Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Suppose ties were banned altogether, and teams had to play until there was a winner, just like in baseball. It's conceivable that two fairly inept teams might be playing one another, and neither one could score for, let's say, four or five OT periods. Do you think any of the players could actually be out there on the field for that long? I certainly wouldn't want to watch them play the following week, if they were!
Wow I am shocked there are so many people wanting the NFL to go to the college system. Are most of you bigger college fans than pro fans?
There is nothing more exciting than the NFL. Just like sudden death OT and the playoffs where they are all just one game, not a best of series.
I would only support a college style overtime to break a tie after the 15 minute sudden death. I say stick with sudden death, give each team at least one possesion. If after the sudden death it is tied, go into some form of college style OT or shootout just to break the tie.
There are some good points made and I thank those who voiced their opinions.
After more consideration, I'm thinking that the 1st OT period should go 15 min. as is. In the rare event that there's neither team scores, then go to a college style OT or even the NFL shootout someone mentioned.
Or, just keep playing more OTs. If you have 2 offensively inept teams and no one can score, so what? It's happened in baseball and NHL playoffs where teams have played an accidental doubleheader (i.e. 18+ MLB innings and 3+ NHL OT periods).
Another NFL pet peeve is having non-Thanksgiving Thursday games, like the one tonight. But I'll save that for another thread.
Well, maybe I'd say to get rid of the conventional OT as well. The Jets and Patriots were tied going into OT tonight. The Jets won the coin toss, got the ball first, and scored. The Patriots didn't even get a chance due to no fault of their own. So, if one team scores and the other team didn't get a chance yet, then it should get a chance as well.
I dislike both teams, so it's not like I was pulling for one over the other. But come on, I want fairness.
I don't see what "fairness" has to do with the NFL. The Patriots did get a chance, a chance to stop the Jets from scoring. Their defense couldn't do it and they lost. Why does each team have to be graded on their offense alone in OT in order for it to be fair?
^ In that regard, you're saying offense = defense. I'm saying both offenses (and therefore, both defenses) should get a crack at it. I hate it when a coin determines fate. Ditto for the MLB 163rd game that happened between the White Sox and Twins where a coin determined where that game would be played. But I digress.
Ok well I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. But yes I do think the defense is just as important as the offense.
If we start this in OT, then where does it end. What about at the end of regulation when a team just sits on the ball to run out the clock, isn't it unfair that the other team doesn't get one more chance to score and tie it up or win?
Ok well I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. But yes I do think the defense is just as important as the offense.
If we start this in OT, then where does it end. What about at the end of regulation when a team just sits on the ball to run out the clock, isn't it unfair that the other team doesn't get one more chance to score and tie it up or win?
I don't think that is really the same thing. In regulation, it is your perogative to kill the clock and play for OT if you wish. That isn't really a good comparison. It isn't unfair if you have the lead and run out the clock at the end of regulation either. Apples and oranges.
I will say, after watching the game last night, I don't think the Pats should have had a chance to match the field goal. They could have stopped the Jets. You win the coin flip, you have an advantage no doubt. But after some thought, I think leave OT as is. However, I STILL think ties should be abolished. After the 15 minute sudden death, do an NFL shootout or something to avoid the tie.
Ok well I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. But yes I do think the defense is just as important as the offense.
If we start this in OT, then where does it end. What about at the end of regulation when a team just sits on the ball to run out the clock, isn't it unfair that the other team doesn't get one more chance to score and tie it up or win?
It's not the same thing b/c in regulation, each team gets to start out w/ the ball. One team in the 1st quarter and the other team in the 3rd quarter. So everything is "Even Steven" in regulation. But that equality ends when OT begins.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
