ADVERTISEMENT

Best Quote/analogy I've heard about NFL OT .....love the comparison!

nutfromSEC117

All American
Nov 2, 2002
7,420
5,585
113
heard on radio ........yesterday's win was like a walk off HR in the TOP of the 10th. Well the pitcher shouldn't have given up a HR. I would like to see both teams get the ball at least once in OT .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint Puppy
heard on radio ........yesterday's win was like a walk off HR in the TOP of the 10th. Well the pitcher shouldn't have given up a HR. I would like to see both teams get the ball at least once in OT .

It's an awful system but hey, at least now, IF they "only" get a FG you get a shot!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saint Puppy
The one thing I never hear brought up is that if both teams get the ball no matter what the second team has a huge advantage. Knowing that you have to go for it on 4th down every time changes the play call significantly and I think would be an unfair advantage.
 
1) let it be a tie
2) play a full 15 mins
3) make sure each team gets the ball once
4) use the silly college system

Which do you prefer?
 
I thought the Packers should have gone for 2 instead of kicking the extra point. Have the Cardinals stunned, go for it!. Give the ball back because of a coin flip.
 
Heard the all time dumbest call on WFAN today. Instead of a coin flip to start OT he wanted to have a competition to see who gets the ball first. His suggestion was each coach pick a player and they run a 40 yard dash. Winning team gets the choice. Unreal.
 
I think the NFL gets it right. The old sudden death system gave the team with the ball a huge advantage, but forcing the receiving team to score a touchdown or hand the ball over is completely fair. A field goal doesn't win it, but if you can go the distance, that's enough to win in OT, in my opinion. I think it's more intriguing than the college OT rules, and less of a "shootout."
 
The college system abandons 2 whole phases of the game, ie KO and Punt. Its absurd, like something out of a video game. Our most valuable player relative to the competition in 06, other than RR, was Joe Radigan. It would have helped to be able to use him in OT vs WVU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssstevem
I thought the Packers should have gone for 2 instead of kicking the extra point. Have the Cardinals stunned, go for it!. Give the ball back because of a coin flip.
-----
Big packer fan who has now suffered two years in a row of a painful exit in the playoffs.

I also thought they should have went for two...... Problem is if you fail, the head coach is subject to a lot more criticism then just playing the OT and losing..... I have no objection to the OT rules, not gonna be a sore loser in that regard.

Edit: It also would have been cool to win the game on that very last play and conversion, when all seemed lost..... Would have been a stunning defeat for the home team fans...
 
Last edited:
system is so much better now that team with first possession has to get a TD to win. I don't think Green Bay should have gone for 2 in regulation. I think they should have covered Fitzgerald in OT
 
Current pro rule is OK.

But how about this modification of the college rule. In OT a team cannot kick a FG or an extra point to force another OT round. E.g., Team A kicks a FG to start OT. Team B must score a TD to win or it loses. Or if Team A scores a TD and kicks an extra point, Team B must score a TD and a 2 point conversion to win otherwise Team B loses. Most OTs would be over after the first round.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT