Poll: Choose the NFL or the NCAA FB Overtime format
- Thread starter ScarletStateofNJ
- Start date
Is that an honest or rhetorical question? College OT by far is the best.
In NFL, each team should get the ball once and then should be sudden death if neither team outscores the other during each teams first possession. If they changed that I would take NFL over NCAA.
NFL needs to adopt College rules...but start at the 40 instead of the 25. No ties, and must go for 2 after the 2nd OT.
Correct, I should have specified my issue is if team with first possession scores a TD the other team should get the ball.
I see I'm in the minority as I write this, but the NFL's is better in my opinion. The college OT eliminates special teams from the equation except for place kicking. A tie is still a valid result in the NFL, which I also believe is better. I don't like the shoot-out in hockey for the same reason I don't like the college football OT because it detracts from what were outstanding games that you wish could be settled in the same manner in which they were played.
The NFL cheapened their OT when they implemented the rule the first score must be a TD to prevent the other team from getting the ball. It was an invalid argument the other team "didn't have a chance". They could have forced a turnover. Yesterday's Giants -- Rams game was decided by the Giants defense by returning an INT for a TD and intercepting two other passes in their endzone. Please explain to me how the defensive team is defenseless to win games.
The NFL cheapened their OT when they implemented the rule the first score must be a TD to prevent the other team from getting the ball. It was an invalid argument the other team "didn't have a chance". They could have forced a turnover. Yesterday's Giants -- Rams game was decided by the Giants defense by returning an INT for a TD and intercepting two other passes in their endzone. Please explain to me how the defensive team is defenseless to win games.
I liked the old sudden death format. You had 60 minutes to win the game but didn't, and getting the ball first did not give a significant advantage in sudden death.
I don't like the college system at all. First one to score in overtime should win. It's a timed game and time has expired.
I don't like the college system at all. First one to score in overtime should win. It's a timed game and time has expired.
I agree with Sherrane, and Megaddrone (I think)..
The current college OT might be exciting, but it's not football (I also don't like soccer OT being decided by penalty kicks for the same reason. Same for that nonsense they do in the NHL now, which makes the standings impossible to understand for an old guy like me).
Personally, I would prefer going back to having regular season games in all sports declared a tie if that's what happens on the field. I don't like having some artificial result imposed just because some Sportcenter fans spout cliches about kissing their sister. Ties happen.
But for playoffs, they should just man up and play for as long as it takes for one side to win, in my opinion.
The current college OT might be exciting, but it's not football (I also don't like soccer OT being decided by penalty kicks for the same reason. Same for that nonsense they do in the NHL now, which makes the standings impossible to understand for an old guy like me).
Personally, I would prefer going back to having regular season games in all sports declared a tie if that's what happens on the field. I don't like having some artificial result imposed just because some Sportcenter fans spout cliches about kissing their sister. Ties happen.
But for playoffs, they should just man up and play for as long as it takes for one side to win, in my opinion.
I choose the NFL because their format is closer to the true spirit of the game.
Or simply stopped them on downs and forced the team to punt. Agree completely.
I never understood the college approach.......how do you spend 60 minutes kicking the snot out of each other and then decide that a tie game be decided by placing the ball at the 25 yard line and go from there? Just seems ludicrous to me. Lost in High School playoffs in similar fashion (back then ball was spotted at the 10 yard line) and my disdain for this rule has only grown since then.
The college OT is such a gimmick. It is basically penalty kicks.
The NFL version with the possession tweaks (other than TD) is one of the few things the NFL has got right over the last decade or so.
The NFL version with the possession tweaks (other than TD) is one of the few things the NFL has got right over the last decade or so.
I refuse to believe anybody thinks NFL OT is fair... It relies on a coin flip luck. "Well then get a stop or turnover" okay then why not just put the ball at the 10 yard line, defense can still get a stop or turnover so that stupid logic still justifies it
Are you suggesting there isn't much of a difference between having an offense drive 50+ yards for a score or 10 yards? The reason why the NFL OT is clearly better is because it follows the same rules the first 60 minutes were played under. College OT is settling a baseball game with a home run hitting contest instead of extra innings or a basketball game by playing HORSE instead of OT.
Not really. First of all, the team didn't earn that field position. Secondly, even if the defense stops the offense, that offense will still have an opportunity they didn't earn to kick an easy field goal.
it's not that important to me either way, and it's a fun debate...
That's because it is ludicrous. NFL by a mile since they tweaked the rule to give the other team a chance if the team that gets the ball first scores a FG.
I don't know why OT is needed in the first place. A tie is a legitimate ending to a game. If we must have OT, then play a full quarter, no sudden death.
Sherrane's argument is compelling - if you must have a tiebreaker, do it in a manner that most closely simulates the game itself.
Sherrane's argument is compelling - if you must have a tiebreaker, do it in a manner that most closely simulates the game itself.
Ties are terrible, but agree with you and others about the structure of OT. Gimmicky "shootouts" are only half a step above just calling it a tie. Continue the game as designed.
I like the tweaked NFL OT by a mile. College is pure gimmicky shootout, but NFL actually resembles the game. I think the new rule is the best possible compromise, too - getting a field goal always seemed too easy, to the point you'd be elated if your team won the coin toss and dejected if it lost. Too much of an advantage for a random coin toss winner, OT or no. But if that team is able to actually drive all the way to a touchdown, they deserve the win. No reason to drag it out if the opposing D can't hold 'em to a field goal.
After thinking about it, I actually agree a lot with the first response. NFL style "sudden death" with kickoffs and everything, but each offense gets a chance to be on the field no matter what. So that way, say if both offenses are really good (ie. can score a TD easily) than it's not decided on a coin flip, first O marches down and scores and it's over. Give both teams a shot whether first team gets FG/TD, and then it would be perfect. It's a great mix of both styles and best simulates the regulation game.
I think the stats showed that teams that won the coin flip in the NFL won the game on their first possession less than 50% of the time. Seems to me that the coin flip didn't doesn't decide the game.
I don't have the stats in front of me and am disinclined to look. But even if the receiving team only scored on its first possession, say, 30% of the time, that's enough to distort the percentages such that the receiving team would win the game significantly more than 50% of the time.
The whole thing is a bit ridiculous. The team that loses the coin toss should not "get another shot with the ball" if their defense can't stop the opponent from scoring on them.
The only thing that should have been changed to remove "cheap OT wins" was keeping the sudden death but eliminating field goals in OT and forcing teams to score either a safety or touchdown to win, and perhaps eliminating ties.
The college way of doing is it a lot more fun, but the whole "start them at the 25" thing is absolutely ridiculous.
The only thing that should have been changed to remove "cheap OT wins" was keeping the sudden death but eliminating field goals in OT and forcing teams to score either a safety or touchdown to win, and perhaps eliminating ties.
The college way of doing is it a lot more fun, but the whole "start them at the 25" thing is absolutely ridiculous.
I came across this info from 2014:
The NFL has had 325 overtime games since the rule was adopted in 1974. The results:
- Both teams have had possession 235 times (72.3%).
- The team that has won the toss has won 169 times (52.0%).
- The team that has lost the toss has won 141 times (43.4%).
- 223 games were decided by a field goal (68.6%).
- 86 games were decided by a TD (26.5%).
- One game was decided by a safety (0.3%).
- There have been 15 ties (4.6%).
IMO, the findings are not enough to cause a radical change to the gimmick NCAA style overtime.
Just use rock, paper, scissor where both owners come to the 50 yard line and the best of three wins.
Once the team who won the toss failed to score on their first possession, the coin toss loser won 60% of the time (141 times out of 235).
Back when you were actually allowed to play defense in the NFL the sudden death OT worked great. Then teams bitched because the teams who won the toss only had to get into FG range. It's a valid argument in today's league. I think the NFL got it right though for the offensive heavy league of today. College OT is silly.
I prefer the college system because any OT system should be designed to eliminate ties. The NFL system doesn't do that.
That said, my biggest knock on the college system is that it all but eliminates a phase of the game - which unfairly benefits teams with poor special teams, and unfairly penalizes teams with great special teams.
That said, my biggest knock on the college system is that it all but eliminates a phase of the game - which unfairly benefits teams with poor special teams, and unfairly penalizes teams with great special teams.
But the bottom line IMO is that the team who won the toss won 54.5% of the games in which there was a winner. The coin toss loser won only 45.5% of those games. That is statistically significant.
Is it? What factors did you control for? Home team? Wind/weather conditions? Injuries?
1/3rd of special teams remain.. FG/XP. And kickoffs should be done away with anyway. Too dangerous (not to mention we cannot find a kicker who can routinely get touchbacks).
In the old NFL system, the team that received the ball first only won 58% of the time (could be even less). Getting the ball first did not drastically improve your chance for victory in NFL sudden death overtime. It wasn't completely fair but it was pretty close and if you really want to win, win the game during regulation time.
Sure - but, as of right now, that's part of the game. If you have a phenom returner (Grant, Peppers), the college OT rules remove that element from your game, putting you at a disadvantage. If a team has a poor place kicker who can't reach the endzone, the college OT rules remove that limitation, putting you at more of an advantage.
By removing a significant part of the game (essentially, the "field position" battle between kickers/returners), it changes the strengths/weaknesses of the participating teams... putting the OT session on a different competitive footing from the regular session.
As they say, a tie is like kissing your sister.
And we're not in the SEC. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
