- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Stupid Question: NFL Overtime Rules
Posted on 10/6/24 at 3:26 pm
Posted on 10/6/24 at 3:26 pm
I know they’ve been this new way for some time that the first team to score a touchdown wins… but both teams are allowed to possess the ball UNLESS the first team to receive gets a touchdown then game over…
Why?
Why couldn’t it be just kick it back off to the other team and if they don’t score a TD to tie, the game is over… otherwise, the game continues to the final 10min.
I mean what are they trying to prevent from happening by adding that “UNLESS” in there? From games going on forever?
I just want someone to give me a good reason why it’s the way it is because that’s the best most fair?
ib4: My Bills fricked up today and this has nothing to do with today’s games.
Why?
Why couldn’t it be just kick it back off to the other team and if they don’t score a TD to tie, the game is over… otherwise, the game continues to the final 10min.
I mean what are they trying to prevent from happening by adding that “UNLESS” in there? From games going on forever?
I just want someone to give me a good reason why it’s the way it is because that’s the best most fair?
ib4: My Bills fricked up today and this has nothing to do with today’s games.
5
Posted on 10/6/24 at 3:28 pm to yankeeundercover
It is stupid. If a td is scored, other team should get a chance
Posted on 10/6/24 at 3:28 pm to yankeeundercover
Sudden death is always better
Posted on 10/6/24 at 3:31 pm to TackySweater
quote:
It is stupid. If a td is scored, other team should get a chance
Correct. But you have to force the 2nd team to play for the win. So if 1st team gets 7, second team must go for 2 after scoring a TD. That is the purpose of OT: to break a tie and determine a winner.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 3:40 pm to TackySweater
quote:odd that this is exactly why the rule was changed in the guest place
other team should get a chance
Posted on 10/8/24 at 12:43 pm to PeteRose
quote:Make it that both teams MUST go for 2-pts regardless and give each team the ball regardless of if 1st team scores TD first
But you have to force the 2nd team to play for the win. So if 1st team gets 7, second team must go for 2 after scoring a TD
Posted on 10/8/24 at 4:55 pm to Madking
I agree, but it’s hard to justify that when kickers are hitting from 55+ with regularity.
Posted on 10/8/24 at 5:42 pm to yankeeundercover
quote:
Make it that both teams MUST go for 2-pts regardless and give each team the ball regardless of if 1st team scores TD first
No way. That setup allows potential tie and the game to be extended. You want to declare a winner and loser as fairly and efficiently as possible. If both teams are forced to go for two, you can have a lsu/Texas am 7 OT kind of game. You have to set up a system where ties are not possible but both teams get the ball. That way, it’s over after 2 possessions.
Posted on 10/8/24 at 6:31 pm to Madking
quote:
Sudden death is always better
Yep. They are changing the rules to take all of the excitement out of the game.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 1:00 am to yankeeundercover
quote:Simple answer
I just want someone to give me a good reason why it’s the way it is
Sudden death was the way it was, first team to score wins. In regular season, you get a quarter, then a tie if nobody does. Playoffs, you play until it ends.
Amazingly enough, prior to all the recent rules that prevent a defense from playing defense, the game was well-balanced, scores were a lot lower, and you would see teams actually choose to kick instead of receive. A touchback was at the 20 (where God intended it to be), and teams might only get 20-30 yds on a drive (2 or so first downs) before they got stopped... so you'd kick and hope to get the ball near midfield after forcing a punt.
*note, this goes back to the days when 27+ points was considered a high scoring game for your offense. It used to be damn hard to get that.
Anyway, that worked quite well for decades, nobody ever had a problem with it. Until one day, the entire media with their TV money was so excited that there was going to be a Peyton Manning/Brett Favre Superbowl. Perfect, the 2 biggest QBs in the game.
But- it didn't happen. Those goddam piece of shite New Orleans Saints didn't know their place, and had the audacity to BEAT Favre's team, by taking the kick and driving for the winning FG.
This was a national catastrophe, the talking heads were outraged. Poor Brett didn't even get a chance (forgetting they played a 60 minute game before that OT). TV was NOT happy. So they leaned on the league, and the NFL grudgingly tweaked the rule. The following year, we got what we have- still Sudden Death, but not for a FG, only on the first drive. The "Brett Favre" rule.
I 100% guarantee you, if the Vikings had done the exact same thing and won, this wouldn't exist. The rule would still be Sudden Death, and Favre's performance in OT would be considered a legendary event.
And what's worse, since the NFL caved on that, they've since been pushed by TV money to keep changing the game: neutered the defenses so star QBs could show out. Clock rules to keep the games shorter (to fit in the TV window). Touchbacks out to the 25, now the 30 to help push scoring. Now we have gimmick kickoffs because kickers are better.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 1:03 am to PeteRose
quote:I really like your idea.
No way. That setup allows potential tie and the game to be extended. You want to declare a winner and loser as fairly and efficiently as possible. If both teams are forced to go for two, you can have a lsu/Texas am 7 OT kind of game. You have to set up a system where ties are not possible but both teams get the ball. That way, it’s over after 2 possessions.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 7:38 am to GusAU
quote:
I really like your idea.
It really is the only solution that gives both teams the ball and a winner decided after two possessions. Make the 2nd team to play for the win. NFL can call it “play to win” OT.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 7:51 am to TackySweater
quote:
It is stupid. If a td is scored, other team should get a chance
They do in the playoffs.
Overtime rules have always been different for the regular season vs playoffs and the rule now is to try to get regular season overtime games over as soon as possible, probably to try to keep early games from taking away eyeballs from late window games and night games from going too late.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 9:42 am to Scoob
quote:
Anyway, that worked quite well for decades, nobody ever had a problem with it.
It worked just fine, but lots of folks had a problem with it. It basically decided games by the flip of a coin. A lot of the time, whoever got the ball first won.
Now I don't have a problem with a tie. Give them both a chance with the ball, if it's still a tie...it stays a tie.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 10:00 am to PeteRose
quote:
No way. That setup allows potential tie and the game to be extended. You want to declare a winner and loser as fairly and efficiently as possible. If both teams are forced to go for two, you can have a lsu/Texas am 7 OT kind of game. You have to set up a system where ties are not possible but both teams get the ball. That way, it’s over after 2 possessions.
What if the team possessing the ball first goes for two after a TD? Do they win automatically?
Posted on 10/9/24 at 12:15 pm to yankeeundercover
It is up to your defense to keep them out of the end zone, otherwise you lose. I am okay with the current rules, especially since they were implemented after the Saints benefited from the old rules.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 12:40 pm to PeteRose
quote:
No way. That setup allows potential tie and the game to be extended. You want to declare a winner and loser as fairly and efficiently as possible. If both teams are forced to go for two, you can have a lsu/Texas am 7 OT kind of game. You have to set up a system where ties are not possible but both teams get the ball. That way, it’s over after 2 possessions.
If the first team knows that the second team has to go for 2, wouldn't the first team always go for 2 if they score a TD?
Posted on 10/9/24 at 12:53 pm to Epic Cajun
quote:
If the first team knows that the second team has to go for 2, wouldn't the first team always go for 2 if they score a TD?
First team shouldn’t have the option to go for 2…
How it should work is, if the first team scores a touchdown, they kick for 1. If they miss it, all the second team has to do is kick for 1. If that misses, they go to dueling 2 point conversions until we have a winner.
If they make it, the second team is required to go for 2 so we have a winner
If both teams don’t score or both teams kick a field goal, we go straight to dueling two point conversions
Posted on 10/9/24 at 1:00 pm to Scoob
quote:
Those goddam piece of shite New Orleans Saints didn't know their place, and had the audacity to BEAT Favre's team, by taking the kick and driving for the winning FG.
Posted on 10/9/24 at 1:05 pm to poncho villa
quote:
What if the team possessing the ball first goes for two after a TD? Do they win automatically?
First team has to go for xp. Here’s the play to win OT format:
1. Team starts at opponents 25(just like cfb)
2. If 1st team doesn’t score, 2nd team can kick fg or score TD to win.
3. If 1st team makes fg, 2nd teams must play for TD to win
4. If 1st team scores TD, they must attempt xp. If they miss the xp, 2nd team can kick the xp to win. If first team makes the xp, 2nd team must go for 2 to win.
Why this format makes sense?
1. Both team gets the ball
2. Can’t end in a tie
3. Resolves in 2 possessions
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News