Do you like the current OT rules?

[Hookem Horns]

Since moving here to Florida I have started following the Bucs again so I had their game on one TV and the Texans game on the other.

Both games went into OT about at the same time. Unlike the Texans game the Bucs won the toss, got the ball first and drove to a TD to win the game on the first series. The Panthers didn't even get the ball in OT.

Do you like this rule? IMO, both teams should get the ball at least once. For example in the above scenario the Panthers would get the ball however have to score a TD to extend the game.

Thoughts?

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Hookem Horns

Do you like this rule? IMO, both teams should get the ball at least once. For example in the above scenario the Panthers would get the ball however have to score a TD to extend the game.

Thoughts?

I love the new rules, it's the way it's supposed to be. Special teams plays a role, offense plays a role, & defense plays a role. All three phases of the team gets involved.

If the Bucs only scored a field goal, then the Panthers would have had an opportunity win it with a TD. But their D let them down.

I don't think both teams should get the ball, I think that's a bad idea. If your defense is good enough, you'll get the ball.

The game is already too offense oriented, we don't need to add to it.

[Hookem Horns]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

I love the new rules, it's the way it's supposed to be. Special teams plays a role, offense plays a role, & defense plays a role. All three phases of the team gets involved.

If the Bucs only scored a field goal, then the Panthers would have had an opportunity win it with a TD. But their D let them down.

I don't think both teams should get the ball, I think that's a bad idea. If your defense is good enough, you'll get the ball.

The game is already too offense oriented, we don't need to add to it.

Good points. I love the new rules also. My only issue is the one I brought out however I can live with it. Watching those 2 games simultaneously was really crazy. In both games I had accepted defeat at some point. The Bucs comeback was a little more dramatic than the Texans. The Texans game was more of a relief.

[drs23]

I like the new OT rules much better than sudden death. Truth be told I like the way they do it in college. I don't think it can be made to be any more fair and level than that but it'll never happen at the pro level so what we have now is much better than what we had before.

[ChampionTexan]

Originally Posted by drs23

I like the new OT rules much better than sudden death. Truth be told I like the way they do it in college. I don't think it can be made to be any more fair and level than that but it'll never happen at the pro level so what we have now is much better than what we had before.

I think the college overtime rules are a farce. It removes the key component of special teams from the game, and the teams basically start their possessions in FG range. In short, the overtime decides the game in a manner that's too different from the way they play in regulation for my taste.

In the NFL, I'd actually prefer a fifth full quarter, but I recognize the drawbacks to doing that (injuries, and just basic player well being). While I wouldn't argue with a modification to allow both teams a possession even if the first possession results in a TD, I think the current rules are fine, and a definite improvement over the previous version.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Hookem Horns

Good points. I love the new rules also. My only issue is the one I brought out however I can live with it. Watching those 2 games simultaneously was really crazy. In both games I had accepted defeat at some point. The Bucs comeback was a little more dramatic than the Texans. The Texans game was more of a relief.

you have to have some semblance of a defense. If not, you don't get the ball. It's a team game.

The only thing I didn't like about the previous rules, was even the best defenses will give up a field goal, especially if your special teams gets you a good return.

I remember games where it didn't look like the one team even tried to get to the endzone. Two plays to get into field goal range & here comes the kicker. If you got a leg like SeBass...... it's ovah.

[drs23]

Originally Posted by ChampionTexan

I think the college overtime rules are a farce. It removes the key component of special teams from the game, and the teams basically start their possessions in FG range. In short, the overtime decides the game in a manner that's too different from the way they play in regulation for my taste.

In the NFL, I'd acually prefer a fifth full quarter, but I recognize the drawbacks to doing that (injuries, and just basic player well being). While I wouldn't argue with a modification to allow both teams a possession even if the first possession results in a TD, I think the current rules are fine, and a definite improvement over the previous version.

Great point. Guess I didn't finger on it long enough.

[SheTexan]

I just don't like the TIE thing. They need to fix that. JMO!

[Texn4life]

Originally Posted by Fiddler

I love the new rules, it's the way it's supposed to be. Special teams plays a role, offense plays a role, & defense plays a role. All three phases of the team gets involved.

If the Bucs only scored a field goal, then the Panthers would have had an opportunity win it with a TD. But their D let them down.

I don't think both teams should get the ball, I think that's a bad idea. If your defense is good enough, you'll get the ball.

The game is already too offense oriented, we don't need to add to it.

I share the same opinion as you on this one. Rep!

[GP]

Why not make it like soccer in case the OT ends in a tie?

OK, so OT has concluded and both teams are still tied.

It goes to kicks. Team 1 sends out their kicker, he tries for a 45-yarder. If he misses, Team 2's kicker can kick a 45-yarder to win it. If both kickers made their 45-yarder, it goes to 50-yarders. Then to 52. Then to 54. 56. 58. 60.

Yeah, you think a stadium would get loud for that? I do. And the rush of watching that kick on each attempt, the adrenaline of both kickers making their kicks and challenging one another for longer FGs each time.

Accuracy is important, so it's not just a leg power thing. And there is the opposing ST players out there trying to block the kick.

LOL, probably not the best idea. But hell, wouldn't it be fun to see at least one preseason game have this happen? Just for kicks. /pun

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by GP

LOL, probably not the best idea. But hell, wouldn't it be fun to see at least one preseason game have this happen? Just for kicks. /pun

You must have been a kicker in highschool.

[Texan_Bill]

Originally Posted by Hookem Horns

Since moving here to Florida I have started following the Bucs again so I had their game on one TV and the Texans game on the other.

Both games went into OT about at the same time. Unlike the Texans game the Bucs won the toss, got the ball first and drove to a TD to win the game on the first series. The Panthers didn't even get the ball in OT.

Do you like this rule? IMO, both teams should get the ball at least once. For example in the above scenario the Panthers would get the ball however have to score a TD to extend the game.

Thoughts?

Kevin, I absolutely love the new OT rules.

I say that as someone who would've loved the outcome after our field goal yesterday as it used to be but I was also someone who was tired of seeing < than the recieving team winning games without the other team even seeing the ball. I love the fact that "if" the team receiving the ball scores a TD - GAME OVER and if they settle for a FG, the other team at least gets a shot.

[BeerTastesLikeVictory]

Originally Posted by GP

Why not make it like soccer in case the OT ends in a tie?

OK, so OT has concluded and both teams are still tied.

It goes to kicks. Team 1 sends out their kicker, he tries for a 45-yarder. If he misses, Team 2's kicker can kick a 45-yarder to win it. If both kickers made their 45-yarder, it goes to 50-yarders. Then to 52. Then to 54. 56. 58. 60.

Yeah, you think a stadium would get loud for that? I do. And the rush of watching that kick on each attempt, the adrenaline of both kickers making their kicks and challenging one another for longer FGs each time.

Accuracy is important, so it's not just a leg power thing. And there is the opposing ST players out there trying to block the kick.

LOL, probably not the best idea. But hell, wouldn't it be fun to see at least one preseason game have this happen? Just for kicks. /pun

No, I prefer the Texans to have a shot at winning in OT.

[Scooter]

i hate the college rules - starting arbitrarily inside field goal range is not football. i also hated the sudden death rules - a 30yd drive to win the game is pretty weak. i think the current system is about as good as it gets. as fiddler said, all aspects of the game come into play. it may seem a little unfair to whoever doesnt win the coin toss, but thems the breaks - if you cant keep the opponent out of the endzone then you dont earn a chance to win.

[TexanSam]

Originally Posted by GP

Why not make it like soccer in case the OT ends in a tie?

OK, so OT has concluded and both teams are still tied.

It goes to kicks. Team 1 sends out their kicker, he tries for a 45-yarder. If he misses, Team 2's kicker can kick a 45-yarder to win it. If both kickers made their 45-yarder, it goes to 50-yarders. Then to 52. Then to 54. 56. 58. 60.

Yeah, you think a stadium would get loud for that? I do. And the rush of watching that kick on each attempt, the adrenaline of both kickers making their kicks and challenging one another for longer FGs each time.

Accuracy is important, so it's not just a leg power thing. And there is the opposing ST players out there trying to block the kick.

LOL, probably not the best idea. But hell, wouldn't it be fun to see at least one preseason game have this happen? Just for kicks. /pun

That should be a pro bowl event. I'd watch!

[The Pencil Neck]

I guess I'm in the minority.

I HATE the new OT rules.

I liked it the way it was. You play a quarter, first team to score wins, and if no one scores, it ends in a tie... unless it's the playoffs.

If you lose the toss and the other team gets the ball first, then put your defense out there and get a damned stop.

[Scooter]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

If you lose the toss and the other team gets the ball first, then put your defense out there and get a damned stop.

that's the difference for me. a stop would be keeping the opponent out of the endzone, where as previously all an offense needed was 2 first downs.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Scooter

that's the difference for me. a stop would be keeping the opponent out of the endzone, where as previously all an offense needed was 2 first downs.

From the 20 to the opponent's 35? Your defense shouldn't even let them get within field goal range.

[Showtime100]

The only problem I have with the OT rules as they now are is the first possession/TD thing. TD or not I think the other team should get a crack at it.

Other than that I like the OT rules. Way better than they used to be. (No offense to Pencil Neck.)

I also like the "threat" of a tie. It gives the teams a sense of urgency they might not otherwise have.

[Scooter]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

From the 20 to the opponent's 35? Your defense shouldn't even let them get within field goal range.

considering our former returners have 5 touchdowns on the season, and we cant even kick it TO the endzone, yeah.