Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Nfl contemplates changing overtime rules

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
An NFL spokesman announced this weekend that the league could change its overtime format for playoff games, starting next year. Under the new proposal, a field goal on the opening possession of overtime would not trigger sudden death. "Both teams would get the ball at least once unless the first team with the ball scores a touchdown. If the first team with the ball makes a field goal and the other team ties the game, action would continue until a team scores again."
Basically:

* A team that scores a touchdown on the opening possession of overtime wins.

* A team that scores a field goal on the opening possession of overtime might not. The other team gets a chance to extend overtime (with a field goal of its own) or win outright (with a touchdown).
This thought-provoking article compares solutions other than the present "sudden death" scenario.
 

Wolf

100% Texan
I'd rather see it like this

Each team gets the ball once .. and then after that, it is sudden death


meaning if team 1 gets the ball and scores a TD then team 2 has to score a TD and if they do game goes to sudden death, if team 2 doesn't score on first possession, game over

If team 1 kicks a field goal and team 2 goes down and gets a TD, game over Team 2 wins

if team 1 on first possession doesn't score , then it is first one to score wins
 

Double Barrel

Texans Talk Admin
Staff member
Contributor's Club
I have been advocating these exact changes in OT rules for years.

Why just the playoffs, though? :um:
 

TheCD

Rookie
It would never happen, but I've always thought it would be great if they kept sudden death overtime but removed the option for a field goal.


If the other team scores a TD on you in overtime, you lose. Period. Same as if they had scored a TD on the last possession of regulation.
 

brakos82

Yaters Gonna Yate.
It would never happen, but I've always thought it would be great if they kept sudden death overtime but removed the option for a field goal.


If the other team scores a TD on you in overtime, you lose. Period. Same as if they had scored a TD on the last possession of regulation.
I'm on the "first-to-6" bandwagon. Seems like the simplest way to go.
 

Double Barrel

Texans Talk Admin
Staff member
Contributor's Club
It would never happen, but I've always thought it would be great if they kept sudden death overtime but removed the option for a field goal.


If the other team scores a TD on you in overtime, you lose. Period. Same as if they had scored a TD on the last possession of regulation.

This is pretty much the rule change that they are talking about.

* A team that scores a touchdown on the opening possession of overtime wins.

* A team that scores a field goal on the opening possession of overtime might not. The other team gets a chance to extend overtime (with a field goal of its own) or win outright (with a touchdown).


But I see the difference that you are talking about in removing FGs altogether.
 
I'm fine with the way it is. From pee-wee football on, we have always been taught there are three phases of football: offense, defense, and special teams. If you lose an over-time game because your defense could not stop the offense, obviously you need to get better on defense and you did not deserve to win the game. I have seen enough rule changes favoring the offense. That's just my opinion.
 

Speedy

Former Yeller Dweller
Leave it alone. The game of football is not just offense. If you want the ball, play defense and make a stop.
 

Thorn

Dirty Old Man
Each team should get a wack at the ball one time in overtime. After that, 1st come 1st serve.

If ta bad guys score on ya, and you can't score back, tough do-do. At least that keeps a stupid coin flip from potentially winning the game. I hate that.
 

The Pencil Neck

Hall of Fame
Each team should get a wack at the ball one time in overtime. After that, 1st come 1st serve.

If ta bad guys score on ya, and you can't score back, tough do-do. At least that keeps a stupid coin flip from potentially winning the game. I hate that.
Everybody had their wacks during the game. In OT, play some D.

Or how about this, the 4th quarter doesn't end until someone scores. There's no stop. There's no coin flip. No re-set of time outs.

Just keep playing until someone scores. True sudden death.

Or maybe not. That thought just popped into my head and it seemed better before I typed it out. :clown:
 

infantrycak

Hall of Fame
From profootballtalk

As expected, the NFL's Competition Committee will propose at next week's league meetings (which will be held not in Maui but at the Ritz-Carlton in Orlando) a change to the overtime rules.

The new rule, as previously reported by many, will allow the team that receives the kickoff to start overtime to win the game only by scoring a touchdown. At that point, the game would end without the other team getting the ball -- and without an extra point being attempted.

If the team that receives the kickoff scores a field goal, the other team would then get the ball. A field goal by the other team would then extend the game, making it truly sudden death. Failure to score at all would end the game, as would a touchdown by the team that kicked off to start overtime.
Looks like a pretty good proposal to me.
 
Just eliminate overtime field goals. First TD wins. That simple and that much better. No time limit, possession limit: 2. Each team has 2 extra possessions and no score: tie.
 

Thorn

Dirty Old Man
Just make it simple. Each team gets at least one shot at the ball. After that, whoever has the most points wins regardless.

Or, just make it real simple. No overtime in regular season. What's so bad about tie games? It all washes out in the end anyway.
 

BIG TORO

TERADACTYL #23
I like the changes, that means you can still win with a field goal if your defence can keep the other team from scoring.
 

El Tejano

Hall of Fame
I propose that in OT, the first team that scores gets the ball for the sudden death. For example:

Texans and Indy go to OT. Indy gets the ball on coin flip, comes down and scores a TD/FG. That determines that Indy gets the ball back for the sudden death.
Then Indy goes on offense and for some reason The Texans get them to punt. Well then the Texans go and score a FG, and they win - yea!

Seriously though, if you get the ball twice and can't score twice, you deserve to lose.
If you get the opp. to defend twice and can't get the ball back in one of those possessions you deserve to lose.
If you score on both possessions you deserve to win.
If you score on your only possesion because you didn't win the ball for sudden death, you deserve to win.
 

JCTexan

Hall of Fame
Each team should get a wack at the ball one time in overtime. After that, 1st come 1st serve.

If ta bad guys score on ya, and you can't score back, tough do-do. At least that keeps a stupid coin flip from potentially winning the game. I hate that.
I agree with this. The bad thing with a coin flip is that teams don't have to try to score a touchdown to win the game. They just have to get the ball to the 30 yard line for the field goal. Most NFL offenses can get the ball to the 30. Once both teams have had an opportunity with the ball in OT then it should be sudden death.
I propose that in OT, the first team that scores gets the ball for the sudden death. For example:

Texans and Indy go to OT. Indy gets the ball on coin flip, comes down and scores a TD/FG. That determines that Indy gets the ball back for the sudden death.
Then Indy goes on offense and for some reason The Texans get them to punt. Well then the Texans go and score a FG, and they win - yea!
If Indy won the coin flip for OT they would have to score first. If they didn't score and Houston did the Texans would win the game. Basically what you purposed is that the winner of the coin flip gets first shot with sudden death?
 

gwallaia

Moderator
Staff member
I like the proposed rule change for OT.

I would also propose rewarding 10 points for a field goal attempt in which the ball hits the upright. That thing is 8" wide! Hitting that from any distance is much more difficult than sailing the ball through all that empty space between them.
 

El Tejano

Hall of Fame
I agree with this. The bad thing with a coin flip is that teams don't have to try to score a touchdown to win the game. They just have to get the ball to the 30 yard line for the field goal. Most NFL offenses can get the ball to the 30. Once both teams have had an opportunity with the ball in OT then it should be sudden death.


If Indy won the coin flip for OT they would have to score first. If they didn't score and Houston did the Texans would win the game. Basically what you purposed is that the winner of the coin flip gets first shot with sudden death?
No I'm basically saying, play for the coin flip. Instead of letting heads or tails determine who gets the ball first (and typically wins), play for who gets the ball first in sudden death.
 

El Tejano

Hall of Fame
People can suggest 8 million different ideas, but what is wrong with the one they have proposed?
Nothing is wrong with it. Just seeing if there is anyway to enhance that idea. I like anything that increases the competitiveness of the game. Wouldn't it be cool if you won something in an OT only to find that is not the final battle? Adds to the drama.
 

Speedy

Former Yeller Dweller
Football is played with offense, DEFENSE, and special teams. If you lose the coin toss....PLAY DEFENSE!!!

OT works fine just like it is, just like it has for however long it's been in play. Leave it alone.

That said, with the way the world is these days with people always wanting change just because....the proposal infantrycak posted from profootballtalk is the best proposal I have heard....IF it has to be changed at all.
 

El Tejano

Hall of Fame
Anyone else notice that these OT rules come the season after Brett Favre throws an INT in the OT postseason loss to New Orleans?

This hasn't been said by anyone but judging by the way the league really hugged his testicles all season and how several commentators and reporters were crying for two possessions right after Brett Favre lossed, I find it kind of funny.
 

HoustonFrog

Dallas Frog
Nothing, but personally, I'd keep it the way it is
You know I was kind of in your boat but I now like the new proposal. One major reason is one cheap PI call can put you in FG range and to me that isn't the way to end a game.
 
Last edited:

gtexan02

Working?
I propose that in OT, the first team that scores gets the ball for the sudden death. For example:

Texans and Indy go to OT. Indy gets the ball on coin flip, comes down and scores a TD/FG. That determines that Indy gets the ball back for the sudden death.
Then Indy goes on offense and for some reason The Texans get them to punt. Well then the Texans go and score a FG, and they win - yea!

Seriously though, if you get the ball twice and can't score twice, you deserve to lose.
If you get the opp. to defend twice and can't get the ball back in one of those possessions you deserve to lose.
If you score on both possessions you deserve to win.
If you score on your only possesion because you didn't win the ball for sudden death, you deserve to win.
This is needlessly complicated. You're playing for the coin flip, but what about that first coin flip? Eventually, you'd have them playing 10 go arounds.

I like the proposal the NFL made. It makes sense. A TD wins it, but if they score a FG, the other team gets a chance to tie or win.



Either that, or have one player for each time fight MMA style. Last one standing wins
 

El Tejano

Hall of Fame
This is needlessly complicated. You're playing for the coin flip, but what about that first coin flip? Eventually, you'd have them playing 10 go arounds.

I like the proposal the NFL made. It makes sense. A TD wins it, but if they score a FG, the other team gets a chance to tie or win.



Either that, or have one player for each time fight MMA style. Last one standing wins
Yeah, you're right. It's basically the same thing because if you tie you go into a sudden death from that point.

Did you see what I said about how the league is probably doing this because they got cheated out of Favre being in the Super Bowl?
 

Blake

MMQB
People can suggest 8 million different ideas, but what is wrong with the one they have proposed?
Nothing, but personally, I'd keep it the way it is
I think it is a good proposal. That or just leave it the way it is. We just keep leaning more and more towards offense. Defense can take a back seat.

Lets flip this thing on its head.

FIRST OFFENSE THAT TURNS THE BALL OVER LOSES!

Give teams with good defenses the option to win the coin toss and still elect to kick off.
 

infantrycak

Hall of Fame
I think it is a good proposal. That or just leave it the way it is. We just keep leaning more and more towards offense. Defense can take a back seat.

Lets flip this thing on its head.

FIRST OFFENSE THAT TURNS THE BALL OVER LOSES!

Give teams with good defenses the option to win the coin toss and still elect to kick off.
Seems to me like this already flips things on its head. If you're such a good defense that you would elect to kick off then how is that different than stopping them on the first drive short of a TD. Offenses used to get off with a short field a field goal and a win. Now they have to drive the field to win.
 

Blake

MMQB
Seems to me like this already flips things on its head. If you're such a good defense that you would elect to kick off then how is that different than stopping them on the first drive short of a TD. Offenses used to get off with a short field a field goal and a win. Now they have to drive the field to win.
If I am a defense heavy team, with a crappy offense, what does it matter if I stop them short of a touchdown? My offense is just going to give it back and thats the game?

Plus it turns the entire field into 4 down teritory.

The proposal is still telling teams to play for a field goal. its just that you need 2 this time.
 
Anyone else notice that these OT rules come the season after Brett Favre throws an INT in the OT postseason loss to New Orleans?

This hasn't been said by anyone but judging by the way the league really hugged his testicles all season and how several commentators and reporters were crying for two possessions right after Brett Favre lossed, I find it kind of funny.
a piece in the Denver Post saw this link and took it to an amusing, tongue-in-cheek extreme:

link: Krieger: Future of OT tied to Favre

teaser:

This just in from the Future News Agency, which has some great stuff nobody ever sees because it's behind a gigantic pay wall:

ORLANDO, Fla. (march 24, 2010) — NFL owners narrowly defeated a proposal today that would have changed the league's postseason overtime rules by requiring that each team get at least one possession.

In a separate vote, they approved an alternative proposal that any team quarterbacked by Brett Favre gets the last possession in any overtime playoff game.

"That was the point of the original proposal anyway," said one general manager who asked not to be identified because he thought it was possible Favre would eventually play for his team.

"This way, when Brett retires for good in 10 or 15 years, the rule will go away. Otherwise, we would have this senseless difference between the playoffs and the regular season forever."

The Saints were the only team to oppose the Favre Clause. "Sudden death is fine for 36 years and suddenly Brett Favre loses an overtime playoff game and it's no good?" asked indignant Saints owner Tom Benson.

"Duh," said ABC Sports president George Bodenheimer.
 

NitroGSXR

Super Sic #58
Apply hockey overtime rules here. Ain't no more thrilling thing in sports as overtime hockey. Shootout all! I know it's not in our favor considering our kicker's struggles but i'd like to see kickers get played a little more.

If it's up to me.... i'd remove half the refs for overtime and keep sudden death the way it is. Just let 'em play football. They can sort it out on the field.
 

Giant Tiger

Veteran
They should have to score a touchdown with a two point conversion. No PAT's in overtime. The team that does both beats the team that can't convert :pirate:
 
Top