NFL Season 2009

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:10 am

Great game, but the NFL needs to overhaul the rules of overtime. Sudden death has past its time. How about playing an undertermined amount of time (8 or 10 minutes) and seeing how the game plays out. Why be penalized for losing the coin toss?

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:17 am

sportdan30 wrote:Great game, but the NFL needs to overhaul the rules of overtime. Sudden death has past its time. How about playing an undertermined amount of time (8 or 10 minutes) and seeing how the game plays out. Why be penalized for losing the coin toss?

By far the biggest stinker in the NFL rulebook. Can't believe they haven't fixed it already.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:21 am

RobVarak wrote:
sportdan30 wrote:Great game, but the NFL needs to overhaul the rules of overtime. Sudden death has past its time. How about playing an undertermined amount of time (8 or 10 minutes) and seeing how the game plays out. Why be penalized for losing the coin toss?
By far the biggest stinker in the NFL rulebook. Can't believe they haven't fixed it already.

I have often wondered why teams dont spend more time working on the coin flip during practice.

Seriously. I am tired of objecting...I really no longer have a big problem with sudden death. I would prefer an entire period or 10 minutes or even a tie but it is what it is and it doesnt bother me that much.

EDIT: Call it good enough overtime.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:26 am

Why not introduce a system whereby each side got a chance at the ball? Then if it's still tied go to the college format overtime until a winner is declared.

Oh and Seymour is still a no show in Oakland and Al Davis isn't asking for his pick back either, loon.

10spro · Post by **10spro** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:29 am

RobVarak wrote:
sportdan30 wrote:Great game, but the NFL needs to overhaul the rules of overtime. Sudden death has past its time. How about playing an undertermined amount of time (8 or 10 minutes) and seeing how the game plays out. Why be penalized for losing the coin toss?
By far the biggest stinker in the NFL rulebook. Can't believe they haven't fixed it already.

The coin toss rule is the most non-sensical rule ever made up. Seriously, that's like giving a hockey team the win in a SO if the first guy on the ice scored, or giving a baseball team an extra inning for themselves.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:33 am

RobVarak wrote:
pk500 wrote:Very entertaining game last night. The NFL never fails to deliver. No wonder it's America's passion and pastime combined.

Take care,
PK
Agreed. Right after the Ward fumble, one of my buddies sent me a sarcastic text saying that he couldn't wait for the NBA regular season.

That was a great strip by that Titans' dude. Just attacked Ward from the blind side.

Collinsworth's delivery annoys me, but his analysis that Ward lacks the mentality to just take a knee after a catch was spot-on. That aggressive mindset is a benefit 99 percent of the time. We saw the other 1 percent last night.

Take care,
PK

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:36 am

pk500 wrote:Collinsworth's delivery annoys me

You ain't the only one.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:38 am

Oh did you guys hear that the NFL has revised their Blackout policy for games this year? All blackout games in your area can be seen on NFL.com for 72 hours after each game. Pretty cool !

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:00 pm

Rodster wrote:Oh did you guys hear that the NFL has revised their Blackout policy for games this year? All blackout games in your area can be seen on NFL.com for 72 hours after each game. Pretty cool !

But from what I understand, they're not available to watch until midnight. What's the point of that? You already know the outcome and most likely, you've seen extensive highlights on your local news and ESPN.

They need to be a bit more flexible on this blackout policy with so many people feeling the money crunch. 85-90 percent filled stadiums wouldn't be a such a huge hit.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:07 pm

The overtime rule ain't getting changed. When the former players announcing the game say they have no problem with it, what do you think the players on the field think? Just because us "sunday quarterback" types think it sucks, doesn't mean the NFL does. And by the looks of it, they are happy with it. I think something like 75% of the owners voted to keep it as is. Just accept it I guess.

And yes, the blackout rule hasn't really been relaxed. Enjoy watching the game at midnight. I guess it's good we don't have a team in LA...that way we don't get blacked out at all.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:08 pm

I prefer the NFL OT setup to the NCAA one.

Not that it's perfect but you have a longer season and the more players have to be out there, more chance for injuries.

It's already a battle of attrition.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:26 pm

I have absolutely no problem with the NFL overtime rule. In fact, I think it's great. The defense can score on any play just like the offense so it's not like you need fair ups like baseball. If the defense steps up, like it should, then their offense should end up with good field position. I don't get the hate for it.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:28 pm

wco81 wrote:I prefer the NFL OT setup to the NCAA one.

Not that it's perfect but you have a longer season and the more players have to be out there, more chance for injuries.

It's already a battle of attrition.

Sorry, but losing a game that you went toe to toe with an opponent in and then not getting to touch the ball in OT at least once is idiotic to say the least. If each team gets at least one shot with the ball, then and only then can OT be considered a "fair" way to determine the outcome of 60+ minutes of football between two evenly matched (according to the tie score at the end of regulation) opponents.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:39 pm

DivotMaker wrote:
wco81 wrote:I prefer the NFL OT setup to the NCAA one.

Not that it's perfect but you have a longer season and the more players have to be out there, more chance for injuries.

It's already a battle of attrition.
Sorry, but losing a game that you went toe to toe with an opponent in and then not getting to touch the ball in OT at least once is idiotic to say the least. If each team gets at least one shot with the ball, then and only then can OT be considered a "fair" way to determine the outcome of 60+ minutes of football between two evenly matched (according to the tie score at the end of regulation) opponents.

Totally disagree for the reason I stated earlier; the defense can score on any play of the game as well. OT is "fair" because it plays by the same rules as they did the entire game unlike college football where they totally eliminate special teams and put teams in scoring position to begin with. In overtime hockey is it a problem when a team wins the faceoff gets in the offensive zone and scores? It's the same damn thing and if the losing team would have played defense better they would have had a chance with the puck in their offensive zone. Sounds about as fair as can be to me.

lexbur · Post by **lexbur** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:48 pm

Only 30% of the time does the team that wins the coin toss score on their first possession. Lose the coin toss and it forces your defense to step it up, which they do 70% of the time. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I much prefer it to college OT, where after three hours of football all of a sudden it turns into a baseball game, with teams alternating their ups from some arbitrary spot on the field.

I'm surprised college football even bothers with OT. If the game ends in a tie, you would think they would just have a panel of experts "vote" for the winner. Isn't that how they determine who plays in their championship game?

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:51 pm

In the NFL, an individual game doesn't carry the same weight as in college.

So this goal of "fairness" for deciding the outcome of OT games is nonsensical.

If two teams fighting for the last playoff berth in the last week of the season go into OT, maybe it's unfair to the team which loses the coin flip (but IIRC, the percentages aren't as lopsided in favor of the team winning the coin flip as they used to be).

But you could argue that the losing team in that scenario shouldn't have been in a position where a coin flip decides the fate of their whole season. These teams trying to get into the playoffs in the last week are marginal playoff teams to begin with.

NFL games are often decided by things like turnovers which are just as random as a coin toss.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:05 pm

wco81 wrote:In the NFL, an individual game doesn't carry the same weight as in college.

So this goal of "fairness" for deciding the outcome of OT games is nonsensical.

Can't say I agree with either statement. One game can decide whether a team makes the playoffs or doesn't. How you can say an individual game carries less weight is "nonsensical" to me....

I don't pretend to have all the answers, but a coin flip is not the way to end a hard-fought contest, IMO. Hardly "nonsensical"....

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:22 pm

I'm with Scoop and WCO.

NCAA overtime seems so "Pop Warner" to me. Let's make sure every kid gets a chance to score on offense and feels good about himself. Plus it can take forever because a team starts its overtime possession in scoring range. A score is almost guaranteed unless there's a turnover. At least the NFL forces teams to move into scoring range.

Take care,
PK

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:22 pm

Here's a simple solution that would probably end most over time games, DO AWAY with the extra point system. Either you try for a two point conversion at that spot. Or you kick an extra point at the distance of a 40 yard field goal.

The extra point in football is one of the most useless ideas. In rugby you kick it from the entry line where you score. In football you get it set-up where Doug Flutie can kick it in.

Plus this brings up a whole lot of numbers on football boards, back into play!

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:29 pm

One interesting compromise that I heard is to make the winner the first team to score 6 points.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:40 pm

RobVarak wrote:One interesting compromise that I heard is to make the winner the first team to score 6 points.

Thats good ....

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:43 pm

RobVarak wrote:One interesting compromise that I heard is to make the winner the first team to score 6 points.

That's the best alternate suggestion I've heard.

If you award a possession after a score, and the game gets tied, there's a good chance you'll finish OT tied. So you either have to play another period or accept the tie.

The simple fact is a defense has to step up if the team loses the toss. What is more NFL than that?

And the NCAA overtime is the most idiotic overtime system ever developed, although it is perfectly suited for the way that sport crowns its "champions."

vinny-b · Post by **vinny-b** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:29 pm

ScoopBrady wrote:I have absolutely no problem with the NFL overtime rule. In fact, I think it's great. The defense can score on any play just like the offense so it's not like you need fair ups like baseball. If the defense steps up, like it should, then their offense should end up with good field position. I don't get the hate for it.

word.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:29 pm

pk500 wrote:I'm with Scoop and WCO.

NCAA overtime seems so "Pop Warner" to me. Let's make sure every kid gets a chance to score on offense and feels good about himself. Plus it can take forever because a team starts its overtime possession in scoring range. A score is almost guaranteed unless there's a turnover. At least the NFL forces teams to move into scoring range.

Take care,
PK

I am not advocating an NCAA type of OT.

However, show me any other professional sport where a tie game is decided by a coin toss and the first to score wins (regardless if the other team gets at least one crack at scoring). The NHL, NBA, MLB, Soccer, Golf, etc....NONE have the disadvantage to one team like the NFL OT rules....

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:58 pm

The NFL can't adopt an OT like baseball or basketball, because they just can't keep playing. It will physically drain teams too much. The idea of two possessions will produce much longer OT games or more ties.

The idea of an NCAA/soccer/NHL shootout or some other arbitrary method goes against the nature of the game. That also goes for the idea of a two-possession sudden death that, if still tied, applies some type of artificial shootout.

And while teams that win the coin toss win 60% of the games, the large majority of games feature both teams touching the ball. One out of every three OT games feature the team that wins the toss scoring on that initial possession. While unfair to the other team, it's a better tradeoff than the other proposals. So why cock up the whole system when 70% of the time, both teams get a possession?

I do like the idea of making it the first to six. That would add more excitement and intensity, even though the team that wins the toss could still win without the other team touching the ball.