Comments on: Should the NFL Change its Overtime Rules?

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:19:40 +0000

A 5th quarter certainly makes sense in the playoffs.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:18:30 +0000

Dreamweapon – I agree with you about Peter King.

By: Poincare

Poincare — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:37:34 +0000

Sorry Wright. I posted mine before reading yours.

By: Poincare

Poincare — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:35:56 +0000

Here’s a crazy idea for you guys to think about. How about making the overtime period last the entire quarter? Whichever team scores more points over the duration of the 15 minute period wins. If they’re still tied after another full quarter of play you could play another quarter or now go to the current sudden death format. Just a thought.

By: Wright, Most the Time

Wright, Most the Time — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:51:24 +0000

NFL Overtime is like taking a home baseball team and letting them bat in the top of the first extra inning, if the home team scores they win. If they don’t score, the visiting team has the opportunity to score in the bottom of the inning to win. Problem is that the visiting team doesn’t always get an opportunity to extend the game or even win. Yes, I believe the system is flawed. Is there a perfect solution, probably not. An extra quarter isn’t the answer. Too much fatigue to the players, too much TV time for the NLF interupting other network shows. College overtime system is more attractive to fans because of the intensity. A new overtime system must have all the elements of a regular football game: running clock, play clock, both teams having a chance of possesion, etc.
My solution:
Regular season games that end a tie after regulation, end as a tiei in the standings. Sounds panzy, right? Here is the caught, any playoff games will have a 5th quarter of overtime just like any other quarter. If tied after 5th quarter, play another quarter.

By: Dreamweapon

Dreamweapon — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:34:10 +0000

Peter King is a washed-up gasbag who has nothing important to say. I’m surprised he can even drag himself away from his precious hobbyhorses (in no particular order: Starbucks, “House”, Mary Beth King and his budding “bromance” with Dustin Pedroia) long enough to opine on a football matter. As to the substance, while change for its own sake may be a passable policy with regards to one’s hairstyle or wardrobe, implementing it with regard to the longstanding rules of the most successful professional sports league in the known universe is, at best, moronic. If Indy wanted to win, they should have done more with their possessions during the first 60 minutes. As for copying the college system, well, it seems to me that college football has more problems than any big-time North American sport not run by Gary Bettman, so I can’t imagine why anyone would want to use it as a template.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:01:26 +0000

The Jewru – The argument there is how brutal football is. Five quarters could be rough. Although in the playoffs it certainly makes sense.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:00:43 +0000

Jeff – Ya I bet Baltimore would have legitimately deferred to kick off with that 2000 defense.

By: The Jewru

The Jewru — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:16:31 +0000

I would love to see them play an entire quarter. If it ends in a tie then at least each team had a chance to take care of business at least once. It would also add loads of strategy to the game. A team might go for 7 if they were playing the Saints or go for 3 if they were playing the Lions.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:44:01 +0000

I don’t see what the fuss is about. Offense, Defense & Special Teams are the 3 aspects of the game. Similarly to what you were saying with the college rules, had Indy stopped San Diego with a 3 & out, then Indy would have a HUGE advantage to win the game. The game is not just offense and I think most people are only focusing on that aspect.
Hypothetical: Would the 2000 Ravens (being arguable the best defense of all time) have elected to defer first because of their defense? Probably, because that was their strength (being that their offense was horrible).