Prime Example of Why NFL OT Rule Sucks

[Anon1712931820]

Green Bay makes a miraculous comeback to send it to over time and their offense doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball in OT. It is 100% not fair that both teams do not have the opportunity to score during overtime. Even if the team with the first possession scores a TD the other team should have a chance to respond and if they do then and only then should it be sudden death.

NFL OT sucks....no question.

WTF was up with them at coin toss lol?

 

[Michigan Fan]

Green Bay makes a miraculous comeback to send it to over time and their offense doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball in OT. It is 100% not fair that both teams do not have the opportunity to score during overtime. Even if the team with the first possession scores a TD the other team should have a chance to respond and if they do then and only then should it be sudden death.

NFL OT sucks....no question.

WTF was up with them at coin toss lol?

It is modified sudden death....if the Packers wanted the ball back...play defense and stop Larry Fitzgerald from going 80 yards by himself...at minimum force a FG....

 

[DaBossIsBack]

It is modified sudden death....if the Packers wanted the ball back...play defense and stop Larry Fitzgerald from going 80 yards by himself...at minimum force a FG....

Exactly.

 

[Krisys]

It is modified sudden death....if the Packers wanted the ball back...play defense and stop Larry Fitzgerald from going 80 yards by himself...at minimum force a FG....

I disagree. The college ot rule is perfect. It's ******** that you can win the game by winning the coin toss.

 

[Anon1712931820]

It is modified sudden death....if the Packers wanted the ball back...play defense and stop Larry Fitzgerald from going 80 yards by himself...at minimum force a FG....

Knew this excuse was coming. Why should the Packer defense be the only ones who have to make a stop?

Would the MLB ever adopt a rule that if a game goes to extra innings if the team batting in the top of the inning scores then it is game over?

NBA goes to overtime and the team who wins the tip scores on the first play and....game over.

MLS goes to kick off and the first team scores, so the other team doesn't have a chance to match it.

How stupid does it sound for every other sport? It is equally stupid for the NFL.

 

[DaBossIsBack]

It's the rule. Deal with it. It doesn't matter how dumb you think it is. There are probably hundreds of rules in every sport that I find equally as dumb. Why can you only take three steps and not five? Why 3? Why can I not pick up my dribble and then dribble again? Why do I only get three strikes? Why not 4, 5, or even just 2 strikes? What is so important about three? Why am I out if the dude catches the ball in dodge ball? I clearly hit him with the ball. Rules man. All these meaningless rules.

 

[Allan Brewer]

It's called "Sudden Death" for a reason, and it's not a secret that this is how it works

If the Packers wanted to slam the door shut and WIN that game they would have gone for two instead of kicking the extra point on their last TD

Really can't have much sympathy for a coach that goes for a tie, and puts the game into the hands of the referee and the coin

 

[WildcatofNati]

I disagree. The college ot rule is perfect. It's ******** that you can win the game by winning the coin toss.

There was never a rule where you could win by winning a coin toss, but, used to be, you could win by winning the coin toss and kicking a field goal. That WAS ********, but now you have to get a touchdown if you win the coin toss, and, that's a bit different. If your team can't stop the coin toss winner from getting a touchdown on their first possession, then so be it, they deserve to lose anyway.

By the way, even under the previous rules, the team that won the coin toss only won about 55 percent of the time. It was an advantage, but not the be all end all, and the new rule evens it out even more.

No excuses for losing I say.

 

[fabcat]

It's only sudden death if a touchdown is scored. If the team that gets the ball 1st kicks a field goal then the other team gets the ball with a chance to either get a field goal to tie, or touchdown to win. Once both have possed the ball either after field goals, turn over on downs, or punt, then it becomes sudden death.

I don't particularly like the deal if a team scores a touchdown after winning the coin toss the game is over. If you are going to allow both teams to posses the ball after a field goal then why not after a TD. Both are scores.

 

[fabcat]

Another thing that could help overtime in the NFL....stop screwing up the coin toss. This has happened more than once, and once is too many times. Especially in the playoffs. And I could care less who won the game today, but botching the coin toss is inexcusable.

 

[Saguaro Cat]

Life ain't always fair. It could be better, but it doesn't suck.

 

[vhcat70]

Knew this excuse was coming. Why should the Packer defense be the only ones who have to make a stop?

Would the MLB ever adopt a rule that if a game goes to extra innings if the team batting in the top of the inning scores then it is game over?

NBA goes to overtime and the team who wins the tip scores on the first play and....game over.

MLS goes to kick off and the first team scores, so the other team doesn't have a chance to match it.

How stupid does it sound for every other sport? It is equally stupid for the NFL.

NFL OT is much better than college because it's complete football with all kicking & because it can end much quicker vs. college going on & on with multiple coin tosses. It's ridiculous to wear players out with the long OT's. And as others said, all GB has to do is prevent a TD. It's not like football teams score TD's over & over in a game vs. hoop[s frequent scores.

Regardless, I'd do away with OT's & in the event of equal score at game's end, award the win to the team who got to that score first; i.e., were more efficient offensively. What would happen is that teams that are behind wouldn't play to tie but to get ahead; i.e., very few equal scores at end. Would result in many more 2 pt conversion attempts. Way fewer FG's to tie the score. And it would put an end to coaching conservatism. Much more excitement I think.

 

[theoledog]

The coin toss... damn thing didn't flip! Who has ever flipped a coin that went flat... and landed flat?
It's a coin toss... the guy tossed it.... NFL has rules for everything and it's all driven by money/betting.......
While you might think you're watching a sporting event .... it's really just another Casino game. Sad but true.

 

[mrhotdice]

Simple fix, just not have sudden death and play another quarter. If teams are tied after first overtime, then play another one. Play till someone wins.

 

[Michigan Fan]

Knew this excuse was coming. Why should the Packer defense be the only ones who have to make a stop?

Would the MLB ever adopt a rule that if a game goes to extra innings if the team batting in the top of the inning scores then it is game over?

NBA goes to overtime and the team who wins the tip scores on the first play and....game over.

MLS goes to kick off and the first team scores, so the other team doesn't have a chance to match it.

How stupid does it sound for every other sport? It is equally stupid for the NFL.

If you can't stop Larry Fitzgerald from basically going 80 yards by himself you don't deserve to win. Football is a team game and part of that team is the defense. If you would have force a punt or field goal they would have gotten the ball back...remember it is modified sudden death.

The college rule to me is not real football....they take special teams completely out of it...

 

[Deeeefense]

I agree with the OP, they should simply play one more quarter of football.

 

[Bluetick2100]

Just one of the reasons college FB is better than NFL

 

[Anon1712931820]

Just one of the reasons college FB is better than NFL

Agree; although, I don't believe the NFL needs to do it exactly like college. The NFL overtime system would be perfect if they didn't have the "team with first possession scores a TD then game over". Last night should have happened like this:

Cardinals got the kickoff and jetted down the field in two plays to score a TD.

They then have to kickoff to Green Bay who has a chance to tie or win the game with a 2pt conversion if they score a TD.

If Green Bay turns the ball over on downs or any other turnover then the game is over.

If Green Bay scores and kicks an XP to tie then it is true sudden death.


All of you who say "They shouldn't have let them score in two plays....should have forced a punt" are full of crap. How is it fair that your offense can't even have a chance to score to win the game in overtime?

Prime example as posted already:

What if: MLB game goes to extra innings and if the team batting first scores then it is game over. The other team should have played better defense I guess. Am I right?

No other sport does overtime like this and there is a reason for that. It is stupid.

 

[Anon1712931820]

If you can't stop Larry Fitzgerald from basically going 80 yards by himself you don't deserve to win. Football is a team game and part of that team is the defense. If you would have force a punt or field goal they would have gotten the ball back...remember it is modified sudden death.

The college rule to me is not real football....they take special teams completely out of it...

How on earth is special teams even important in an overtime period? How many turnovers do you see on a kickoff return? What percent of kickoff returns go for touchdowns? Hardly any...that's how many.

College has is alright except I think starting at the 25 is ridiculous. You shouldn't get the ball already in field goal range. Maybe on the 40-45 would be better and make the offense work instead of run 3 times and kick a field goal.

Atleast college allows both teams the chance to score.

 

[Michigan Fan]

How on earth is special teams even important in an overtime period? How many turnovers do you see on a kickoff return? What percent of kickoff returns go for touchdowns? Hardly any...that's how many.

College has is alright except I think starting at the 25 is ridiculous. You shouldn't get the ball already in field goal range. Maybe on the 40-45 would be better and make the offense work instead of run 3 times and kick a field goal.

Atleast college allows both teams the chance to score.

Special Teams is 1/3 of Football...play all aspects of the game...offense, defense and special teams...taking it out is reducing the sport and is Stupid IMO...it like deciding a Basketball overtime with a Free Throw Contest or Baseball Extra Inning with a Home Run Contest...kickoffs and punting are huge parts of the game...College Football OT eliminates that...but if you don't want to go to Overtime...you got 60 Minutes to win in regulation.

BJ Raji of the Packers said it best last night in rebutted to his teammate Clay Matthews about changing it to the College Overtime:


Despite the controversy, not everyone in Green Bay's locker room wants to see the overtime rule changed.

"That's sucker stuff, man," nose tackle B.J. Raji said when asked about the NFL's overtime rules. "We lost the game. We should've won."

Anyway, if Matthews wants the overtime rule changed, he should probably talk to someone in the Packers front office. Back in March, the Bears actually recommended a rule change that would've called for each team to get a possession in overtime. However, that rule got shot down 29-3 and the Packers weren't one of the teams that voted for it, according to USA Today.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...s-nfl-should-go-to-college-rules-for-overtime

 

[Bryguy]

I think you should put the coaches in to kick FGs and see who could kick the most 25 yrds FGs. That would settle it!

 

[DaBossIsBack]

If Green Bay picks that pass off and runs it back for a score, should Arizona have another chance to score? Or should that be the game?

 

[Michigan Fan]

If Green Bay picks that pass off and runs it back for a score, should Arizona have another chance to score? Or should that be the game?

Under the current NFL Overtime rules a TD or a defensive score-(Defensive TD, Safety) the game is over if it is the first score of the overtime period....if you only get a FG on the first possession the other team get the ball...Modified Sudden Death...

 

[DaBossIsBack]

Under the current NFL Overtime rules a TD or a defensive score-(Defensive TD, Safety) the game is over if it is the first score of the overtime period....if you only get a FG on the first possession the other team get the ball...Modified Sudden Death...

I understand the rules. I'm asking the op. Trying to point out holes in his logic.

 

[Anon1712931820]

If Green Bay picks that pass off and runs it back for a score, should Arizona have another chance to score? Or should that be the game?

You said the exact word that proved they shouldn't.....another. In that case the Cardinal offense had a chance and would have blown it. No holes at all in the logic that is is not fair for one offense to get a chance because of a lucky coin toss, but not the other. I would be saying the same thing had Green Bay done it to Arizona.

 

[Anon1712931820]

Special Teams is 1/3 of Football...play all aspects of the game...offense, defense and special teams...taking it out is reducing the sport and is Stupid IMO...it like deciding a Basketball overtime with a Free Throw Contest or Baseball Extra Inning with a Home Run Contest...kickoffs and punting are huge parts of the game...College Football OT eliminates that...but if you don't want to go to Overtime...you got 60 Minutes to win in regulation.

BJ Raji of the Packers said it best last night in rebutted to his teammate Clay Matthews about changing it to the College Overtime:


Despite the controversy, not everyone in Green Bay's locker room wants to see the overtime rule changed.

"That's sucker stuff, man," nose tackle B.J. Raji said when asked about the NFL's overtime rules. "We lost the game. We should've won."

Anyway, if Matthews wants the overtime rule changed, he should probably talk to someone in the Packers front office. Back in March, the Bears actually recommended a rule change that would've called for each team to get a possession in overtime. However, that rule got shot down 29-3 and the Packers weren't one of the teams that voted for it, according to USA Today.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...s-nfl-should-go-to-college-rules-for-overtime

Really....1/3 of football? Technically...yes. It is offense, defense and special teams, but let's look at how many "special teams plays" there are in a game compared to offensive and defensive possessions. You are looking at maybe 5-10% just guessing.

Just checked....123 offensive plays for Carolina and Seattle today with only 11 plays being a field goal or punt (not including kick offs), so you have a whopping 11 out of 134 plays (8.2%) being special teams. Far from 1/3 of football lol. Include routine kickoff sand it is 21 out of 144 plays for 14%.

 

[HalHR2500]

Green Bay makes a miraculous comeback to send it to over time and their offense doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball in OT. It is 100% not fair that both teams do not have the opportunity to score during overtime. Even if the team with the first possession scores a TD the other team should have a chance to respond and if they do then and only then should it be sudden death.

NFL OT sucks....no question.

WTF was up with them at coin toss lol?

Hold them to a field goal or make them punt, its Green Bay's fault, nobody else. Palmer and Fitz teamed up for a huge play, give them credit.....

 

[Michigan Fan]

It still a huge part of the game and it decides games many time...a critical punt alone can flip the field...but really majority of the players and IMO the majority of Pro Football fans have no issue with the Overtime rules. Don't go on Pro Football Talk advocating the college OT Rules

 

[DaBossIsBack]

You said the exact word that proved they shouldn't.....another. In that case the Cardinal offense had a chance and would have blown it. No holes at all in the logic that is is not fair for one offense to get a chance because of a lucky coin toss, but not the other. I would be saying the same thing had Green Bay done it to Arizona.

It's not fair that one defense gets a chance because of a lucky coin toss.

 

[andreIGUODOLLAsigns4UK]

It's the rule. Deal with it. It doesn't matter how dumb you think it is. There are probably hundreds of rules in every sport that I find equally as dumb. Why can you only take three steps and not five? Why 3? Why can I not pick up my dribble and then dribble again? Why do I only get three strikes? Why not 4, 5, or even just 2 strikes? What is so important about three? Why am I out if the dude catches the ball in dodge ball? I clearly hit him with the ball. Rules man. All these meaningless rules.

Basketball with double dribbles and 5 steps? Would never watch a basketball game or play basketball again if these were the rules. At least the NFL OT rules are dumb. Your examples make no sense as to comparing it to the ridiculousness that can be argued against NFL OT rules. Those BB rules are very much needed. The OT one not so much.

 

[vhcat70]

Simple fix, just not have sudden death and play another quarter. If teams are tied after first overtime, then play another one. Play till someone wins.

Yea, beat the hell out of them. Nothing to you.

 

[Blueaz]

lots of Packer butthurt in this thread

 

[Cats_2010]

You said the exact word that proved they shouldn't.....another. In that case the Cardinal offense had a chance and would have blown it. No holes at all in the logic that is is not fair for one offense to get a chance because of a lucky coin toss, but not the other. I would be saying the same thing had Green Bay done it to Arizona.

The hole in your logic is that Arizona's defense in this scenario didn't get the chance to make a play to win the game. The simple solution is to play one extra qtr before going to sudden death but then you would still have people whining over the sudden death rule. 4 quarters is not enough so why would 5 be? What amount of quarters is enough before sudden death is allowed?

I think no matter how you do it it will be deemed unfair and still ultimately decided by a coin toss when the team that loses the coin toss also loses the game.

 

[DaBossIsBack]

lots of Packer butthurt in this thread

Which is odd because it's usually the packee with all the butthurt.

 

[TBCat]

If Green Bay picks that pass off and runs it back for a score, should Arizona have another chance to score? Or should that be the game?

Totally different argument. The suggestion is that both teams should get the ball at least once. If Green Bay scores on Arizona's possession then there is no reason for Arizona to get the ball again.

I don't really like the college way either because they encourage multiple over time games that just bloat the score. Still the NFL way isn't good either. There should be something in between. I'd like to see both teams have to play defense at least once. If the goal is making it a team game it seems unfair to allow an offense oriented team to win the game without having to put their weakest unit on the field. You'd think there would be something they could come up with that would split the difference between the countless OTs that the college game produces and the one possession and done that the NFL produces.

 

[DaBossIsBack]

Football has three phases. Green Bay had a chance to get the ball back and win the game. They failed to do so. If you want your offense to have a chance then get the ball back. Pretty simple really. Not fair wah wah. This isn't t-ball where everyone gets a turn.

 

[Michigan Fan]

Football has three phases. Green Bay had a chance to get the ball back and win the game. They failed to do so. If you want your offense to have a chance then get the ball back. Pretty simple really. Not fair wah wah. This isn't t-ball where everyone gets a turn.

Exactly....if the Packers wanted to win they should have won in regulation instead of giving up 3rd down after 3rd down in the 4th Quarter...and in overtime just don't let Larry Fitzgerald ensure his Bust in Canton, Ohio in the Pro Football Hall of Fame...force a punt or even a FG they would have gotten the ball back...