Why in the world do they still have ties in the NFL?

POTUS

Heisman
Sep 29, 2022
3,893
10,301
113
Hot Take Warning: If a game is tied at the end of overtime, the home team should win.
 

Perd Hapley

All-American
Sep 30, 2022
5,803
6,856
113
Because they don’t want to play forever & get tired players even more beat up & susceptible to injury. It happens maybe a time or two per year. So what?
I don’t buy this narrative. There were 25 plays run in OT of the Packers-Cowboys game last night. 24 plays in the last NFL tie before that.

With the college OT rules, how many OT’s would have to occur for there to be 25 plays run between the 2 teams? For reference, there were 7 plays run in OT of MSU-UT on Saturday. I’d love to see a comparison of average # of OT plays between NFL and FBS for games tied after regulation. I bet there is almost no appreciable difference.

Spare me the BS about tired players and player safety, and go ahead and get to the real reason….the TV networks hate it.
 
Nov 16, 2005
27,498
20,444
113
Because they don’t want to play forever & get tired players even more beat up & susceptible to injury. It happens maybe a time or two per year. So what?
It’s more to do with TV.

The Packers could have done more to put themselves in a position to kick a field goal. It’s almost like they were playing for the tie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patdog

The Peeper

Heisman
Feb 26, 2008
15,427
10,568
113
I mean, surely they could come up with something to end the game?
But I read on this very forum all the time that "we want more football". Every time I see some shi-tty matchup on tv and say something about it on here everybody runs and screams "doesn't matter who's playing as long as its more football, give it to me blah, blah, blah"

I'd much rather watch a tied pro game than Minnesota State vs Saint Little Sister in the Weedeater Bowl or some meaningless crap like that......
 
Nov 16, 2005
27,498
20,444
113
But I read on this very forum all the time that "we want more football". Every time I see some shi-tty matchup on tv and say something about it on here everybody runs and screams "doesn't matter who's playing as long as its more football, give it to me blah, blah, blah"

I'd much rather watch a tied pro game than Minnesota State vs Saint Little Sister in the Weedeater Bowl or some meaningless crap like that......
But that’s also Network TV vs cable. The networks want everything done timely and on a schedule. That’s why the NFL has their overtime that way so it doesn’t take forever.
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,736
26,074
113
It’s more to do with TV.

The Packers could have done more to put themselves in a position to kick a field goal. It’s almost like they were playing for the tie.
I think it's both. The official reason given for shortening OT to 10 minutes was "to improve player safety."
 

FlotownDawg

All-American
Aug 30, 2012
6,848
7,174
113
NFL overtimes should be 12 minutes instead of 10. They used to be 15 minutes but they shortened it to 10. Shortening the period by five minutes as well as creating a rule that means both teams must possess the ball unless the team that receives the kickoff scores a touchdown means there will be more tie games. I would prefer that teams just play an extra 12 minute quarter and whoever is ahead at the end of that quarter wins the game. If it's tied, the game ends in a tie.
 

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,041
2,372
113
NFL overtimes should be 12 minutes instead of 10. They used to be 15 minutes but they shortened it to 10. Shortening the period by five minutes as well as creating a rule that means both teams must possess the ball unless the team that receives the kickoff scores a touchdown means there will be more tie games. I would prefer that teams just play an extra 12 minute quarter and whoever is ahead at the end of that quarter wins the game. If it's tied, the game ends in a tie.
I didnt know until watching last night that they changed thr rules again, and now both teams get at least one possession even if the first team scores a TD. So, really, you want to kick off, which is what Green Bay chose to do, so you know what you need out of your offense. The only way you get screwed is if the receiving team eats up all the clock and scores a TD.

If the game is still tied after 2 possessions, and there is still time on the clock, it becomes sudden death.

So.....why don't they just keep playing at the end of regulation but have it be sudden death? No coin toss, just keep playing. If a team kicked a FG as time ran out, then they get OT, but they have to kickoff. If a team is driving at the end of regulation, just keep playing. If that team scores, they win.
 

Bobby Ricigliano

All-Conference
Jul 27, 2011
2,473
1,404
113
But I read on this very forum all the time that "we want more football". Every time I see some shi-tty matchup on tv and say something about it on here everybody runs and screams "doesn't matter who's playing as long as its more football, give it to me blah, blah, blah"

I'd much rather watch a tied pro game than Minnesota State vs Saint Little Sister in the Weedeater Bowl or some meaningless crap like that......
What does this have to do with settling tied NFL games?
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,736
26,074
113
So.....why don't they just keep playing at the end of regulation but have it be sudden death? No coin toss, just keep playing. If a team kicked a FG as time ran out, then they get OT, but they have to kickoff. If a team is driving at the end of regulation, just keep playing. If that team scores, they win.
This is how OT should be. Just an extension of the 4th quarter. Any advantage one team will have will be an earned advantage, OT would generally be shorter & more exciting with the sudden death element.
 
  • Like
Reactions: preacher_dawg

IBleedMaroonDawg

All-American
Nov 12, 2007
25,542
9,752
113
I was complaining about it before when it decided that the previous two Super Bowls. They made this change. I expect more to come... Slowly.

I agree with you that it is silly the way it is. They made sure to tell us that both teams had a chance with the ball.
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,736
26,074
113
I was complaining about it before when it decided that the previous two Super Bowls. They made this change. I expect more to come... Slowly.

I agree with you that it is silly the way it is. They made sure to tell us that both teams had a chance with the ball.
With as long as a possession in the NFL can take, I wonder what happens if the 10 minutes runs out before the 2nd teams possession is over. Does the game end, or do they play out that possession?
 

IBleedMaroonDawg

All-American
Nov 12, 2007
25,542
9,752
113
With as long as a possession in the NFL can take, I wonder what happens if the 10 minutes runs out before the 2nd teams possession is over. Does the game end, or do they play out that possession?
From what I understand, from the way it played out last night, when the time is up, the game is over.
 

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,041
2,372
113
From what I understand, from the way it played out last night, when the time is up, the game is over.
Exactly, that's why the pressure was on Green Bay to score before time expired. The last incomplete pass fell with 1 second left....a second slower and they lose.
 

Colonel Kang

Heisman
Sep 29, 2022
36,276
67,382
113
If you're going to have ties, you need the soccer point system to go with it so it makes sense in the standings. 3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss
 
  • Like
Reactions: vicksburg

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,041
2,372
113
If you're going to have ties, you need the soccer point system to go with it so it makes sense in the standings. 3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss
It's essentially 1 point for a win and 1/2 point for a tie. So a tie is more valuable in football than it is in futball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: patdog

kired

All-Conference
Aug 22, 2008
7,008
2,322
113
With as long as a possession in the NFL can take, I wonder what happens if the 10 minutes runs out before the 2nd teams possession is over. Does the game end, or do they play out that possession?
Game ends. I believe first team could even run out the clock and kick a FG as time expires. It's limited to 10 minutes regardless (in regular season).
 

FlotownDawg

All-American
Aug 30, 2012
6,848
7,174
113
I think it's both. The official reason given for shortening OT to 10 minutes was "to improve player safety."
This "improve player safety" excuse is just crap. If they cared about player safety, they wouldn't have added a 17th regular season game, and want to potentially add an 18th game. They wouldn't have Thursday night games where teams only have four days of rest between games. Everything the NFL does is to make money and appease the TV networks.
 

Bulldog Bruce

All-American
Nov 1, 2007
4,709
5,209
113
This "improve player safety" excuse is just crap. If they cared about player safety, they wouldn't have added a 17th regular season game, and want to potentially add an 18th game. They wouldn't have Thursday night games where teams only have four days of rest between games. Everything the NFL does is to make money and appease the TV networks.
TV is probably the biggest reason. It's also partly that the NFLPA has a say. The players being forced to play more which increases their chance of injury and also not receive any additional compensation is something they have the power to negotiate. So it makes sense to limit any overtime since they aren't getting time and a half. What they do is physically hard.
 

Perd Hapley

All-American
Sep 30, 2022
5,803
6,856
113
I didnt know until watching last night that they changed thr rules again, and now both teams get at least one possession even if the first team scores a TD. So, really, you want to kick off, which is what Green Bay chose to do, so you know what you need out of your offense. The only way you get screwed is if the receiving team eats up all the clock and scores a TD.

If the game is still tied after 2 possessions, and there is still time on the clock, it becomes sudden death.

So.....why don't they just keep playing at the end of regulation but have it be sudden death? No coin toss, just keep playing. If a team kicked a FG as time ran out, then they get OT, but they have to kickoff. If a team is driving at the end of regulation, just keep playing. If that team scores, they win.
I like the idea of just continuing play as you end regulation, and making it sudden death. I’d add the caveat that the sudden death should still require a TD in overtime. If you have first down on the 35 yard line with 0:02 left, and can kick the game winning field goal, but you let it go to OT just so you can gain 10-15 more yards for the game winning field goal attempt, that would be crap. There has to be some incentive to end the game in regulation.

Another option is to keep things as they are, but bring back the ability to win with a TD on the first OT possession. The only change from previous is you have to score a TD and get a 2-point conversion. This will encourage more aggressive play in the first OT possession.

3rd option - keep everything the same as now, but shorten the play-clock to 25 seconds for all plays, not just administrative breaks in action for penalities, change of possession, etc. This would also encourage more action towards a resolution. The Dallas / Green Bay game where they spent the entire 10 minutes of OT on two field goal drives was atrocious. No excuse whatsoever in today’s modern passing offenses for there to be only 2 possessions in a 10 minute OT period.
 

Perd Hapley

All-American
Sep 30, 2022
5,803
6,856
113
Maybe start with field goals from the 30 (40 yards), then move out 5 yards at a time until one team misses.
But what if they both miss from same distance? You just keep going?

I also like the idea of FG’s counting differently in OT. Instead of 3 points regardless of location, I would say count it as 3 points if ball is snapped from between the goal line and the 30 yard line, 4 points if snapped between the 30 yard line and 40 yard line, 5 points if snapped between the 40 yard line and the 50 yard line. This way you can actually trump one field goal with another longer FG. Keeps the kicking game involved in the strategy.
 

Dawgzilla2

All-Conference
Oct 9, 2022
2,041
2,372
113
I like the idea of just continuing play as you end regulation, and making it sudden death. I’d add the caveat that the sudden death should still require a TD in overtime. If you have first down on the 35 yard line with 0:02 left, and can kick the game winning field goal, but you let it go to OT just so you can gain 10-15 more yards for the game winning field goal attempt, that would be crap. There has to be some incentive to end the game in regulation.

Another option is to keep things as they are, but bring back the ability to win with a TD on the first OT possession. The only change from previous is you have to score a TD and get a 2-point conversion. This will encourage more aggressive play in the first OT possession.

3rd option - keep everything the same as now, but shorten the play-clock to 25 seconds for all plays, not just administrative breaks in action for penalities, change of possession, etc. This would also encourage more action towards a resolution. The Dallas / Green Bay game where they spent the entire 10 minutes of OT on two field goal drives was atrocious. No excuse whatsoever in today’s modern passing offenses for there to be only 2 possessions in a 10 minute OT period.
Yeah, one thing wrong with the "keep playing" approach is, if the game is tied, you miss out on the drama of a team trying to score before time runs out. That's good TV.

In my suggestion, if the game is tied late, and one team has the ball in decent field position, there is no incentive for them to play "beat the clock". Just play conservatively, roll over to OT, and then try to score and win. I have no problem with that, but TV might object.
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,736
26,074
113
Yeah, one thing wrong with the "keep playing" approach is, if the game is tied, you miss out on the drama of a team trying to score before time runs out. That's good TV.

In my suggestion, if the game is tied late, and one team has the ball in decent field position, there is no incentive for them to play "beat the clock". Just play conservatively, roll over to OT, and then try to score and win. I have no problem with that, but TV might object.
On the other hand, in that situation tv gets the commercial time out at the end of regulation every time & not just if the offense fails.
 

mstateglfr

All-American
Feb 24, 2008
15,968
5,817
113
It's called football- ties need to be broken with the foot!
Start at the 40yd line and have a sudden death FG competition, where the ball moves 5 yards further back each round. Each kicker is given 15 seconds after the ball is placed to snap and kick. No defense needed.

If both miss, move the ball forward 2 yards and kick again.

Make those 17ers earn their roster spot!