AFlaccoSeagulls Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 After last night, a narrative that seems to be creeping up is that the NFL OT rules are now somehow bad because Patrick Mahomes, the favorite to win NFL MVP, didn't get to see the field in OT because Tom Brady drove the Patriots down the field and ended the game on a touchdown. Exhibit A: Exhibit B I actually think last night perfectly summarized why the OT rules are pretty solid as-is. What we saw from the Patriots offense in overtime was nothing short of genius in how they carved through man and zone coverage. The Patriots converted THREE separate 3rd-and-10 plays (twice to Edelman over the middle, and once to Gronk on a slant) and then ran the ball 3 times to score. If your offense is able to execute like that, there's nothing "boring" or "not fun" about why that team shouldn't win the game in overtime. The Chiefs defense didn't get robbed. There were not controversial calls or catches in OT, they just straight up got obliterated because they failed to adjust or have any sort of idea how to defend 2 guys (Edelman and Gronk), and instead just tried to man up across the board with zero double teams and the Patriots carved them up as a result. Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingseanjohn Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 The coin toss determined the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwibrown Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 I think mahomes should of had the right of reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 It was fine the way it was and should have never been changed in the first place. But ofcourse the league has to find a way to make higher scoring games and we all know why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-ALL-DAY Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 10 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said: The coin toss determined the game No, your defenses lack of ability to get off the field on 3rd and long determined the game. The rules are fine. Do you really want a college football style of OT that lasts damn near three hours? The original rule of first score sucked as it made it too easy for teams to go down and kick a FG. But really no excuses if your team allows a TD in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
childofpudding Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 It's obviously a results-based opinion. Absolutely no one was saying squat about the OT rules during the NFCCG. All that said - as a fan of the team who won that AFCCG game last night, I do think there is merit in changing the rules. Each side gets a possession no matter what, and then sudden death after that. I can understand that argument. I'm also fine with the rules staying the way they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showtime Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 I'm not really sure how it should be changed, so it can probably stay the way it is. However, I don't really like the current rules and I think that the Chiefs should have had a chance to possess the football during the overtime period. Obviously games would take forever in certain situations, but I think in the playoffs the overtime rules could possibly like college except they should do kickoffs and drive down the field. If the first team scores a TD, let the other team match or they lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilpimp972 Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said: No, your defenses lack of ability to get off the field on 3rd and long determined the game. The rules are fine. Do you really want a college football style of OT that lasts damn near three hours? The original rule of first score sucked as it made it too easy for teams to go down and kick a FG. But really no excuses if your team allows a TD in that situation. So, why the Pats shoudn't play defense too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilpimp972 Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 I don't think it's fair because both defenses deserve to play in the OT (see what I did here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 13 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said: But of course the league has to find a way to make higher scoring games and we all know why. If this was truly the case they'd be doing college OT unless I'm not understanding your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 18 minutes ago, childofpudding said: It's obviously a results-based opinion. Absolutely no one was saying squat about the OT rules during the NFCCG. All that said - as a fan of the team who won that AFCCG game last night, I do think there is merit in changing the rules. Each side gets a possession no matter what, and then sudden death after that. I can understand that argument. I'm also fine with the rules staying the way they are. I'm lock step with this. If they keep it the same, fine. I have no issues with that. Also, if they want to change it to each team gets at least one possession no matter what, I'm also okay with this. In a league that is getting more and more offensive, it may be a little unfair to say, "yeah, the defense needs to make a stop" when both teams' defenses don't have to take the field (this season had the highest rate of drives ending in a score in the last 20 years according to a ringer article). That in and of itself isn't really a level playing field. The 1 and 1 then sudden death is the compromise to keep it going full on college. I could actually see this as something that is done only in the playoffs - keep regular season as is, playoffs 1 and 1 then sudden death. This is a rule that I could actually see be re-evaluated, not because of the "fairness" angle though. Nope. I think the NFL is going to look at this exact situation/scenario, with these specific players and teams, and realize it's a bit of a marketing inefficiency. Brady, Brees, heck, even Rodgers, are probably going to be done within the next few years. They need to start building around the young quarterbacks in the league, and Mahomes is at the forefront of that. They are going to realize that they had a situation where they kept perhaps the guy that will be the most marketable budding superstar in the sport on the sidelines in a playoff overtime game, and they aren't going to like it. A great game could have been made even greater, and the legacy of Mahomes could have gotten another shot in the arm. A guy who is likely to win MVP in the first year he started and he never saw the field in an overtime game where 30 million people were watching with all eyes on this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-ALL-DAY Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 3 minutes ago, evilpimp972 said: So, why the Pats shoudn't play defense too? Because the Chiefs defense couldn't stop the Patriots from scoring a TD, that's why. If the Chiefs defense would have held them to a FG, then you would have seen the Patriots defense out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilpimp972 Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 A change would not be against the defense. I want to see both defense giving a chance to stop the opposing offense. Not a goddamn coin flip. For everybody saying it's fair, why the coaches never defer? lol (I remember Belichick did it once and it backfired haha) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 28 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said: The coin toss determined the game For who? Not the Saints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldfishwars Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 I don't know how you get a better rule the current rules. Mike Sando put it well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.