Owners approve postseason overtime rule ensuring both teams get a possession

[MWil23]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

I Don't like College OT...I'm good with possession for possession, but I hate the idea of doing it from the opponents side of the field

 

Just now, MWil23 said:

College OT IMO would be best if teams started from midfield or their own 40 instead of just outside of the Red Zone.

Lol you would beat me to the punch wouldn’t you? 😂

[Dodo]

Laaaaaaame

[Forge]

37 minutes ago, BucsDraftGeek47 said:

I remember when we didn't change rules every freaking year

Honestly, that has never really been a thing. There are rule changes pretty much every year, especially over the last 25 years or so. They just vary in terms of their importance and impact and how much we notice them. 

[Geezy]

Now it’s going to be that it isn’t fair because the losing team didn’t get a 2nd possession lol 

[SHONUFF]

Everyone gets a participation trophy! 💩

[AZ_Eaglesfan]

Idk this rule seems like a good thing. It is far from unfair and will be just as dramatic if not more so.

[WheatieMan]

What about a mandatory two point try? If team 1 misses, team 2 has to go. If team 2 misses, team 1 wins (in lieu of Team 2 knowing they have four downs). Team 1 TD = 7 points and 2-pt try = 1 point in OT. Team 2 ensuing TD = 6 points then mandatory 2-pt would give them the win.

You can also keep the Tennessee proposal and just modify with the aforementioned point structure 7 (TD) + 1 (2-pt) for Team 1 = automatic win.

You can also give Team 1 TD an automatic 8 points with an opening TD by giving them 7+1, with the option of a two point try to put the game away. But if Team 1 can open with an 8 point lead with just an extra point, it preserves the incentive to receive the ball after the coin toss.

Edited March 29, 2022 by WheatieMan

[Calamity_Cometh]

I don't give a damn either way, personally. It's done. Rule is changed. And tomorrow is another day.

[y*so*blu]

Remember the suspense of "sudden death overtime" in the playoffs? That was pretty awesome. Players like John Elway and Tom Brady built their legacies on it. By changing the rules yet again, the league is implying that none of those victories should have happened. 

Other than disallowing helmet-to-helmet, has the NFL made a single positive change to the game in the last 20 years?

[Teen Girl Squad]

54 minutes ago, Geezy said:

Now it’s going to be that it isn’t fair because the losing team didn’t get a 2nd possession lol 

The team that wins the flip can just bleed the clock and kick a FG! We need 15 min overtimes then 2nd overtimes etc...

[Broncofan]

For the “what if it’s tied after 2 possessions” crowd - there’s a simple answer - the team electing to go for the tie in OT knows they are allowing the other team first chance to win the game on O with a 3rd possession.   Down 3 they could go for it on 4th down instead of a FG, to score a TD - or go for 2 if they tie it up with a TD.   Point bring - it’s their choice.    In regulation under the current format you don’t know who is getting the first chance.    If a team scores on a 3rd possession it means the team who tied it up passed up a chance to win outright.    In regulation, the tie could have happened 3,4,5+ minutes before the game ended, too - but in either case with a tie game after 60 mins - no one knows who’s getting ball first.     
 

In this OT format if 1st team scores a TD and 2nd team goes down and scores a TD on their own - they choose to kick the XP and let 1st team get first crack to score again and rely on their D.   Or they can go for 2 and let the O win/lose right there and then.   Since it’s a 50+ percent prop it’s literally in their hands to decide who they trust more.    That choice is what removes any complaint of 3rd possession score winning the game.   
 

Again I’d hate for this to happen for every OT.   Way too much extra time.  But for a sudden death game I’m all for it.   Both teams have to play O & D.   The team that plays for an OT tie knows they are giving up the first crack on O to the other team.    Perfect IMO.   
 

We may not see this come into play until 2,3,4+ years.   But I guarantee no one is going to sit back and say “awful” then.   It’s not affecting regular season games.  Both sides play O & D.   Every decision made knows the outcome of who gets the ball next.   This is going to stick IMO.  
 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by Broncofan

[Forge]

26 minutes ago, y*so*blu said:

Remember the suspense of "sudden death overtime" in the playoffs? That was pretty awesome. Players like John Elway and Tom Brady built their legacies on it. By changing the rules yet again, the league is implying that none of those victories should have happened. 

Other than disallowing helmet-to-helmet, has the NFL made a single positive change to the game in the last 20 years?

The suspense of true sudden death overtime kind of died when the league got so heavily slanted toward offense that I just expected the team with the ball to score every time, tbh. 

[Forge]

1 hour ago, Geezy said:

Now it’s going to be that it isn’t fair because the losing team didn’t get a 2nd possession lol 

Yeah, there will be people who complain. Because people complain. That's what they do. You get people on extremes and you get people on the middle. Very difficult to please everyone. 

Nobody has really given me a reason why this is a bad thing outside of some "get off my lawn" energy, tbh. 

At worst, I find this to be a net zero. I honestly can't think of anything worse about this format than the previous one. 

[Broncofan]

FWIW it seems like this is going to be playoffs only for the foreseeable future.   Which is perfect IMO.   Increasing player injury risk only makes sense for the greatest impact games - doesn’t justify making it for entire regular season.   This follows similar model to NHL having 2 different OT formats.   
 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by Broncofan

[43M]

Wow....a new rule thats actually good.

Thats rare.