There are 185 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

NFL Passes New Overtime Proposal

Originally posted by scopur49er:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by scopur49er:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by valrod33:
leave it the way it is.

Dont give me that s**t about its not fair blah blah blah. Its the defenses fault if they lose they get paid to stop the other team.

It's a new world of soft ass people where everything has to be done fairly. My question is how long is gonna take for folks to say well regardless of a TD the other team should still get a chance to match that. it's unfair

Sports evolve over time and rules sometimes need to be changed to keep up.
The competition committee and nearly all owners agree and that's why they're the ones making these decisions and not a bunch of bitter, curmudgeonly fans that are stuck in their ways.

Change that promotes competition and fairness is a good thing and disagreeing with it because you think people are getting "soft" or they're just not tough like back in the olden days is just laughable.
Hell while we're at it why don't we bring back those tiny leather helmets, get rid of shoulder pads and play ironman style so we can be gritty and hard like pappy used to be!

LOL.

well since you couldnt stop the other team lets give you a chance to score a td, cuz thats whats fair

if a game is tied in the 4th quarter with 2 minutes to go and one team leads a drive and kicks a FG with no time left are we gonna give the other team a chance to score?

The rules for overtime aren't "First team to make a defensive stand wins". It's "First team to SCORE wins" and the way you score is primarily on offense. A team that doesn't recieve that opportunity is getting shorted.

During the 4 quarters of regulation time there are plenty of opportunities to both stop the other team AND score hence your example = fail.

Because overtime is sudden death, it's basically like starting the game over again and resetting the score so what you're saying is that, by comparison, it would be fair if we just eliminated all 4 quarters and the 60 minutes of regulation playtime from the game and just made it so the first team to score wins and a coin flip decides who gets the first opportunity to score because that's essentially what happens in overtime right now.

They are getting shorted because the defense failed. Its a team game. If the Defense cant stop the opposing teams Offense that team should lose. Not give the other team a shot because the D failed at their job that they get paid millions of dollars to do.
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.
So if both teams fail to score on their first possesions, then a field goal can win the game? If the team that wins the coin toss and throws an interception, and the other team kicks a field goal, do they win the game? Or will the team that threw the interception get another chance? Just a few questions I have with the new overtime rules..
Originally posted by samoan49er:
So if both teams fail to score on their first possesions, then a field goal can win the game? If the team that wins the coin toss and throws an interception, and the other team kicks a field goal, do they win the game? Or will the team that threw the interception get another chance? Just a few questions I have with the new overtime rules..

I thought it only applies if the team that wins the toss scores in 1 possession the other team gets at least 1 possession
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by scopur49er:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by scopur49er:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by valrod33:
leave it the way it is.

Dont give me that s**t about its not fair blah blah blah. Its the defenses fault if they lose they get paid to stop the other team.

It's a new world of soft ass people where everything has to be done fairly. My question is how long is gonna take for folks to say well regardless of a TD the other team should still get a chance to match that. it's unfair

Sports evolve over time and rules sometimes need to be changed to keep up.
The competition committee and nearly all owners agree and that's why they're the ones making these decisions and not a bunch of bitter, curmudgeonly fans that are stuck in their ways.

Change that promotes competition and fairness is a good thing and disagreeing with it because you think people are getting "soft" or they're just not tough like back in the olden days is just laughable.
Hell while we're at it why don't we bring back those tiny leather helmets, get rid of shoulder pads and play ironman style so we can be gritty and hard like pappy used to be!

LOL.

well since you couldnt stop the other team lets give you a chance to score a td, cuz thats whats fair

if a game is tied in the 4th quarter with 2 minutes to go and one team leads a drive and kicks a FG with no time left are we gonna give the other team a chance to score?

The rules for overtime aren't "First team to make a defensive stand wins". It's "First team to SCORE wins" and the way you score is primarily on offense. A team that doesn't recieve that opportunity is getting shorted.

During the 4 quarters of regulation time there are plenty of opportunities to both stop the other team AND score hence your example = fail.

Because overtime is sudden death, it's basically like starting the game over again and resetting the score so what you're saying is that, by comparison, it would be fair if we just eliminated all 4 quarters and the 60 minutes of regulation playtime from the game and just made it so the first team to score wins and a coin flip decides who gets the first opportunity to score because that's essentially what happens in overtime right now.

They are getting shorted because the defense failed. Its a team game. If the Defense cant stop the opposing teams Offense that team should lose. Not give the other team a shot because the D failed at their job that they get paid millions of dollars to do.

Yes it is a team game! So why not give the whole team an opportunity to affect the outcome rather than just half the team (I'm not including special teams here)?

It's really simple.
You win by scoring.
Offense = opportunity to score

If only one team gets to be on offense, there's no way to have competetive balance.
Give both teams equal opportunities and let them play it out.
This rule change is long overdue, imo.
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
Originally posted by samoan49er:
So if both teams fail to score on their first possesions, then a field goal can win the game? If the team that wins the coin toss and throws an interception, and the other team kicks a field goal, do they win the game? Or will the team that threw the interception get another chance? Just a few questions I have with the new overtime rules..

I thought it only applies if the team that wins the toss scores in 1 possession the other team gets at least 1 possession

If they score with a touchdown then I think the game is over. The other team gets a chance if they score with a field goal. Oh here's another question, can the game end on a safety. The team with the 1st possesion gets sacked for a safety. IMO it should end the game since they blew their opportunity..
Originally posted by samoan49er:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
Originally posted by samoan49er:
So if both teams fail to score on their first possesions, then a field goal can win the game? If the team that wins the coin toss and throws an interception, and the other team kicks a field goal, do they win the game? Or will the team that threw the interception get another chance? Just a few questions I have with the new overtime rules..

I thought it only applies if the team that wins the toss scores in 1 possession the other team gets at least 1 possession

If they score with a touchdown then I think the game is over. The other team gets a chance if they score with a field goal. Oh here's another question, can the game end on a safety. The team with the 1st possesion gets sacked for a safety. IMO it should end the game since they blew their opportunity..
Yes that would end the game.
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.

College football one sucks in my opinion.
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.

College football one sucks in my opinion.

College Football in general sucks
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.

College football one sucks in my opinion.

How so?
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.

College football one sucks in my opinion.

How so?

I just don't like it at all. Seems like such a random way to finish a game. It's like you had a bunch of 12 year olds coming up with that idea or something.
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.

College football one sucks in my opinion.

College Football in general sucks

In general I'm not really a fan. But that USC - Texas game, Leinart vs Young was pretty awesome. Also Crabtree beating Texas
not a big fan of change, but i suppose it's ok. hopefully it doesn't translate to regular season, though.
Patrick Willis tweeted that he's a fan of the new rule change.

So I guess that's the end of that.

Right?

Riiiight?
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by blizzuntz:
college football overtime >>>> NFL overtime

I think this helps it fall somewhere inbetween.

College football one sucks in my opinion.

How so?

I just don't like it at all. Seems like such a random way to finish a game. It's like you had a bunch of 12 year olds coming up with that idea or something.

Random? It provides the fairest way to settle a tie.

I'm amazed at how many people are OK with sudden death football, where half the time the game is ended with no chance of rebuttal by one team. Football isn't like hockey or soccer where possession is constantly changing.

There is nothing wrong with the college system, it's perfect. I'd only change the starting position for the NFL.

This new rule is OK, but it's a little strange, and I feel like they could've come up with something better.