Skip to content

Belichick supports timed overtime

Bill Belichick doesn’t like how overtime is currently set up.  He’s not a big fan of the latest proposal to change overtime either.

“I like the rules of the game as they are in regulation,” Belichick told Mike Reiss of ESPNBoston Monday. “I think that’s the way it should be in overtime, but that’s not
the way it is. So whatever it is, it is.”

To make sure our Belichick translator was correct, we asked Reiss to confirm what that meant exactly.  Reiss pointed out what Belichick said to him back in 2007.

“Football is a game that is played to the final gun,” Belichick said then. “There is a lot of strategy at the end of the game — you’re
protecting a lead, conserving time to get the ball back, and that all
gets eliminated from the game in overtime.”

One option would be to play half a quarter.  Both teams should get the ball in that scenario.

“The way it is now, you’re playing for field position and the score,
and you lose that end-of-game strategy. I think that strategy is part
of the intrigue that football brings.”

It’s a convincing argument and one we’re surprised has never gotten very far as an alternative.

Permalink 49 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: New England Patriots, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
49 Responses to “Belichick supports timed overtime”
  1. zappa says: Mar 23, 2010 9:32 AM

    I like it, make it so Florio.

  2. begooode says: Mar 23, 2010 9:34 AM

    and when the extra times runs out and both teams conservatively sat on the football, who wins?

  3. Bobb Cobb says: Mar 23, 2010 9:37 AM

    yes, a really fantastic idea to make the game longer than it is already. It will be fantastic for scheduling. Monday night games ending in time for the morning commute on Tuesday.
    Plus, you know, it can be tied at the end of that overtime. Then what? Sudden death? Ties?
    Last thing, with some of the more exotic run formations and short passing games, a 7 minute drive is not unheard of these days.
    Other than that, this should go to the top of the list of how to fix what ain’t broke.

  4. Hauschild says: Mar 23, 2010 9:38 AM

    It’s only a convincing argument to people that hop from one issue to the next with little regard for thoughtful analysis.
    This is typical of nearly everything in this country nowadays – that people furthest removed from the situation are the ones responsible for making key decisions. Then, everybody’s surprised when things become far worse.
    Just leave it alone already.

  5. Bob S. says: Mar 23, 2010 9:40 AM

    “The way it is now, you’re playing for field position and the score, and you lose that end-of-game strategy. I think that strategy is part of the intrigue that football brings.”

    Say what? Like the BRILLIANT strategy with 2 minutes left in the game you are leading by 6 points and with a 4th and 2 on your own 28 yardline, you try on 4th down?

  6. Outlaw Jersey Whales says: Mar 23, 2010 9:41 AM

    “Kodachro-o-ome
    You give us those nice bright colors
    You give us the greens of summers
    Makes you think all the world’s a sunny day, oh yeah!
    I got a Nikon camera
    I love to take a photograph
    So Mama, don’t take my Kodachrome away”

  7. pkrlvr says: Mar 23, 2010 9:42 AM

    Why not make overtime a 5 min. quarter. That would add drama and still give both teams a crack in most cases. And if you can’t stop the coin toss winner from putting together a 5 min. drive, then you deserve to lose.

  8. Chapnasty2 says: Mar 23, 2010 9:42 AM

    “One option would be to play half a quarter. Both teams should get the ball in that scenario.”
    Who says?

  9. WarrenMoonGOAT says: Mar 23, 2010 9:43 AM

    F u and your agenda, overtime will not change no matter how many articles u write about it
    let it fcuking go

  10. Reasonable says: Mar 23, 2010 9:45 AM

    Belichick is the smartest man in Football. Has the largest football book collection (Video too. Ha Haters beat you to it.) and he’s been coaching in the NFL longer than I’ve been alive and I’m nearly 38. I like his idea but it would have to be a full 15 minutes. A team could logically have a 6 or 8 even a 10 minute drive so it would have to be a full 15 minutes.

  11. house068 says: Mar 23, 2010 9:48 AM

    begooode says:
    March 23, 2010 9:34 AM
    and when the extra times runs out and both teams conservatively sat on the football, who wins?
    ————————————
    The team who films the other teams signals and cheats until the final gun usually comes out on top until they get caught. When that happens, they won’t ever win a Superbowl again.

  12. LuvThatDirtyWatah says: Mar 23, 2010 9:49 AM

    It’s a convincing argument and one we’re surprised has never gotten very far as an alternative.
    Bill Belichick, with respect to intellect, is a man among boys in the NFL.

  13. Drat says: Mar 23, 2010 9:49 AM

    I’m surprised it’s never gotten far as an alternative. I post relentlessly that the solution to a tie is to play more football, regular football, not weirdo change-the rules pseudo football. I believe the main objections are that players are tired (sad millionaires, I feel their pain) or that tired players will have a higher rate of injury. Well, I’m not sure how you get around that. It’s a violent game. We could bring out a basketball rim and shoot horse to determine winners.

  14. aec4 says: Mar 23, 2010 9:51 AM

    I recommended 1/2 a quarter a few weeks ago on these boards. if the quarter is 7:30, and the team that loses the toss doesn’t get the rock, they deserve to lose.

  15. WarrenMoonGOAT says: Mar 23, 2010 9:52 AM

    stop posting articles about how YOU want to change overtime
    its not going to happen
    theres a better chance of you growing hair on your chest before the league changes overtime

  16. BenRapistberger says: Mar 23, 2010 9:54 AM

    Play a two mini-half overtime. If that ends in a tie, the game is a tie. If it’s the playoffs, keep playing til someone wins. You wanna get off the field? Win the game. Baseball, Basketball, all these other major sports keep playing.
    This also allows overtime to operate like an actual game. You know where a team is actually trying to get a TD.

  17. pacstud says: Mar 23, 2010 9:55 AM

    Wow, we continue to split this atom.
    What do kids do, you know, when they’re tied?
    Next score wins.
    That’s right folks, next score wins.
    It’s so simple a caveman can figure it out, putting Florio and Co. somewhere below homo habilis…
    The current system is fine for everyone except Favre fans. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Favre DID have his chance to win the game, and he…???…

  18. hayward giapunchmi says: Mar 23, 2010 9:57 AM

    ” Outlaw Jersey Whales says: March 23, 2010 9:41 AM
    “Kodachro-o-ome… [ /snip ] ”
    Yeah, uh huh.
    We heard you the first ten times you posted this.
    Geezus, little kids with keyboards.

  19. Reasonable says: Mar 23, 2010 9:58 AM

    Chapnasty2 says:
    March 23, 2010 9:42 AM
    “One option would be to play half a quarter. Both teams should get the ball in that scenario.”
    Who says?
    ————————————————–
    pkrlvr says:
    March 23, 2010 9:42 AM
    Why not make overtime a 5 min. quarter. That would add drama and still give both teams a crack in most cases. And if you can’t stop the coin toss winner from putting together a 5 min. drive, then you deserve to lose.
    ————————————————–
    A 5 minute drive is about an average drive. Stop playing so much Madden and watch real football. 7- 10 min drives are not that uncommon anymore. A full 15 would insure both teams get the ball with enough time for each team to get the ball. The reason I like the full quarter idea is OT still would include offense defense and speacial teams and clock managment.

  20. JAG880 says: Mar 23, 2010 10:00 AM

    While being more fair, I could see many OT games ending with the climax of 3 straight kneel downs in this scenario.

  21. heyyon says: Mar 23, 2010 10:04 AM

    I hate to say it (esp with the intense hatred the system has), but college football has an amazing overtime format for the fans to watch. Think of the OU Vs Boise State epic bowl game… and tell me that the Chargers Vs Colts going into a “who drops the ball first” type finish wouldn’t sit in legendary football lore forever just the same.

  22. RaiderRedleg says: Mar 23, 2010 10:05 AM

    In other news…Belichick also supports the “Tuck Rule”.

  23. larrydawg says: Mar 23, 2010 10:08 AM

    Similar to what the NBA does…

  24. cballlv11 says: Mar 23, 2010 10:08 AM

    AHHHHH!!!! I just figured it out! Florio won’t stop with this, because he wants whatever changes that come (if any) to be called “The FLORIO Rule”!!!

  25. PFTiswhatitis says: Mar 23, 2010 10:12 AM

    The idea is compelling but what happens if it ends in a tie again? At some point you have to go to sudden death. The current proposal at least addresses the lame FG situation and is at least a minimal improvement over what we have now. DO IT.
    “Bob S. says:
    March 23, 2010 9:40 AM
    “The way it is now, you’re playing for field position and the score, and you lose that end-of-game strategy. I think that strategy is part of the intrigue that football brings.”

    Say what? Like the BRILLIANT strategy with 2 minutes left in the game you are leading by 6 points and with a 4th and 2 on your own 28 yardline, you try on 4th down?”
    I think you made the point for him. That part of the game and the associated strategy was compelling. You have not forgotten it.

  26. Ralph says: Mar 23, 2010 10:12 AM

    should, not will.
    If you can both control the ball for the entire overtime period and score, you deserve the win. If, on the other hand, you’re unable to wrest control of the ball from your opponent during 7+ minutes of play and allow them to score, you’re a loser. Pretty easy to see that one, wake up.

  27. PDXNinerfan says: Mar 23, 2010 10:14 AM

    Amen. This is what I have been trying to preach to the Peter Kings and Mike Florios (yes, I just lumped them together) for a couple of years now. As poster above said, I wanted 5 minute “quarters”. It protects the integrity of the game which amounts to maintaining possession of the football. High passing teams sometimes hold the ball less than high running teams. Defensive teams sometimes need a couple of cracks at offense to score, but do they not deserve it if they keep Peyton scoreless for 3 drives? Let each team exploit their strengths and use their strategies.
    Maybe we could just continue from the same spot as in the 4th quarter withiout a new kickoff ? Either way, I hate to see a high-powered offense team get the coin toss and beat the defensive team that just held them to a tie and not even get a try at the ball.
    No college rules, no sudden death, no “you need to score a touchdown, field goal and a rouge”, no “the game is too long” (are we seriously on a football fan site with people saying this?), just plain old football played the right way.

  28. Skinsfan23 says: Mar 23, 2010 10:17 AM

    too bad Baltimore didnt need overtime to whip the patriots ass in the playoffs

  29. stan26 says: Mar 23, 2010 10:22 AM

    Don’t hear a lot of fans clamoring for a change, just some of the media.
    Leave it alone.

  30. FlourideSoldOut says: Mar 23, 2010 10:24 AM

    Finally Flouride your starting to get it. Once again, no coin toss, you just add 5 mins. and pick up where you left off. Look at the NFCCC game last season:
    Farve throws the pick, the Saints get it, time runs out. 5 Mins. are put on the clock, the Saints now have the ball on thier side of the field, what to do…hmmm? PLay football! Go down the field, try to score a touch down, if not maybe settle for a field goal, just like you do in regulation play.
    Either way you need to consider how much time will be left when you kick off and now have to play defense, again just like what happens in regulation play, you know football.
    So what if its still tied after the 5 mins are up? You add another 5 mins., do it again, after a third addition of 5 mins. then you call it a tie, in the regular season, for the playoffs, you gotta akeep going, somebodys gotta win.
    Think about those playoff hockey games that have 4 OT periods, same thing. Or a Baseball game with several extra innings.
    We’re not gonna know till we see it played out, I’d be interestred to see how many time the 5 mins. would have to be added to settle a game, I’d be surprised if it went beyond two.
    Why can’t we use the preseason game to try out these different OT concepts?
    Also, what ever they decide to do with OT, will someone please let Donovan McNabb know?

  31. stetai says: Mar 23, 2010 10:35 AM

    Since the current OT rules are not an accurate measure of which team played a better game let’s go all the way with it.
    Coin flip winner must kick a 35 yd FG. The other team’s kicker must do the same. If they both make it, then we move it to 40yds, then 45, etc.
    If both guys miss, then it’s either a tie or a hoagie eating contest between coaches. (The Eagles-Jets OT game will be legendary)

  32. AlanSaysYo says: Mar 23, 2010 10:36 AM

    I hate Belichick more than life itself, but he is right on this. The only way to make OT fair is to play it like you play the rest of the game.

  33. XXINYG says: Mar 23, 2010 10:45 AM

    Take away the media, and the overtime rule wouldn’t even be brought up. Ever. It’s not like coaches, players and front office members are going on and on about the OT rules. It’s only because they’re asked – which amounts to nothing. There’s simply no good reason to change the rules, or even a decent reason. Plus, with Goodell changing everything BUT the overtime rules i think it would’ve been done by now.

  34. notsosmart says: Mar 23, 2010 10:45 AM

    I am OK with it. If team A gets 3 points with its’ possession and team B does not Team A wins.

  35. WorkDay says: Mar 23, 2010 10:49 AM

    # Skinsfan23 says: March 23, 2010 10:17 AM
    too bad Baltimore didnt need overtime to whip the patriots ass in the playoffs
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA a stupid Skins fan hating on someone because of a playoff loss. I live in DC now and your team, owner, and idiot fans are a joke. Maybe you guys will win 5 games this year….

  36. AllThat says: Mar 23, 2010 11:07 AM

    Leave it alone. It is what it is and doesn’t need to be changed. Even if Donovan McNabb doesn’t understand it. Dumbass.

  37. daffy87 says: Mar 23, 2010 11:09 AM

    How bout overtime be one 10 minute period. If a team can hold the ball for all 10 minutes then the other team deserves to lose.

  38. rusH1023 says: Mar 23, 2010 11:09 AM

    Bob S. says:
    “The way it is now, you’re playing for field position and the score, and you lose that end-of-game strategy. I think that strategy is part of the intrigue that football brings.”

    Say what? Like the BRILLIANT strategy with 2 minutes left in the game you are leading by 6 points and with a 4th and 2 on your own 28 yardline, you try on 4th down?
    ________________________________________
    It was the right call, dumbdumb. Unfortunately, it was a game the Pats were probably going to lose either way.

  39. Kate773 says: Mar 23, 2010 11:10 AM

    I hate Belichick more than life itself,
    ***********************************
    You should probably get more of a life. No one should hate someone they don’t know that much unless that person is Hitler.

  40. VonClausewitz says: Mar 23, 2010 11:17 AM

    I agree with BB, it’s the only solution that makes sense. All the other approaches are unproven, and are at best crude attempts to remove the coin flip advantage.

  41. bogmon says: Mar 23, 2010 11:37 AM

    My question: Why do they kickoff in OT?
    To me it should just be and extension of the game from the exact point that it ends…almost like extra innings.
    If the score is tied and with the final 7 seconds the team that has the ball is on the 35 yard line…then they should get the ball @ the 35 yard line in OT and just extend the game by half of a quarter.
    Each team gets one possesion in the OT period….if it’s still tied…then go to sudden death.
    A last second touchdown in regulation should not allow for such dramatic moment shifts as it currently seems to offer if that team wins the coin toss….then kicks a field goal.

  42. polishkingski says: Mar 23, 2010 11:41 AM

    I NEVER KNEW THOSE WERE THE WORDS TO THAT SONG!? THANKS!

  43. Gordon-Geico-Gekko says: Mar 23, 2010 11:42 AM

    ” # Kate773 says: March 23, 2010 11:10 AM
    I hate Belichick more than life itself,
    ***********************************
    You should probably get more of a life. No one should hate someone they don’t know that much unless that person is Hitler.”
    I think you just proved his point.

  44. Speed_Blue says: Mar 23, 2010 12:03 PM

    @daffy83
    I agree completely. Start it with a coin flip to determine the possession and side of the field, then play 10:00 of football. If it’s still a tie at the end of ten minutes, sudden death.

  45. geek says: Mar 23, 2010 12:29 PM

    Really interesting point from BB. Here would be a great compromise with the players: eliminate OT altogether during the regular season (when a ite is workable). When the playoffs come and there must be a winner, play 10 minute OT periods until there is a team with more points on the board to end that period. You could continue the rotation of kickoff from half-to-half, into the OT periods – making the initial discision to kick/return/defer even more interesting. I like it!

  46. tj.52 says: Mar 23, 2010 12:38 PM

    Bob S. says: Say what? Like the BRILLIANT strategy with 2 minutes left in the game you are leading by 6 points and with a 4th and 2 on your own 28 yardline, you try on 4th down?
    ———————————————————
    @Bob S.:
    Bill Belichick as an NFL coach = 7 Superbowl appearances with 5 victories.
    Bob S. as an NFL coach: 0 Superbowl appearances with 0 victories. (just a guess)
    Stop trying to pretend as if you would be a better coach. You would have better luck arguing economics with Alan Greenspan.

  47. sdigre says: Mar 23, 2010 12:42 PM

    I’ve always thought a 10:00 quarter. Then if tied, go to sudden death.

  48. Pastabelly says: Mar 23, 2010 1:01 PM

    It would do wonders for the Red Zone channel.
    League will never do it because they want to cut away to 4 pm games and would have to start 4 pm games at 4:30 or 4:45 to make it work.
    If still tied after 67.30 minutes, it’s a tie and that would actually end some of the ridiculous tiebreakers at the end of the season.

  49. Kate773 says: Mar 23, 2010 1:24 PM

    I think you just proved his point.
    ***********************************
    Please tell me you’re not saying Belichick is in any way like Hitler. You’re really not saying that, are you? I’m hoping I misread you.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!