Comments on: NFL morning after: How I learned to stop worrying and love overtime

By: epetk

epetk — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 03:02:13 +0000

Tight ends block on field goals. That’s always been the case and it’s not logical for the Saints and Patriots to carry an extra guy to protect Gronk or Graham. Great job looking like a genious after the fact. I’ve never heard you bring up this concern before….because you’ve never even noticed.

By: toooverbearing

toooverbearing — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:34:15 +0000

My thought is, treat end of regulation as a change in quarter and still keep it sudden death. Whoever has possession at the end keeps it with the same down, distance and field position that they ended with. That’s great if it is 1st and 10 at your opponent’s 25 yard line, but not so good if it is 3rd and 13 at your own 6 yard line.

What I like about this is the down, distance, and possession are all earned and not based on luck. Also, no one will kneel on the ball during a tied game and takes the coin flip out of the equation.

By: burtburtman

burtburtman — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:25:43 +0000

The new OT rules are still unfair – I favor the 5th quarter/sudden death approach = simply keep the game going with possession/field position staying the same. This eliminates the worst thing about OT (the coin flip) and presents some awesome scenarios – ex: say the Eagles, down 24-17 to the Bears, score a touchdown with 10 seconds left. Do they go for 1 and the tie, knowing that the Bears will get the ball back with a chance to win, or do you go for 2 to win in regulation? At least they can decide their fate rather than rely on winning a coin flip. Also, this would eliminate teams just running down the clock to get to OT instead of trying to mount a drive. Is there a downside to this that I’m missing?

By: klaykaspar

klaykaspar — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 21:39:21 +0000

I don’t like the immediate sudden death if it’s still a tie after each team gets a possession. This puts you right back to the old OT rules where the team that gets the ball first in OT has an extra possession. If this is OK then why change the rules in the first place.

I am a proponent of the original OT rules and would argue that extra possessions shouldn’t be a complaint. If a team scores on the final drive of regulation time with no time left and they’ve had the ball one more time than their opponent the game is still over. The other team doesn’t get another chance to score because they had the ball one less time.

If a team gets a good kickoff return in OT and drives far enough to kick a field goal then they beat you. You don’t deserve to win.

By: Gabbo

Gabbo — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:51:19 +0000

I dislike the new OT rules. They make it more likely the first possession team gets a better result. They will always have more possessions. If you want teams to play more to win, just have no overtime. Ties are ok.

Like yesterday, all 3 teams that scored first in OT won. All you do is extend a regular season game which doesn’t have to be extended in the first place. You can’t mock the Gronk injury while not mocking the OT changes. He sat out the entire 4th quarter except the XP he came in for.

By: derklempner

derklempner — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:40:29 +0000

@justintuckrule:

“The NFL instituted OT to begin with to avoid ties. With these new rules, you’ll see more ties. The rules are too hokey. Play a 7 min period and be done with it.”

I agree, although I’d like to see a 10-minute overtime period. Play the full 10 minutes and the score at that point stands – tie or no tie.

By: tvguy22

tvguy22 — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:14:44 +0000

Any chance we could call the new overtime rule “The McNabb Rule” in honor of the rules genius?

By: justintuckrule

justintuckrule — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:27:46 +0000

The NFL instituted OT to begin with to avoid ties. With these new rules, you’ll see more ties. The rules are too hokey. Play a 7 min period and be done with it.

By: joecb91

joecb91 — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:07:59 +0000

That would have been a blowout win for the Cardinals if Kolb was playing. He is MUCH better than any other QB on their roster.

By: tcostant

tcostant — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:49:59 +0000

I love the new OT rules. The only thing I would do didn’t a TD is scored first; I would give the other team one chance to match that TD; but I’m spliting hairs – HUGE improvement from past years…

By: eezyxyz

eezyxyz — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:38:39 +0000

I thought that the NFL should simply get rid of OT in the regular season, and that if they were going to have it then there was nothing wrong with the old sudden death system. Teams kicking off could always play defense if they didn’t want the game to end on one possession, and history showed that the outcomes of games was pretty close to 50-50 between teams kicking off and receiving.

Here’s my favorite stat on the new OT rules: the team receiving the ball first is now 12-3-1 under the new OT rules. So, yeah, based on evidence, the new rules are LESS FAIR to the team kicking off first!

(yes, yes, still early, small sample size etc. I still think that’s funny after all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over how unfair the old rules were to the team kicking off)

By: azvikefan

azvikefan — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:11:17 +0000

Whisenhunt should be fired today. That was some pathetic coaching yesterday.
Sure the QB’s couldn’t make plays but…

By: conormacleod

conormacleod — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:05:01 +0000

I would tweak the rules just a bit. Both teams should be guaranteed one possession in OT, regardless if the first team gets a TD. Once both teams have had the ball (which could be a defensive TD to win game immediately) then it’s a sudden death format. Under the current rules, the team that wins the coin toss can still win right away, albeit with a TD and not just a FG.

By: spicymudbugs

spicymudbugs — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:58:49 +0000

Never have understood why coaches keep their best players in the game when it’s clearly out of reach. Why does Gronk even play special teams to begin with?

By: madtolive5

madtolive5 — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:42:50 +0000

Not like the Pats are one of the worst 4th quarter teams in the NFL right now. It isn’t like they struggled to close out wins vs Buffalo, Denver, Jets and lost 4th quarter leads to Seattle, Baltimore.

By: orndorf2

orndorf2 — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:43:11 +0000

Great call on Whisenhunt. They had the Falcons in their back pocket – - – 6 turnovers—-and couldn’t close them out. The Defense held the Falcons “high powered” offense to 1 TD! And gave the Cardinal offense short fields several times. Why Skelton looked so unprepared that he was benched is baffling????

By: ausernamethatisavailable

ausernamethatisavailable — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:29:13 +0000

Hate to see players get injured but as a Steven Ridley owner who lost to a gronkowski owner this week, I feel as though belichek got what he deserved. Give Ridley the damn ball and milk the clock!

By: logicalvoicesays

logicalvoicesays — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:16:02 +0000

Robert Griffin is the best QB to step on an NFL field since Johnny Elway retired. For anyone to deny this undisputable fact at this point just plain unfairly has something against RGIII. Talent and IQ wise, no one comes close. I’m honored that he will lead my Washington Redskins to glory in this next decade.

By: williamxl22

williamxl22 — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:58:51 +0000

A lot can happen in 15 minutes. I always felt like the NFL should do away with sudden death and just have an extra quarter for overtime. Fair to both teams.

By: nokoolaidcowboy

nokoolaidcowboy — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:55:46 +0000

The tie column is there for a reason. Eliminate overtime. Then sit back and watch teams play their hearts out for 4 full quarters.

The implications for leading in their division as well as the playoffs would be REALLY interesting to see.