Blandino argued for eliminating overtime

Getty Images

When the NFL discussed changes to its overtime format, former head of officiating Dean Blandino’s argument was simple: Just get rid of it.

Blandino, who recently left the league to work for FOX, was asked by Colin Cowherd whether anybody ever argued for getting rid of overtime. Blandino answered, “Yours truly.”

As the NFL became concerned that long overtimes were a player safety risk, Blandino proposed eliminating overtime, but he said he had little support within the league.

“We started talking about overtime and reducing it from 15 to 10 because we were worried about additional snaps, players playing a full quarter more of football and then potentially having to go play on Thursday,” Blandino said. “Well, if we’re worried about player safety, then eliminate overtime and play to win in regulation. It would make the last two minutes that much more exciting. If a team’s sitting there with 30 to go and the ball on their 20, and they know the game could end in a tie because there’s no overtime, they’re going to go for it, take chances, take risks. We did talk about that. I think there would be some serious backlash from the fans if we got rid of overtime . . . but when you really break it down and you say, ‘OK, you’ve got to play to win in regulation, I think ultimately that would be a good thing.”

There would, of course, have to be some way of breaking ties in the postseason, as the league isn’t just going to cancel the Super Bowl if the NFC Championship Game is tied after four quarters. But in the regular season, the league could just deal with more ties. A small step was taken in that direction this offseason, with overtime reduced from 15 minutes to 10. It seems unlikely that the much larger step of eliminating overtime will ever catch on.

51 responses to “Blandino argued for eliminating overtime

  1. right…the owners who want 18 games are going to eliminate OT because they are concerned about player safety.

  2. Totally agree with him and his reasoning. The two-minute warning would make for some great football. No more lame running out the clock and then kicking a field goal to tie and go into overtime.

    Touchdown and then a two-point try for a win or loss.

    Besides, if its a FOX game that would mean getting Joe Buck off the TV sooner without there being an overtime.

  3. Yeah, nobody’s going to go for that. Now, if you want spitball crazy solutions to boring games, give both teams the loss if it ends up tied.

  4. waynefontesismyfather says:
    Jun 18, 2017 2:10 PM

    Totally agree with him and his reasoning. The two-minute warning would make for some great football. No more lame running out the clock and then kicking a field goal to tie and go into overtime.

    Touchdown and then a two-point try for a win or loss.

    Besides, if its a FOX game that would mean getting Joe Buck off the TV sooner without there being an overtime.
    =============================
    every team would still play for the tie because its significantly better than a loss.

  5. Further evidence that Blandino just thinks in terms of risk aversion. He doesn’t get the significance of actually winning for the competitors, coaches and fans.
    Dean’s replacement should address what constitutes a catch. Blandino’s natural propensity to overcomplicate the rules is his legacy.

  6. Blandino is finally right about something. Overtime wins should come with an asterisk showing that a team wasn’t good enough to win in regulation.

  7. “As the NFL became concerned that long overtimes were a player safety risk”

    I don’t know how anyone could write or say that with a straight face. Its very clear the one and only time the owners really care about “player safety” is if they perceive it’s something players could sue them over.

  8. uglydingo says:
    Further evidence that Blandino just thinks in terms of risk aversion. He doesn’t get the significance of actually winning for the competitors. Blandino’s natural propensity to overcomplicate the rules is his legacy.
    ———————–
    Everything this guy does is to make it as easy TO OFFICIATE as possible, completely forgetting the ACTUAL PURPOSE of what’s actually happening for the game, players and FANS. (ie the catch rule is made NOT to call the best catch, but instead to call “it” EASIER

  9. The reasoning is sound but really the fans are not going to go for, and that includes me. Id much rather them play overtime, ties suck.

  10. I think the NFL had it right in the past with no regular season overtime and sudden death in the playoffs. Once they started messing with stuff it got goofy. Play to win.

  11. If player safety was so important they would not play games on Thursday in the first place.
    This being said, when you see NHL players go through several periods of overtime and two days later play another game that can also get in OT without bitching, whining or dying, one have to wonder why the NFL brass is so obsess with this topic.
    I for one think it probably has more to to do with TV network convenience than player safety.

  12. Good idea–this would eliminate any advantage gained from winning the overtime coin flip–plus imagine the scenario where a team scores a td on a last minute drive to come within 1 point—do they go for 2 points or 1? That would be more interesting than going to OT and winning on a field goal.

  13. mannyiac
    Jun 18, 2017, 11:39 AM PDT
    Happy Father’s Day!! The most confusing day of the year for Antonio Cromartie.

    ——————————————————————————

    What was that, 6, 7 years ago? The joke that keeps on giving.

    Not really. You’re just lame.

  14. OT has to stay for the playoffs of course, but I don’t understand the resistence to scrapping regular-season OT. For ties are a perfect tie-breaker to div & conf ranking when there are only 16 games and thus currently teams quite often end up with similar records. It’s much better for team A to be ranked on their own results rather than get a bit of OT luck over team B and then get ranked above team B based on some dubious “common opponents” or “strength of opposition” tie-breaker when in those cases the said opponents might have been banged up when team A played them.

  15. Blah blah blah ex league office guy joins the media, says a bunch of things to make himself sound important. I’ll tell you what the NFL does NOT need, is more “rules experts” on broadcasts trying to sound intelligent. The thing none of these guys want to admit is that the rules are so convoluted there is no way to predict the outcome of calls.

  16. ^btw, in my example I’m referring to division opponents wherein the head-to-head became split thanks to the OT win and other tie-breaking had to come in. But I’m sure you get the idea.

  17. emphraser says:
    Jun 18, 2017 6:06 PM
    mannyiac
    Jun 18, 2017, 11:39 AM PDT
    Happy Father’s Day!! The most confusing day of the year for Antonio Cromartie.

    ——————————————————————————

    What was that, 6, 7 years ago? The joke that keeps on giving.

    Not really. You’re just lame.

    —————————————————
    It looks like 51 people liked the comment and you’re the only one whining about it.But,you’re right,everyone else is wrong.

  18. Has he even watched a football game in his life? The coaches will play for the tie every time. They will be too worried about trying to score and having to punt and then losing the game on a last second FG, when they could have tied by sitting on the ball. The NFL coaching profession is based on CYA, like a politician or James Comey’s entire career.

  19. What’s wrong with ties? Because of tie-breakers in favor of the Bears over the Packers a few years back, the recovery from a sixteen point halftime deficit against the heavily favored Vikings salvaged a division-winning “tie” for the Packers.

    Adding sugar to that spice was the comeback being led by a fourth-string free agent walk-on while Rodgers was recovering from an injury.

    That was a division-winning tie. Ties can be good or bad. That was a good one.

  20. I have always approved the way college football decides their tie games. Only force teams to go for two after each OT TD.

  21. How bout start at a 20 yard field goal sudden death – each team gets a try and then move it back 5 yards until one side misses. Standard field goal rules in effect meaning blocked field goals are recoverable and fake field goals are good.

    That’d actually make the kicker important.

  22. I agree with abolishing OT except for the playoffs.

    I don’t care if it makes for reduce player injuries – if that were the case then let’s just play one quarter and call it a day.

  23. I know its tough, but take Blandino out of the equation.

    Has the game improved with regular season OT? No. I really don’t see the point in it. I agree. Just get rid of it instead of always “fixing it”.

  24. waynefontesismyfather says:
    Jun 18, 2017 2:10 PM
    getting Joe Buck off the TV sooner without there being an overtime.
    ————
    I was thinking hell no, but damn, nice point, you’ve changed my mind on it!

  25. He might be onto something.

    It is painful to see a team with the ball, tie game, not much time left, and they take a knee to go to overtime.

    With no OT– they will have a strong incentive to try to score before the end of the game.

    Unless the head coach thinks his offense sucks and would rather take the tie–will make for a more interesting post game press conference.

    Football is a brutal game, OT periods just adds more chance for injury. Besides, I’d rather see a desperation hail mary at the end of regulation than dueling field goals in the OT period.

    Plus, OT is great for the fantasy football types that have a player that gets to OT, chance for more points. But sucks if you are playing against them!

  26. They play 16 games a year. Three hours a week, sometimes six. They get a week of not actually playing. Oh no, 15 extra minutes…maybe. Poor players.

  27. Teams records would look like hockey scores and we’d rely on weird tie breaker rules more often….we could just go back to original or rules

  28. When I wore a younger man’s shoes there were ties, and I had no problem with it.

    Eliminating overtime would also help my DVR… Tick, tick, tick.

  29. The joke is the current OT system. Why does the league change the entire structure of the game to try and come up with some “fair” way of trying to get a won/loss outcome.

    This stupid stuff about both teams getting the ball if one doesn’t score a TD is like a participation trophy.

    The old system was perfect. Play the game for 60 minutes and you get a win a loss or a tie. If you aren’t good enough to beat the other team in the time allowed then tough.

  30. Teams that have everything to lose would take the tie rather go for the win. Keep IT the way it was. Really what exactly was wrong with It? The players had to play an extra 15 minutes possibly? Cry me a river!

  31. Regardless of tradition and resistance to change overtime is not needed in the regular season.

  32. I never thought I would say maybe we should go back to 1980 rules.
    With all the technology advances available to the NFL, they’ve made the game more confusing and controversial. How does one bungle that all up? The NFL managed to do just such.

  33. Back in the day …there was no overtime except for the ‘Championship’ game , there were no playoffs .
    The ‘overtime ‘ problem could be solved by awarding the win to the team with the most ‘net yards’ and the end of regulation.

  34. every team would still play for the tie because its significantly better than a loss…sorry, I watched the NFL when there was no overtime…teams usually went for the win, the exception being dire circumstances like being pinned on your five yard line and 30 seconds remaining…

  35. I’m fine with eliminating overtime in the regular season. I remember that playoff game in 2013, Baltimore vs Denver, when the game is tied and Peyton Manning have the ball back with 31 seconds left. Instead of having one of the greatest offensive players ever to try to get to field goal range, coach John Fox unforgivably decided to run out the clock and play overtime. I know it’s a playoff game and OT is necessary to advance. But if this was regular season and knowing there’s no OT, the coach would probably go for it and win the damn game!

    I used to prefer a 2 point conversion shoot out but people convinced me that it’s too gimmicky and it’s too different from the actual game itself. So the other best solution I currently prefer is to play for the 5th quarter and let the drive or play continue into the next quarter and whoever scores next wins the game. No more gimmicky shoot out like soccer or college games. Just play regular football until a winner is decided and everyone can go home satisfied… or devastated and move on with their lives!

  36. 1. Thank God Dean is Gone, he was terrible and contradicting. In all actuality should be in politics, guys can lie right to your face showing 2 exact plays telling you there is a difference. SO again, Thank God.

    2. The tie games really caused issues over these last few years. Player safety? they run underwear practice most the summer, cant even get in pads till right before the season starts. Then if anything you have more injuries because players are softer. Most spend so much in off season trying to do what they cant in there own facility, they want the work..

    3. Player safety? its tackle football. Look at the late hits, hit that are done because its better to give a few yards than a TD, still chop blocks, etc. You know, the Richie Incognito type players

Leave a Reply

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