Chiefs will propose OT rule change guaranteeing both teams a possession

Getty Images

The Chiefs lost the AFC Championship Game without their offense ever taking the field in overtime, and they don’t want that to happen again — to them or any other team.

And so, Chiefs General Manager Brett Veach said on PFT Live, Chiefs coach Andy Reid is working on a proposal to change the overtime rules and guarantee that each team would get an offensive possession.

“Coach is working on that,” Veach said. “I think everybody wants a chance for guys to do what they do. I don’t really see the downside of having that. Especially when you have a player like Pat Mahomes. It would have been a lot of fun. I think people, if they weren’t already tuned in for a great game, would have turned on that overtime.”

Overtime rules are often the subject of offseason discussion, but this year, after both conference championship games went to overtime, is likely to see even more of that discussion than usual. The Chiefs will have to convince 23 other teams to support them for any rule to change.

203 responses to “Chiefs will propose OT rule change guaranteeing both teams a possession

  1. Hmmmm! So then if they agree to this I imagine that the next thing they’ll propose is that both Super Bowl teams will get a trophy and a ring!

  2. Forget possessions. In OT in the playoffs just add a full quarter. No one would have complained if they saw a repeat of the Chiefs/Pats 4th quarter for another 15 minutes.

  3. What happens after both teams have a possession and the game is still tied? Both teams get another possession?

  4. The rule is fine the way it is. The game has to end at some point. If both score a TD do they both get the ball again? You are right back where yous started. Also after two TD drives the OT will just about over leaving us with more ties. If you want tied games go watch hockey. If you can’t stop a TD in OT you lost. Don’t change the rules, get better on defense.

  5. One full 15 minute overtime period in the playoffs. During the playoffs it’s more important to have the true winner advance. No one should be worried about squeezing the game into a 3hr window during the playoffs. Regular season can be left alone.

  6. The rule needs to be changed. As great as that AFC game was, it would have been iconic if Patrick could have come back on the field with a shot a tying and later winning the game. Instead, the Chiefs were shortchanged … as were the fans.

  7. I agree 100% that each team should have at least one possession in OT. I also believe that defensive players should not lineup off sides.

  8. Playoff Overtime should be exactly like College Football Overtime. If you want to keep it how it is now in the regular season for the sake of time, that’s fine, but each team should be allowed to match the other’s possession when the championship is on the line.

  9. I know a lot of people are going to say they are only doing it because they lost in the AFCCG, but I think it’s probably something to look at making changing. In that game, IMO, and based on the way the game was going, had the Chiefs gotten the toss, they probably would have marched down and gotten the TD, thus denying the Pats a chance. Also, the more recent rule changes are geared more in favor of the offense, so that’s another reason to possibly change the rule.

  10. No overtime playoff game should be decided by a coin flip. Change the OT rule for the playoffs only to guarantee at least one possession by each team. Of course getting the archaic powers-that-be in the NFL to make logical changes is next to impossible.

  11. I believe defense is as important in football as offense. Call me crazy. Make a stop and you get the ball. It’s not rocket science.

  12. db105 says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:41 am
    What happens after both teams have a possession and the game is still tied? Both teams get another possession?

    The team that scored first gets the ball back and scores again to win. The losing team then proposes a rule stating it is only fair that each team must get two possessions.

  13. The game has changed. Expand the game day rosters. Overtime should be a full quarter. Hockey has a 5 minute OT. Basketball does too. Baseball is a full inning.

  14. Each team should get at least one offensive possession regardless.
    Personally going the college OT rules would be the MOST fun. And for sure the most fair.

  15. The rules in OT should be applied to as if it was the beginning of the game.

    I mean, if people think the rule should stay the same in OT, then why not apply this rule to the beginning of the game where the team wins the coin toss and they receive the ball in the beginning of thr game AND after halftime? Same thing right? It’s “fair” right? Just have the defense stop them is all…

  16. Ugh, that’s disappointingly stupid.

    Overtime should be more of a punishment than a reward. If you couldn’t get it done in regulation, you deserve to have the pressure turned up a notch and the game get more dangerous.

    Regulation is the time for “fair” chances. Overtime is for increased drama for the audience and increased stress for the teams. There should be an incentive to avoid overtime – if you give both teams “chances” or make it a full quarter, then get ready for teams taking their foot off the gas and just coasting into overtime.

  17. He said. Especially if you have Patrick Mahomes. Andy..how about mixing in a sound defense. Not just one that looks great on paper because othet teams are seats playing from behind. That is why you seem to struggle in the playoffs.

  18. If you are going to do that, then you should pass a rule that both teams have the same number of possessions in overtime. That would be an improvement over what we have, but would lengthen games.

    What I would like to see is this. Go back to true sudden death overtime and eliminate the coin toss. We can do this one of two ways 1) allowing the team who gets the ball first win in OT with a field goal, or if you dont like that 2) eliminate FGs in overtime and make the only scores that count TD’s. I always liked knowing the game could end on any one play.

    Since we have eliminated the coin toss in overtime, how do we determine who gets the ball first (and has a major advantage in OT). Its the home team. You make that an inherent advantage of being at home. In baseball, if you host a Game 7, you know that you will always have a chance to win the game in the bottom of any inning after the 8th. Its an inherent advantage of earning the right of hosting that game. Apply similar logic to the NFL. In the regular season, you have 8 home and 8 away games. In the playoffs, if you want the ball first in OT, win enough games in the regular season to ensure you are the home team.

  19. Nofoolnodrool says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:50 am
    It is inherently unfair that a team doesn’t get to touch the ball in overtime. A game shouldn’t be decided by a coin toss.

    ============

    No it isn’t. Why should a team that can’t stop their opponent from scoring a TD on the first drive get more chances to win? I’d say that’s a pretty darn fair deciding factor.

    Games aren’t decided by coin tosses. After the coin toss, the Chiefs couldn’t stop a long Patriots drive that ended in a TD. if they had even held them to a FG, they’d have gotten the ball back. If a team can’t meet that low standard, they don’t deserve more chances to win.

  20. I think had they won the coin toss and scored they would have wanted the game over, no way would they be saying today they think the Patriots should have gotten another chance with the ball. I see this as just being some sore losers unable to let it go. This game was exactly why a team needs to have their defense built to close out tight games when needed.

  21. Oh,come on. Now there has to be an OT rule change because Andy Reid got out -coached and his defense let the Pats march down the field and score? That’s not a bad rule, that’s bad coaching and bad defense.. Let it go, already!

  22. Nofoolnodrool says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:50 am

    It is inherently unfair that a team doesn’t get to touch the ball in overtime. A game shouldn’t be decided by a coin toss.

    they always told me “Life ain’t fair”

  23. That’s what the first four quarters are for…to determine a winner. If you can’t win the regulation game, then live with the consequences. Games are already too long with all the reviews and TV commercials. Win the game during the game so you don’t have to make excuses for losing in overtime… simple.

  24. routerunning says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:46 am
    No overtime playoff game should be decided by a coin flip. Change the OT rule for the playoffs only to guarantee at least one possession by each team. Of course getting the archaic powers-that-be in the NFL to make logical changes is next to impossible.

    ———————
    This game was not decided by a coin flip. It was decided by one teams defense failing to stop the other teams offense.

    There were actually two games going to OT that day. In one the team that won the toss won the game, in the other the team that lost the toss won the game. Its not like there is some big imbalance here.

  25. For those that are saying no, wait until this happens to your team and the roles are reversed. With that being said, it’s past time for a fair overtime competition rules.

  26. It will be known as the “Sore Loser Rule” which they hope to get implemented in time for the 2019-2020 season.

  27. another “patriot rule”. I love it. never seen as a problem until pats won sb51 and 18 afc title game in ot.

    -leaping the line of scrimmage was an exciting play until pats got too good at it.
    -dbs checking receivers to disrupt routes was always fine until pats repeatedly humiliated manning
    -declaring a receiver ineligible off the line of scrimmage was legal but too much for
    harbaugh to process and had to be made illegal.
    -eliminating most kick returns negates pats consistent coaching advantage on special teams.
    -tuck rule

    like bruschi said years ago “change the rules, we just win”.

  28. Adding a 12 minute overtime period, makes sense. If the game is tied after the 12 minute overtime period, stop flipping coins and the team that received the first half kickoff gets the ball to start the O.T. Period, since they kicked off to the opposing team in the 2nd half.

    If it’s still tied at the end of 12 min O.T. Period, the team that received the O.T. Kickoff must kickoff in a sudden death; first team to score-wins!

    Or….

    Apply the same college rules for overtime.

    NFL is so arrogant! Here’s two alternatives that make more sense than current overtime rules!

  29. routerunning says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:46 am
    No overtime playoff game should be decided by a coin flip.
    ——————————————–

    Playoff games aren’t decided by the coin flip, they are decided by the points allowed by the defense that failed to make a stop. It’s not as though they simply flip a coin and the winner walks away with the W

  30. Alternatively they could spend some resources on having a defense that doesn’t surrender touchdowns at will. Crazy thought, I know, investing in both sides of the ball…

  31. This wouldn’t be an issue if all the rules changes didn’t favor the offense. The NFL has bowed to the casual fan who only cares about offense. Video-game culture is responsible for this.

  32. I’m not a Pats fan or a Chiefs fan, but I agree a change should be made. College football overtime is one of the most exciting things to watch in all of sports. Obviously, it would need some tweaking for the NFL, maybe starting on the 50 so a team would need at least 1 first down to put them in FG range. To speed OT up teams could be required to go for 2 after a TD. Seems like this would be a simple enough fix.

  33. Both Teams had a chance to win it in regulation time. OT- Sudden death…..Chiefs stop the Pats and kick a field goal, Chiefs win. If they had stopped the Pats and forced a Patriot field goal they would have gotten the ball. They didn’t stop them. Game over.

  34. The obvious solution, since the AFCCG was only decided by the OT coin toss, is to just decide all games via the opening coin toss. That will cut way back on injuries, and leave about 3 hours for commercials. Win win win!

  35. It needs to be changed, not because of the playoffs, but because of how OT is played out in general across all NFL games. The playoffs just magnified this. I sent the NFL a letter outlining my changes. I’d be happy to share them with PFT any time. Its a rough draft and needs some work, but the foundation is strong.

    Every other sport has OT periods where everybody gets to handle some time of offense. NFL is only one I can think of that does coin toss and allows for that team to take ball and win with no regard to the other team having the same opportunity to score on the other team in the same fashion

  36. Also on the proposal list is that no one can throw the ball on 3rd and 10 or longer, defenses cannot call time outs if tired, defenses are allowed only ONE aw shucks I was offsides during OT, defensive coordinators get to choose up to 4 players on the opposing team to play for them and the team who loses the coin toss gets to choose which coach is on their side for OT.

    Geesh, Stop acting like the game was over with the coin toss. There were MULTIPLE 3rd and 10+ throws/catches the Pats converted and countless clutch plays. Go make one yourself instead of trying to change the rules. As others have said, should the Chiefs had won the game I cannot imagine ANY outcry about changing the rules of OT. Pathetic. You are better than this Chiefs.

  37. footballfan441 says:

    March 1, 2019 at 11:54 am

    How come the losers always want to change the rules?

    ________________

    How come the teams that lose to the Patriots always want to change the rules?

    Fixed it for you.

  38. I think it’s a valid argument. Sort of. You know everyone says the new rules favor the offense… but then there’s the Pats that played incredible D in the playoffs.

    Adding another 15 minute quarter would be inviting gimmicky onside kick wins for teams imo, unless you made them against the rules.

  39. Just leave it alone. If you cant stop the other team from scoring a touchdown, then you dont deserve the possession.

  40. Both teams get at least one possession.

    Kickers are eliminated after the 1st OT possession score. So if team A kicks a FG then team B must score a TD to win on the next possession.
    If team A scores a TD on the 1st possesion, then Team B must score a TD and get a 2 point conversion to win.
    If its tied after first 2 possessions of OT then it goes to 1st team to score wins. Kickers will still be available if nobody scored yet, but if its 6-6 or 8-8 in OT then kickers are still eliminated

    It gives both teams 1 strong opportunity to win the game and each team a chance to win it.

    It gives the coin flip more importance as well.

  41. In that game, IMO, and based on the way the game was going, had the Chiefs gotten the toss, they probably would have marched down and gotten the TD, thus denying the Pats a chance.
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    And if that happened, BB would have said something to the effect of “those are the rules. it was our defense’s job to stop them.” There would have been no complaining and rule change proposals from the Pats. This whole thing wreaks of sour grapes.

  42. All because the Chiefs terrible defense couldn’t stop Tom Brady. How pathetic. Would the Patriots have complained this much if the Chiefs won the toss and scored? I doubt it. Deal with it Chiefs and Chiefs fans, your team lost and they lost fair & square.

  43. The evolution of Overtime

    1) At first there was no overtime, we lived with ties, in playoff games first team to score wins (sudden Death)

    2) The whining ensued when the coin toss was lost and a field goal ended it

    3) Then we changed it again, in the event of a field goal , the other team would get a possession, unless there was touchdown, game over.

    4) Now more whining …

    Is there any team in the history of the league that has prompted more rule changes than the Patriots? Mostly whining resulting from playoff losses?

    1) The Bill Polian coverage rule (2004, Indy)
    2) The Tuck Rule (2001, Oakland)
    3) Overtime rule changes (2019, Atlanta and KC)
    4) Hitting the QB below the knee (2008, Patriots)
    5) Moving the camera location of filming the signals of opposing teams (2007, Jets)

  44. The team winning the toss has 3 downs and has to decide whether to punt. If they score the losing team gets 4 downs. Last I checked, the defense gets paid too. Leave it alone.

  45. “Downside is an increase in injuries. the longer then game the greater chance for someone to get hurt”
    ______________

    You think maybe they just need to disband the league now? They could totally eliminate injuries that way.

  46. I remember when overtime was sudden death…..

    This game has gone so pansy it is ridiculous.

    Next we should hand out participation trophy’s to display in your stadium saying that you made the playoffs….

    grow up. Flip a coin stop the team from scoring and get your to score. End of story and wining…..

    My Lord what is this game coming to.

  47. Hilarious. You knew it was inevitable.

    I propose the Patriots cannot start Tom Brady at QB in overtime. That will make things “fair” for other teams. 🙂

  48. Next is he going to propose a rule change that mandates that an official tells him when one of his players is offsides?

  49. I wonder how many new rules or rule changes have been a direct result of the Patriots winning?

    Clearly whatever changes have been made haven’t worked so far. GO PATS!

  50. The should eliminate OT during the regular season. Coaches would really have to make some tough decisions coming down to the end of close or tie games.

    OT becomes a player safety issue, and the NFL should be concerned with player safety, even if a lot of fans aren’t.

    How come there wasn’t this kind of outcry when the Pats beat Atlanta with the same OT scenario in SB LI?

  51. This is the DUMBEST argument! The only reason this is being brought up is because NE won the AFCCG. No one had any issue with the sudden death OT for decades. Next, losing teams will want to guarantee each team has 2 possessions, then 3, then 4. If the KC would have won the toss and marched down the field to win, not one single person would be complaining.

  52. Nofoolnodrool says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:50 am
    It is inherently unfair that a team doesn’t get to touch the ball in overtime. A game shouldn’t be decided by a coin toss.

    ————
    It’s inherently unfair that teams have to plan for and play against BBa and Tom Brady. So what do you propose?

  53. If you analyse every overtime game in the last 5 years, there are 2 conclusions: there is no perfect overtime rule and second, the Chiefs are bad losers. They wouldn’t be crying if they had won the coin toss…..

  54. arrowhead816 says:
    March 1, 2019 at 12:08 pm
    For those that are saying no, wait until this happens to your team and the roles are reversed. With that being said, it’s past time for a fair overtime competition rules.

    ———————-+
    Actually no. Had the Patriots lost the toss and Mahomes had marched down the field and scored then Belichick would have blamed himself and spent the offseason working to fix the deficiency he was blaming on himself. And fans would also be expressing disaapointment in the defense. Haters would be making all kinds of joyously derisive comments about Belichick and the defense. NO ONE would be looking for a rule change. That is the difference between the Chiefs and the Patriots. While the Chiefs cry and blame others for their shortcomings, the Patriots get back to working to make sure they are up to it next time. Its a bigger thing than all the also rans realize.

  55. The Chiefs, like the Patriots, had four quarters to get a lead, hold it, and win the game. Neither team did that, so how should they decide who gets the ball first in OT, if not a coin toss? Rock, paper, scissors? One potato, two potato? I really thought that Andy Reid and the Chiefs were better than this. Stop the team with the ball and get it back. THAT’S how both teams get a possession. Move on, Chiefs. If it happened the other way around, NO ONE would be crying for a rule change.

  56. If just ONE of these things didn’t happen, Chiefs would have won.

    Dee Ford was offside
    4th 6:25 3rd and 8 NWE 45 Tom Brady pass complete short right to Chris Hogan for 11 yards (tackle by Steven Nelson)
    4th 3:35 4th and 1 KAN 10 Sony Michel middle for 10 yards, touchdown
    4th 0:29 3rd and 5 KAN 29 Tom Brady pass complete deep left to Rob Gronkowski for 25 yards (tackle by Eric Berry)
    OT 13:40 3rd and 10 NWE 35 Tom Brady pass complete short middle to Julian Edelman for 20 yards (tackle by Daniel Sorensen)
    OT 12:51 3rd and 10 KAN 45 Tom Brady pass complete short middle to Julian Edelman for 15 yards (tackle by Charvarius Ward)
    OT 11:57 3rd and 10 KAN 30 Tom Brady pass complete short left to Rob Gronkowski for 15 yards (tackle by Eric Berry)
    OT 11:18 1st and 10 KAN 10 Rex Burkhead middle for 10 yards (tackle by Daniel Sorensen)

    So don’t gimme that junk about how “unfair” overtime was. LOL.

  57. C’mon people. The suggested change is NOT “Rocket science”!
    Geez.
    What is with all the “What happens if they both score a touchdown questions? ”
    It’s not even a QUESTION.
    They are ONLY proposing a change to the “If the first team that has the ball scores a TD the game is over” aspect.
    Nothing else would need to change.
    If BOTH team score a TD (just as it is now if both teams score a FG) then it goes to Sudden Death.

    All the proposed rule is suggesting is giving BOTH teams a chance to possess the ball regardless of what happens in terms of the first score.

  58. here is a proposition:

    1) ANDY REID..use your timeouts!!!! You should’ve learned that when we beat you in the 2005 super bowl in Jacksonville. Tommy threw that boneheaded goal line INT intended for GRONK, or else this argument is meaningless and the game might not have resulted in ot in the first place.

    2) Matt Ryan..DONT TAKE A SACK…

    who would be arguing about the rule then?

  59. Bottom line- The rule should have been changed years ago so both teams get possession. New England has cashed in 2 of these to the SB because they received the ball off a coin flip and the other team didn’t. Please spare the talk how both teams had a chance all game to win the game when the reality is one team didn’t get it in OT. BOTH TEAMS SHOULD GET POSSESSION!

  60. I will only agree with this move if the rule change guarantees both teams two possessions if both teams score on the first possession (and the game is still tied), and the team that won the toss scores on its second possession. Otherwise, you have the same issue with this new overtime rule as we have with the current overtime rules right now, meaning that the rules are unfair. This rule changes keeps the unfairness in place, even if it will happen less frequently.

  61. Actually no. Had the Patriots lost the toss and Mahomes had marched down the field and scored then Belichick would have blamed himself and spent the offseason working to fix the deficiency he was blaming on himself. And fans would also be expressing disaapointment in the defense. Haters would be making all kinds of joyously derisive comments about Belichick and the defense. NO ONE would be looking for a rule change.
    ———————————————-
    This is exactly how the fanbase up here would have reacted too. They won, we lost…that sucks, moving on. Notice that Pats fans don’t blame crazy Giant catches, but they do blame a Patriot player not doing their job in losses–Asante Samuel and Wes Welker we are looking at you guys.

  62. routerunning says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:46 am
    No overtime playoff game should be decided by a coin flip. Change the OT rule for the playoffs only to guarantee at least one possession by each team. Of course getting the archaic powers-that-be in the NFL to make logical changes is next to impossible.

    ——–

    The game wasn’t decided by a coin-flip. It was decided by the Chiefs defense not being able to stop the Patriots.

  63. steelpenguin6687 says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:46 am
    I know a lot of people are going to say they are only doing it because they lost in the AFCCG, but I think it’s probably something to look at making changing. In that game, IMO, and based on the way the game was going, had the Chiefs gotten the toss, they probably would have marched down and gotten the TD, thus denying the Pats a chance.
    —————————–
    Except the Chiefs had a chance to take the lead and likely win on their final drive in regulation and instead kicked a FG to tie.

  64. The Chiefs scored 3 touchdowns in the final 15 minutes… why didn’t they go for 2 pts. ANY of those TD’s?? THAT would’ve been the time to have your offense win the game for you instead of relying on a defensive stop. smh

  65. another rule change as a direct result of the Patriots. you can’t stop them & you can’t even contain them.

  66. This won’t go anywhere. The Saints won the coin toss in overtime and the Rams stopped them. The Chiefs are being ridiculous.

  67. The rule they really want to propose states that the Patriots are not allowed to win in overtime. They’re having a little trouble with the wording, that’s why they haven’t announced it yet.

  68. No game should be decided by a coin flip. Case in point: team A drives for a game winning field goal or touchdown to go into overtime…the opposing defense is drained no doubt…you have a coin flip and the team who scored gets it again, scores on a tired defense..what about that is remotely fair?

  69. A multi billion dollar industry like the NFL is still run with all the efficiency of a kid’s lemonade stand…still pulling chains to determine first downs and still can’t figure out a catch or pass interference much less equitable overtime

  70. Why do great football teams, such as the Patriots, have to suffer because their opposing teams’ defense can’t make a stop on consecutive 3rd and long set of downs? The Saints had the ball first to start OT in the NFC championship game and what happened? Drew Brees threw the game-ending interception. Let’s be honest, teams want this rule to change because the Patriots have benefitted from it in the AFCC and Super Bowl LI. It was the same thing with John Harbawl and the ineligible receiver play in the 2014 divisional round game. At some point, teams need to be held accountable for playing awful when it matters most.

  71. why not just keep the 4th quarter going, so there is no coin flip to begin the OT quarter?

    if the score is tied with 10 seconds to go and the gall is on the 48, just keep your offense going and decide whether to drive for a TD or a field goal.

    why potentially give the defense the benefit of winning the coin toss when the offense had momentum of a tied game with and the 15 minutes of Q4 running out?

  72. I could see making the change for playoffs only. If it fails, I’d draft more defensive players. If you want to win a championship, there’s a good chance you’ll have to stop Tom Brady.

  73. Interesting Pat fans against it. I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, this comment section would be looking a whole lot different 🙄

  74. I would suggest using rock/paper/scissors instead of a coin flip, and if you flinch you lose. However I can’t help but think if they implemented this, then the following year they would be looking at implementing a rock/paper/scissors replay challenge rule. Because you just know someone (prob Harbaugh) would be whining that someone flinched, even though the official didn’t see it.

  75. Jeez another’s Patriots rule. Why doesn’t the rest of the league just get together and ask for a rule the Patriots players have to play with hand tied behind their back. Or how about just try beating the Patriots with the rule that are in place.

  76. You got 60 minutes to win the game straight up. If 60 minutes can’t determine the clear Victor then a flip of a coin will.

    #BringBackSuddenDeathOvertime

  77. Hey Andy change the OT RULE to whenever you are in the playoffs you get as a many chances as Chiefs need to win the game in overtime
    Maybe that will help you
    Go PATS

  78. Im fine with playoffs being a 15 min quarter with it turning into sudden death if its tied at the end (no coin toss just a change ends to begin the 6th quarter).

    There is no way to make football ot fair. Currentl rule is perfectly fine as is.

  79. Maybe they should propose that they get a defense? I hate the Patriots but this is just stupid. Stop them. Don’t let them get a TD. Or…don’t freaking line up offsides? maybe they should suggest that?? smh

  80. Here’s a better idea. No overtime. Game ends in a tie.

    If a playoff game ends in a tie then the teams play again in 2 days. 4 more quarters.

  81. Memo to Andy Reid: The game isn’t just about your offense and your phenom quarterback. You need a good defense to stop the phenom on the other team. THREE 3rd and 10’s and they couldn’t get it done? THAT’S why you lost, not because of a coin flip.

  82. Why don’t they just turn into soccer and have a shootout? God, how I miss sudden death overtime! It was the best, most exciting thing in all of sports, and the NFL totally ruined it.

  83. I’m just curious did the Chiefs ask for this rule change last year or are they only doing it now because they didn’t like how their last overtime game ended. If they haven’t said anything until now then they come off as sore losers. I’ll be honest, I’m a Pats fan so while I’ve enjoy the last 2 overtime games the Patriots have played in, I believe like every other sports the game should just continue with an extra period, especially in the playoffs. As it is now it just feels a little strange to only allow, possibly, one offense to posses the ball in OT. Just keep playing

  84. It’s easy to just say “well defense is part of the game so all they needed to do was stop them” which I would’ve probably also said 5 years ago but the way the game is going and how the rules are being applied are so biased in favor of the offense that that “just play defense” argument isn’t quite as valid anymore.

  85. Of course they would. Bunch of crybaby’s. Since 2012, teams that when the first wins the game on first possession 52.7% of the time.I agree that 3 3rd and 10s and they still couldn’t stop the Patriots. If the Chiefs won the coin flip they would’ve won the game. Belichick wouldn’t be asking for a rule change. Stop crying Andy Reid because your defense stinks.

  86. If neither team scores on their first possession, the OT rule has it that the next team that scores is the automatic winner. Therefore, the coin flip winner still has the advantage because if they score on their second possession, they only needed to make one defensive stop instead of two. This proposed rule change doesn’t “fix” every situation.

  87. One teams fans, whining about another teams brass whining. Sweet!

    Seriously though, I really don’t see the connection with this being all about the Patriots. Let’s say it was the Chiefs playing team “X”, and the same thing occurred, you don’t think that the Chiefs would have proposed the change in that case?

  88. Defense is part of the game, but rule changes in the 21st century are mostly geared towards offense and scoring. Both teams need to have a possession, to allow both offenses on the field. Defense will still be a factor.

  89. Defense wins championships!
    If you can’t stop them … you don’t deserve to win!

  90. Since the rules were changed to the current OT rules, the team winning the coin flip has won the game just 52% of the time. So no, the game is NOT determined by who wins the OT coin flip. I sure wish people who propose changing rules were required to collect all the data before making the proposal, rather than relying on their emotions and a single game experience.

  91. I’d rather see a timed overtime period (10 minutes?). Whoever scores the most in that time wins. It would make for more interesting strategies. I don’t like rule changes that fundamentally alters how the game works just because it’s overtime. I hate the college overtime system.

  92. Andy Reid should have listened to Herm Edwards “You play to win the game” instead going for a field goal and overtime. John Madden once pontificated on air that the Patriots should go for a field goal and overtime and BB went for a touchdown and won the game outright. Who remembers which game that was? Stop crying Andy and take responsibility for losing the game.

  93. If the rule were changed and the team that wins the toss scores a TD and then the opposing team scores a TD does the game keep going with alternate possessions if both teams keep matching scores. How would a winner be determined?

  94. The problem the league has in terms of fairness is the rules have been changed to favor the offense, so defensive stops are harder and harder. I am fine with the rules on defensive holding/PI, but they should do something about the pick plays, like make the illegal. Get back to the old way where the better athlete wins.

  95. On another subject, I’ve always felt one thing should be tweaked in the regular season. If neither team can win in OT in the regular season, there are no ties. Both teams will be given a loss. That’s how it should be. It would be quite unique in comparison to the sport of soccer, which still has ties. For the longest time, there were ties in the NHL but since 2005, they now have shootouts after the OT period. For another possibility, the two kickers in sudden death after OT take turns kicking field goals from the 40-yard-line. The first one to make a field goal wins the game, after the other has missed. There’s no quarter time limit, no blockers or rushers, no time outs, but there would be a 15 second game clock for the kick-holders to line it up.

  96. Two of the best playoff games I’ve ever seen ,the Miami Kansas City Christmas game,and the Oakland vs Baltimore 1978 Divisional game.Both went to 2 overtimes.Each team did what was required to keep the other from scoring.Go back to sudden death,if you let the other team score,you don’t deserve another chance.The game is ridiculous as it is with all these ridiculous rules.You stop the other team,or go home.

  97. As a Chiefs fan…

    Suck it up Chiefs Kingdom. We didn’t lose to a coin toss. We lost to an offsides, or a phantom roughing call, oh how about 3 3rd and 10s where people didn’t play the right coverage.

    Get over it. The OT rules are fine. Play better defense, and maybe play better offensively in the first half and score some points and the coin toss wouldn’t haven’t matter.

  98. J K says:

    March 1, 2019 at 1:59 pm

    It’s easy to just say “well defense is part of the game so all they needed to do was stop them” which I would’ve probably also said 5 years ago but the way the game is going and how the rules are being applied are so biased in favor of the offense that that “just play defense” argument isn’t quite as valid anymore.

    ____________________________________________

    I think that it’s totally valid. If you play good defense and make a stop, you get the ball back. The saying “defense wins championships” is the truth, and the truth is that the Chief’s defense was gassed and Reid never even used a time out. It may have turned the game in their favor if they had a quick breather.

  99. I think that both teams should get a possession. If a team scores a touchdown on the first possession and the 2nd team fails to answer with a touchdown of their own, then game over. If the 2nd team does score a touchdown of their own, then play til the quarter is over. It’s only fair. A game like the chiefs vs the patriots with 2 high powered offenses and an outcome like the one we saw? The game was literally decided by a coin flip.

  100. A lot of people lying on this thread. A coin toss should not determine the outcome unless both sides have had a chance to get the ball. Opinions of the Pats fans will change once it happens to them…..take that to the bank.

  101. Settle this with an 8 minute OT period that will be played like a normal quarter. When the clock zeros out we will have a winner.

  102. I’m a Chiefs fan. I disagree with the rule change. I wanted it after we lost to the Pats in the Championship game, but we had THREE Chances to stop them. We didn’t. Once against Rex Burkhead who averaged 3.3ypc, and we couldn’t stop him from getting in the in-zone.

    It was the Chiefs’ fault we lost. We lost because our defense was atrocious.

  103. It should be something like if the opening team scores a touchdown, then you do get the ball back but if you score a touchdown you MUST go for two, so that the game will definitely end right there.

  104. A coin toss doesn’t determine the outcome of the game!!! That implies the team that won the toss automatically gets the win, no need to play, game over!!! All it determines is who gets the football on offense! Do your job & stop the team from scoring, just like the Rams did!!!

  105. Thats why the NBA remains leader of the pack when it comes to Rule changes and doing so expeditiously, There are absolutely ZERO reasons a team faith should be decided on a COIN FLIP. And the OT rules should be very straight forward, let every team has possession with the understanding that the team getting the ball 2nd MUST match what the team who went first did, If the team who went first score a TD then the team getting ball 2nd must match that to continue the game,

    However force the teams to go for a 2point conversion in OT. Also if the team going 1st on their drive was only able to score 3 points then the 2nd team with their possession needs to match 3points to continue the game or score a TD to win outright. Now if both teams were unable to score on their first possession or only able to manage a field goal apiece then NEXT SCORE automatically WINS.

  106. bradygirl12 says:
    March 1, 2019 at 2:37 pm

    I think that it’s totally valid. If you play good defense and make a stop, you get the ball back. The saying “defense wins championships” is the truth, and the truth is that the Chief’s defense was gassed and Reid never even used a time out. It may have turned the game in their favor if they had a quick breather.
    =======================================================================
    True. Reid hung those guys out to dry by not calling a timeout to at least give them a chance to catch their breath. Bad coaching on his part. The Chiefs only have themselves to blame for the loss, in their case, and the most glaring error, if Ford doesn’t line up offside, game over. The only certainty is that they will never satisfy everyone, no matter how they tweak this or that rule.

  107. toddm6d says:
    March 1, 2019 at 1:14 pm
    Get rid of OT altogether.

    You’ve got 60 minutes to get it done or go home with a tie.

    —————————–

    For a PLAYOFF game, you’re suggesting that both teams go home with a tie. Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with scenario?

  108. David Muehlhausen I’m with you on everything you said except for the roughing the passer call being a reason the Chiefs lost. I do agree that it was the wrong call but that play occurred with 7 minutes to go on 2nd and 7 from the Patriots 28 yard line. While the call did help the Pats they still had to go 60 yards for the touchdown. Also, even if they didn’t get that call it would have been 3rd and 7 and the Pats converted 13/19 third downs in the game so they had a decent chance of converting anyway. Like I said that call did help the Patriots but it’s not even close to being the reason why the Chiefs lost, it’s not even a small turning point in the game

  109. mmakansas says:
    March 1, 2019 at 2:56 pm
    I’m a Chiefs fan. I disagree with the rule change. I wanted it after we lost to the Pats in the Championship game, but we had THREE Chances to stop them. We didn’t. Once against Rex Burkhead who averaged 3.3ypc, and we couldn’t stop him from getting in the in-zone.

    It was the Chiefs’ fault we lost. We lost because our defense was atrocious.

    5 0 Rate This

    ——————

    That’s why “yards passing or “yards per attempt” is overrated. Stick to fantasy football, but I appreciate your honesty.

  110. To paraphrase Zuzu from It’s a Wonderful Life: ‘Every time the Pats win a ring, a new rule gets its wings.’

    And can we just do away with the asinine phrase, ‘A coin flip shouldn’t decide a game’?!?

    Under current rules, a coin flip does NOT decide a game and never has.

  111. DO IT LIKE COLLEGE!! The only difference, you always have to go for 2. But that seems too smart for the genius’ in the NFL Front Offices!!

  112. I’m a Patriot fan and although I’m glad they won the SB, the NFL overtime format is UNFAIR. Both teams have played to an equal score in regulation and both teams deserve an equal chance in OT. Model it 100% after the College FB OT format.

  113. The best rule would be to be to let them play another whole 12 minutes. If it’s still tied, maybe add another 6 minute period. and then if there’s triple OT make the rest of them 3 minutes long. I’m just being creative. but they should never allow ties, and this whole thing about each team getting a possesion is better. I don’t like in college, how they just give you the ball at the 25 yard line, that’s too easy to score.
    anyways. it doesn’t matter if they change it or not, defense is allowed to have a place in the NFL. I mean look at the superbowl, it was a defensive slugfest.

  114. haughville says:
    March 1, 2019 at 1:27 pm
    Interesting Pat fans against it. I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, this comment section would be looking a whole lot different
    ———————————————————-

    By and large Pats fans expect playoff wins not excuses. Did you happen to catch the SB? It was won by the team that played better D…just like the SB before that when it happened to be the Pats opponent that got more stops. The problem with interminable overtime from this Pats fan’s perspective is the winner gets that much more beaten up for the next opponent.

    Again, make a stop and the point is moot.

  115. John Madden once pontificated on air that the Patriots should go for a field goal and overtime and BB went for a touchdown and won the game outright.
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    It was the first Pats SB against the Rams. And Madden actually said the Pats should play for OT and not go for the win. They ended up kicking a FG as time expired.

  116. As a Chiefs fan…

    Suck it up Chiefs Kingdom. We didn’t lose to a coin toss. We lost to an offsides, or a phantom roughing call, oh how about 3 3rd and 10s where people didn’t play the right coverage.
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________

    While the roughing call was bad, it paled in comparison to the no-call on the blatant pick play the Chiefs ran for the go ahead score in the 4th quarter. The pick was clear as day and should have been called. That led to actual points in the game as opposed to just a first down. Bad calls on both sides – no excuses.

  117. Since this is Andy Reid’s proposal, we all know how it will end – it will get passed, the Chiefs will make it to the AFC championship game against NE, they’ll go to overtime, KC wins the toss, goes the length and gets a touchdown, then they MISS the extra point. Brady then gets the ball, goes the length of the field, they score a touchdown and make the extra point. Andy finds a new way to lose…..

  118. I think it was fine with sudden death and 15 min Q…here’s a thought, win the game in the first 60 or you are subject to disappointment.

    Every team has lost a heartbreaker in OT, part of the game.

    What is Andy’s record in conference championship games – maybe they need a rule for take you to the brink with no delivery longevity. He’d be under those wheels.

  119. Some are saying have a better defense if you don’t win the coin toss. I say its only fair that both teams show who has the better defense. Both teams need an equal chance on both sides of the ball.Think about it…not your team….think about every team….if you can.

  120. Maybe the Chiefs should learn how to play Defense in front of the home field crowd in playoffs.

  121. Let’s all be serious is this all cause the pats benefited from the rule won the game and another sb🤔 like tedy bruschi once said you wanna say all you want you wanna change the rules change em we still play and we win🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆

  122. I get the whole “defense has to get a stop” argument, but the rules have been skewed to the offensive side of the ball increasing the odds in the favor of the coin toss winner.

    The post season could have a different set of rules to reflect that circumstance. I’d like to see each team get the ball in the red zone, 2 minutes on the clock, no time outs; score as much as possible. Sudden death rules if the teams remain tied. That brings the intensity of a shootout, fairness in possession, and compresses the field which brings better coaching to the forefront (time management and going for 2 or converting on 4th down) and defenses less ground to cover.

  123. Again I’m not a fan of the current overtime format. I wish they would just continue the game and play another quarter just like every other sport does. However, people here need to stop saying that the game is decided by a coin flip. It’s as if whatever happens after the coin flip means absolutely nothing. It’s completely disingenuous to the team that won because you’re basically saying that they didn’t do anything to win the game aside from winning a 50-50 coin toss. It’s even more ridiculous considering that the same day, just hours earlier, you had a team in the Saints that won the overtime coin toss and lost the game. By saying that the whole game comes down to a coin flip is really naive and just plain incorrect. There’s a lot more that goes into overtime than just a simple flip of a coin

  124. haughville says:
    March 1, 2019 at 1:27 pm
    Interesting Pat fans against it. I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, this comment section would be looking a whole lot different

    ——————————
    If the shoe was on the other foot this conversation would not even be taking place.

  125. tylawspick6 says:
    March 1, 2019 at 12:16 pm
    embarrassing
    what is this, the 78th rule change in the last decade targeting the pats?
    ———————————–
    For me, this has nothing to do with the Pats. They won fair and square! But, I do believe each teams should possess the ball at least once in OT.

  126. blessedunliketherest says:
    March 1, 2019 at 3:53 pm
    John Madden once pontificated on air that the Patriots should go for a field goal and overtime and BB went for a touchdown and won the game outright.
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    It was the first Pats SB against the Rams. And Madden actually said the Pats should play for OT and not go for the win. They ended up kicking a FG as time expired.
    ————————————–
    Thanks for the correction, but at least you knew which game I meant.

  127. Nofoolnodrool says:
    March 1, 2019 at 2:51 pm
    A lot of people lying on this thread. A coin toss should not determine the outcome unless both sides have had a chance to get the ball. Opinions of the Pats fans will change once it happens to them…..take that to the bank.
    ——
    Maybe they should change the OT rule and actually allow coaches to trip players from the opposing team. Tomlin would certainly have an advantage as he does have real in-game experience

  128. This is stupid. It was stupid after Vikes vs Saints playoff loss, and it’s stupid now. Don’t want to lose? Stop them. Want to win? Go score.

  129. Take heart, Chiefs fans-Patrick Mahomes is an insane beast who will undoubtedly rule the NFL very soon. He needs to learn right now, and he just learned that a slow start can doom you. Learned it TWICE, in fact. But I think he’s going to be a very dangerous QB for a long time to come. The salty feeling he got watching the Patriots win because the Chiefs didn’t stop them may cause him to go easy on you at contract time.

  130. There has been a lot of consternation over this issue since the AFC Championship game. I’m sure the masses would still have been as concerned about the fairness of the situation had the Patriots lost without touching the ball.

  131. Only change the rule on one condition…

    Add a 2nd part of the rule which requires Chief fans to not make excessive noise during home games when their opponents are on offense.
    It can be called “The decide the games on the field rule”.

    If we are going to change rules based on being fair to both teams then go all the way.

  132. jurgyisgod says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:42 am

    The rule needs to be changed. As great as that AFC game was, it would have been iconic if Patrick could have come back on the field with a shot a tying and later winning the game. Instead, the Chiefs were shortchanged … as were the fans.

    ___________________________________

    The Chiefs short-changed themselves. Patrick MaHomes has many years ahead to be “iconic”,but their defense failed. That is not the fault of the Patriots. If the Chiefs defense couldn’t stop THREE 3rd and 10’s,they didn’t deserve to win. That’s not about an unfair rule. It’s about a defense that got sliced and diced on the first possession. That’s on them.

  133. Why did they not propose this rule change last off season? Could it be because they feel that it would give them an added advantage because they will have one of the league’s more dynamic QB’a and offenses for years to come? This comes off very much like what Bill Polian and the Dolts did when they had Manning, and they too could not beat the Patriots.

  134. The Chiefs need to give it up. They lost to the Patriots last season. Twice. Once on their home field, in OT, with their fans screaming and interfering with the Patriots signals. What more do you want? You got beat, fair and square. Let. It. Go.

  135. How about those arguing Chiefs vs Pats try to look at the big picture. Overtime in the playoffs, regardless of who is playing, should not be determined by a coin toss. It should be determined by which team has enough gas in the tank to get the job done. Both teams should have an equal opportunity to win in OT. Giving a decided advantage to the winner of the coin toss is just as ridiculous as deciding a playoff game on an obvious non-call. The games should be decided by the play on the field. Period.

  136. First time I saw this rule I said how stupid is this one team doesn’t even get a chance if the other scores a TD. Just stupid and can’t believe it’s taken someone this long to address the rule.

  137. FootballSeasonRules says:
    March 1, 2019 at 2:29 pm
    On another subject, I’ve always felt one thing should be tweaked in the regular season. If neither team can win in OT in the regular season, there are no ties. Both teams will be given a loss. That’s how it should be. It would be quite unique in comparison to the sport of soccer, which still has ties. For the longest time, there were ties in the NHL but since 2005, they now have shootouts after the OT period. For another possibility, the two kickers in sudden death after OT take turns kicking field goals from the 40-yard-line. The first one to make a field goal wins the game, after the other has missed. There’s no quarter time limit, no blockers or rushers, no time outs, but there would be a 15 second game clock for the kick-holders to line it up.
    —————————————————
    I was going right along with you until you wanted to put the outcome of a football game into the hands (feet?) of the non-football players on the team. No to FG shootouts, FGs are fine in the normal course of the game but they shouldn’t be used as the deciding factor in place of OT, the game should be won by actual football players not glorified soccer players.

  138. laudermk says:
    March 1, 2019 at 1:10 pm
    No game should be decided by a coin flip. Case in point: team A drives for a game winning field goal or touchdown to go into overtime…the opposing defense is drained no doubt…you have a coin flip and the team who scored gets it again, scores on a tired defense..what about that is remotely fair?
    ——————————————–
    I agree, that’s absolutely not fair. If team A drives for a game winning field goal or touchdown and get it, it’s not fair they should have to play overtime. However, no game has ever been decided by a coin flip. After the coin flip both teams go onto the field, one team tries to score points, the other team tries to stop them from scoring or takes the ball away so their team can try to score points, like the Saints/Rams game earlier in the day.

  139. Let’s not forget that if you play defense and force a punt or turnover, all you need to do is score a field goal. You are relieved of the more difficult task of scoring a TD. Then there is also the possibility of ending the game by scoring a safety.

  140. If this game had gone the other way,you certainly wouldn’t hear from the Patriots camp that they were going to request an OT rule change. They would suck it up,blame only themselves,and move on to next season. This is nothing more than a bad case of sour grapes that the superstar QB didn’t have a chance to “wow” the fans and be the hero. Get over it,Chiefs. You can’t change it,you can only work on what caused it.

  141. jurgyisgod says:
    March 1, 2019 at 11:42 am
    The rule needs to be changed. As great as that AFC game was, it would have been iconic if Patrick could have come back on the field with a shot a tying and later winning the game. Instead, the Chiefs were shortchanged … as were the fans.
    _______________________
    People want this rule changed because they’re tired of seeing the Patriots win. Chiefs defense is the culprit here. I’m not a Pats fan and never will be. The game could have also been won by the Chiefs if Dee Ford doesn’t line up offsides. No have nobody else to blame but yourselves, Chiefs fans.

  142. Or….we speed OT up with a kicking shootout.

    1st kick is from the 25
    2nd from the 30
    3rd from the 35 ect. ect.

    Each team kicks until another one misses.

  143. jurgyisgod says:

    March 1, 2019 at 11:42 am

    The rule needs to be changed. As great as that AFC game was, it would have been iconic if Patrick could have come back on the field with a shot a tying and later winning the game. Instead, the Chiefs were shortchanged … as were the fans.

    ===================

    If Chiefs got a chance after the Pats scored in OT and then the Pats scored again, game would have been over. The coin flip winner still has an advantage.

  144. KC played for overtime. Against Tom Brady. There is no rule that can fix this level of stupid.

  145. arrowhead816 says:
    March 1, 2019 at 12:08 pm
    For those that are saying no, wait until this happens to your team and the roles are reversed. With that being said, it’s past time for a fair overtime competition rules.
    _______________________________________________________

    It has. We didn’t. In K.C., if you aint cryin’ you aint tryin’

  146. The overtime rules were only very recently changed to the way they are now, and they greatly reduce the win percentage by the team who wins the coin toss. At this point the team that wins the toss wins about 55% of the time. So still a slight advantage, but to put it in perspective, in an NFL game, the home team wins almost 60% of the time, a greater advantage.
    It is simply not that big of a deal, and that very slight advantage is by definition random.

  147. This proves that the Chiefs will never win a SB as long as Andy Reid is around. Won’t matter how much talent they have. Just like in The Hustler, “He’s a loser.” Reid’s teams are always undisciplined, always make bad penalties at bad times, always come up short. Now Reid is complaining that the refs don’t warn his players before they throw flags. He wants to remove the coin flip before overtime. I guess that’s the Matthew Slater rule? He is out of his freakin’ mind. Take some responsibility Reid and actually demand some discipline your players. Instead he installs a loser mentality into them. KC, if you want to win, fire Reid now. Things are only going to get worse from here.

Leave a Reply

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