Overtime rules still need to change

Getty Images

After the Chiefs lost the AFC Championship in overtime, the Chiefs proposed a rule that would allow the team that kicks off to start the extra session a chance to match a first-possession touchdown. It wasn’t passed. It still needs to be, as evidenced by Sunday’s first-possession, walk-off touchdown from the Vikings in New Orleans.

The Kansas City proposal had some support, prompting Chiefs owner Clark Hunt to tell PFT Live last March that a revision to overtime for the postseason could be coming. The owners had tabled the subject until May (Cowboys COO Stephen Jones, a member of the Competition Committee, told #PFTPM that he supported it), and then instead of voting on the change the owners delayed consideration for a year.

The decision to table the matter for a year made little sense, but political and P.R. considerations likely influenced an outcome that didn’t entail a failure to make overtime more equitable.

And equity continues to be the primary consideration. As to everyone who shouts “Just play defense!” the reality is that if the team that wins the coin toss scores a touchdown on the opening drive, it never has to play defense in overtime. Both teams should have to play offense and defense if the score is tied at the end of regulation of a postseason game.

On Tuesday, the XFL will be announcing its official first set of rules, and the overtime procedures at last check were expected to be a shootout-style two-point conversion competition lifted (we were happy to help) from one of the ideas proposed by PFT for making the extra session more fair. Here’s hoping the NFL is willing to consider creative alternatives like this, especially if the XFL’s approach is as compelling as it promises to be, with 22 players at each end of the field alternative two-point tries with the game on the line.

259 responses to “Overtime rules still need to change

  1. lol. a 2 point shootout? so a gimmick is going to decide playoff ot games? that’s not a better alternative. why dont we just not keep score in the playoffs, let fans vote who advances, and give everybody a super bowl trophy.

  2. That XFL plan would be unfair to teams that have 2-way players, like the Patriots Elandon Roberts. So we’d need to modify this rule to stagger the playing so that Roberts could run from one end of the field to the other alternating between LB and FB.

  3. That rule change would give a noticeable bonus to the team starting off OT on defense, knowing that they Have to score a TD. Arguably that rule change would make OT less equitable than it currently is, not more so

  4. So you basically want to add the “shoot-out” to the NFL, which was one of the worst decisions the NHL has ever made with their overtime. Throwing away an entire 60 minutes of football that includes offense, defense, and special teams and deciding the outcome based on one very specialized play makes absolutely ZERO sense. Each team being guaranteed to received a kick-off is much more logical, and “equitable”.

  5. Please No! Then they will say If both teams score a touchdown, then they should both get two possessions if the first team then scores a field goal! If you want to win the game so bad do it regulation!

  6. Well hell…. why don’t we just play a whole 60 minutes if they end up tying…… LOL people can’t seem to ever accept the end result anymore…. you have a defense… if you can’t stop a team from scoring a touchdown on one drive then you really don’t deserve to win…

  7. I’ve always felt the team that kicks off and gives up a TD on the opening drive should get the ball and have a chance to match that TD but that is not the answer. The problem is that the team that gave up the TD and got the ball second would have the advantage of always going for it on 4th down. They could call plays differently knowing they had 4 downs. You would then see teams that win the coin flip kick off and trust their defense to either get the stop or hold them to a FG. If you give up a TD on the opening drive then your whole drive is 4 downs which is a huge advantage.

  8. If the NFL doesn’t want to go the route of college football with their back and forth OT shootouts, ok fine.
    Even if they did, because of the quality of kickers, they would have to move back from the 25 yard line starting point.

    How hard is it to have the same exact overtime rules as right now, EXCEPT…both teams get the same amount of possessions until they don’t match scores? The team that gets the OT opening kick scores a TD? The other team has to score a TD. The team that gets the kick ends up with a FG? A matching FG keeps the game going, a TD wins it.

    I know how sports media and the whole the NFL league office can never do anything right crowd operates. If they settle for just giving teams an opening possession, then the game becomes sudden death I can guarantee if popular teams lose too many times on the 3rd possession of the game we’re right back into this OT debate. It would still make the coin toss too important, make OT too unfair, and everyone would wonder why one team got 2 possessions and the other team only got one.

  9. You want to make it fair? End the game at the end of the game. No over time at all. Done.

    If that doesn’t work for you, the only way to truly be fair in football would be to play an entire extra quarter(or half, really) with normal football rules. No one wants to do that because it makes the game longer.

    If you can’t win in regulation, then just leave it as a tie. That’s honestly about as fair as you can make it without coming up with all these weird rules to somehow make a 10 minute quarter “fair.”

  10. The OT rules are designed to get the guys off the field after 60 brutal minutes. Otherwise there would just be another full quarter-length period played. Anything short of that will have some quirk or problem, so it is senseless to try to “fix” it.

    Half of us are going to be disappointed with any game result. No matter of tinkering will change that.

  11. I can get behind the team kicking off getting a chance to score if the receiving team scored a touchdown on the first possession. I don’t know about all this shootout style two point conversion stuff. I feel like it would take away from the defensive aspect of the game.

  12. I don’t like the current system. I would like the college rules w/tweaking. Start on 50 yard line.

  13. I wish we could just give ideas a thumbs up or a thumbs down. I would give this idea a thumbs down. Overtime is fine as is. Teams have a defense out there.

  14. Calling and winning the overtime coin flip is a skill as much as anything in the NFL. Serious, the game shouldn’t be won by picking the coin toss correctly. Both sides should have a possession but not in the way the NCAA does it nor a ball toss like basketball. If a team scores on the opening, then the other team gets a chance. They continue until a team is stopped or they all pass out from exhaustion. They could replay the game after a week but that would mess up the playoff schedule and the SuperBowl. I’m being impractical but there needs to be a fix.

  15. There should be no OT ! Each rule change makes it worse. Go old school, at the end of regulation of a tied game , the team with the most ‘net yards’ wins . Than way , every down must be played as if the game depended on it , because it would . No more watching ‘ bend but don’t break defense , each team fighting for every yard makes for a more exciting game.

  16. In baseball both teams get an at bat in extra innings even if the visiting team scores or not. Why not in the NFL?

  17. Oh yes, because that two point shootout idea is so much more compelling.

    Quit trying to ruin the game. Let the football players decide. Not the Madden crowd who has never played the game.

  18. I can’t believe this bullcrap that people are whining and crying it’s not fair to the team that loses. This crap stems from these panty waisted people that say everyone should at least get a participation trophy. The object of the game is to win. This “the other team should at least get a chance” is pure baloney. There is nothing wrong with the rules the way that they are. If I remember correctly is used to be that a field goal won the game in overtime until the whiny babies got that changed. This is turning the nfl into the waa waa league.

  19. First, I don’t think it was OPI. So let’s drop this from the conversation. It’s off topic. What if Rudolph was wide open or whatever? BUT, I do agree that if the first team to get the ball in OT should not win the game with a TD on their first possession. This not hockey or the NBA.The other team should have a chance to score a TD on their first possession After that, whoever scores first wins. Just treat it like the FG scenario. Safeties?? That’s weird. Still, if you allow a safety, you should lose.

  20. They been talking about the same things for years. The overtime rules have needed to be changed for years. Many teams have benefited over others because of the rules.

  21. Is defense not part of the game? If you want the ball stop them. When I watched the overtime I saw two teams on the field. Make the damn stop then.

  22. Simple: possession, down and distance at the end of regulation is the possession, down and distance to start OT. Play to sudden death.

    No kickoffs. No coin flips. No extra possessions or complicated rules.

    Is it fair? Perfectly fair. Possession, down and distance was earned and both teams got an arbitrary kickoff (beginning and half) which cancel each other out.

  23. So teams would only have to play goal-line defense in your OT proposal? Why limit offenses (and defenses) to such a small part of the playing field when the whole field is used for the first 4 quarters of the game? I don’t like it.

  24. The losing team always suggest changes after they lose. They bave a 50/50 chance to win the coin flip. If you lose it than stop them from scoring a TD. Its that simple. Live with it!

  25. Why change it again? Is Sean Payton crying with the city of New Orleans after Minnesota smacked them in the mouth for the 2nd time in 3 years? Leave the rule alone….

  26. I agree that both teams have to play offense AND defense. But I absolutely do NOT like a shootout finish because it is so gimmicky and far removed from the actual game. You just have to play it like in regulation.

    Another approach is to simply eliminate overtime forcing teams that in the last 2 minutes of the game that no extra point is allowed and a team must score 2 point conversion. This will forces or motivates a team to decide the game in regulation. If a field goal would tie then the team must go for a touchdown instead. Whatever you do, just eliminate overtime and decide the game in regulation.

  27. IOW, we need to change the rules every year the Saints lose in the playoffs to ensure they don’t lose the next year the same way?

    The problem with a FG winning the game without the other team getting the ball is simply the relative ease of getting one. Almost all KOs are touchbacks in the NFL now. Instead of a 100 yard field you only have to go from your own 25 to the opponent’s 35-40 to kick, a distance of only 35 or 40 yards. That’s a LOT easier than going 75 yards for the TD! If a team can’t stop a 75 yard drive when it counts the most, they deserve to lose. The Saints deserved to lose yesterday because they allowed a 75 yard drive, period! Leave the rule alone!

  28. Yes. Bring back real sudden death like before and leave it.

    Unfair? Beat the team in regulation and it won’t come down to a coin toss.

  29. The longer the game, the more TV revenue and vendor sales. Of course OT-cash for all the little people. But that’s like 1 commercial.

    I can’t see how they couldn’t make more money unless it would an NFL concession for the CBA. THEN it makes sense. Even if they make extra money they have to give it back in some way. But they’re like Banks and Insurance companies. They print money but nickel and dime-ing us to death.

    Besides, what does fair have to do with anything other than a guy waving his hand on a punt? Seen the Refs this decade?

  30. 100 years and still wanting to change rules every year. Will it ever end? There is always a squeaky wheel that wants grease. No matter what it still will take a little luck and alot of skill to win.

  31. It’s easy. If you win the toss and elect to receive, you start with the ball on the 5 yard line. A team that likes their defense may just choose to receive.

  32. It’s easy. If you win the toss and elect to receive, you start with the ball on the 5 yard line. A team that likes their defense may just choose to start with their defense on the field.

  33. No, they don’t need to change. How they do it in college and how they will do it in the XFL are too gimmicky. It really is as simple as “Just play defense!” as was stated, the defenders on one team have as many opportunities to prevent a score as their opposing team has to score, and they get paid just like their opponents do. Stop making excuses for teams not getting a stop on defense and move on.

  34. Look, I get it, first we got rid of true sudden death with the field goal change, but now another change to allow the game to continue on a first possession TD?
    Sheesh.
    How about just play another 15-minute quarter and whoever is ahead when it ends wins.
    Then no one’s feelings can be hurt.
    Or just play defense. #smh

  35. The Vikings lost in OT by a FG never saw the ball nobody said a word. Now they have to score a TD.And PFT is saying both teams need to get the ball.

  36. These gimmick approaches are worse. What happens if both teams score? Then is it sudden death or do we do two more possessions?

  37. So, I thought defense was part of the game right? And the kick off… That’s special teams right? So if you play good special teams, then good defense, it makes it harder to play offense and get that touchdown right? People whine and whine each team needs a chance. What happens when after 1 full OT, each team got a TD, with a tie score. So we go into double OT? Or like in college, 4 OT’s? Just play defense and quit crying.

  38. Overtime is not a continuation of the regular game. You had 60 minutes, you couldn’t win so now the rules tighten as a means to find a winner.

    It is fair and we like it, and we liked it the old way.

  39. just get rid of FGs in OT and make it sudden death. “each getting a turn on offense” is stupid. you want the ball back? stop the your opponent. play defense.

  40. Overtime rules are fine. And here I thought the millennials were supposed to be the biggest whiners.

  41. OMG please no. Games are already too long. Trying to adopt a college style shoot out is beyond dumb. We might as well do penalty shoot outs with the kickers.

  42. Is it required that every time New Orleans loses a playoff game, the NFL is required to change the rules? While last year’s playoff game included a horrible non-call, there were still multiple opportunities for the Saints to win the game. Likewise in Sunday’s playoff game vs. the Vikings they had a much better opportunity to win the game than the Vikings did back in the 2009 overtime playoff game. All the Saints had to do to go to the Super Bowl was win the toss and kick a field goal. On Sunday, the Vikings had a much more difficult task of actually scoring a touchdown. If Saints fans didn’t like the outcome in the past three playoff games, I’ve got three words for them “Just play defense!”

  43. Enough with the pathetic whining about overtime rules! Each team has 60 minutes to win the game. Each team will field its offense, its defense and its special teams numerous times in that 60 minutes. If you don’t want your little feelings hurt by not getting to try to match a touchdown because some big meanies won the toss and drove down your defense’s throat to win the game, then it is very simple: win the game in regulation. Stop pretending that you are grounding this argument in some high-minded notion of fairness like you are defending someone’s civil rights. It is a sport, a game – win in regulation or lose without whining.

    Just wondering: do commentators on other sports spend so much time crying about overtime like Florio and so many others do about it in the NFL?

  44. Then next, each team will get two possessions to see what happens.

    Here’s a proposal. Sudden death. But first downs are 20 yards, not 10. More chance for stops and equal possessions. If you drive within FG range, which is pretty much two first downs (40 yds), you’ve earned a kick for the win. It’s not gonna be a chip shot which makes it fairer to the defense and just as exciting as sudden death used to be.

    You’re welcome nfl.

  45. Mike, we all know why everyone was so angry last year and yet you could hear a pin drop this year

    Patriots

  46. Saints got beat in OT by a team scoring a touchdown. That is what sudden death is all about. There is already the rule of being able to have a possession after a field goal.
    So why not eliminate Overtime completely. If the 2 teams are tied after regulation, chose the winner by total yards gained during the game. IF that ends up the same for both, go with time of possession, then fewest penalty yards….
    Then the Best team during the game has won. They have had a full game why take the risk of injury for tired and banged up players.

  47. Maybe the defense could make a stop & force a punt. Why penalize the team that drove the field & scored a touchdown????

    If a team can’t stop them on the first drive in overtime, they don’t deserve to win anyway.

  48. It’s really very simple and always has been. Look at the numbers. If winning the coin flip statistically causes a team to win significantly more often, then the rule should be changed. In my mind anything over somewhere in the 53-55% range would be too much of an advantage.

  49. Why is it that the team that loses their game (particularly a post-season game), is always crying for rule changes. Now they want to make another change to OT? Try winning in regular time, and you won’t have to worry about not getting a chance to score in OT. More rule changes to OT will just make an already too long game even longer. Another reason to stop watching the NFL and enjoy college ball.

  50. The comments predicted this piece, and here we are.

    How about unlimited mulligans, for the Saints and Florio alike? Would that be enough?

  51. Darned right that they need to change – MLB goes to extra innings with both teams getting an extra at bat no matter what, NBA goes to an extra period and keep playing extra periods until the game is decided. NHL is 20 minute overtime games until one team scores. The NFL has some sort of convoluted formula all based upon a coin toss (and dont talk about the fact that the defense must make a stop). Change it so both teams get a shot. Then you would have a decision to make about going for 2. Good quarterbacks shouldnt lose in overtime due to a coin toss.

  52. In post season NFL overtime games, the home team should have the choice of kicking off or receiving the kickoff with sudden death as in the old days, any score wins game. The road team can strategize accordingly near the end of regulation if they fear a big disadvantage, going for two to win or going for touchdown instead of field goal, depending on the score.

    In regular season games, ties never bothered me in the least. In fact, when teams tie at the end of regulation, it’s appropriate to accord both teams their half-win/half loss as that’s true to that game value as opposed to winner take all, which creates a value distortion relative to the two teams’ win/loss records.

  53. Wrong. The data suggests that the team that wins the coin toss wins 52.7% of the time. You are delusional if you think a rule can be devised with a more balanced outcome.

  54. The current OT rules are fine in both the regular season and playoffs.

    The only change I’d make is to eliminate the coin toss at the start of the OT period to make it less random. Do something so that at the end of regulation, both teams know who gets the ball first at the start of OT so they can factor that into their end-of-game decisions.

    For example, always have the visiting team (or home team, just pick one to make it the same each time) get to choose to receive or kick at the start of OT.

    Or, whoever won (or lost) the coin toss at the start of the game gets to choose kick/receive at the start of OT.

    That way, each team knows going into OT who’s getting the ball.

  55. Totally agree. I’ve always thought OT rules were a farce, and while it might extend games into other network programming, the outcome needs to be fair. If they’re worried about starting the Golden Globes late, move the 1st kickoff up to 12:30pm and 4pm. West Coast teams traveling East can always come in a day early if they’re worried about jet lag.

  56. Go the college route. Tweak it so the they start from the 35. Or just revert back to the way it was. Boo freaking hoo already. I am getting tired of how over complicating thing due to the “because it’s not fair” line.

  57. So by your ideas, you either have to play a full extra period(equality) or do a college style overtime. In fact you cant have just an extra period because one team may possibly have an extra possession to end the period and that would be unfair

  58. The Vikings took the ball at the 25 yard line, drove 75 yards for a TD! The Saints Defense didn’t stop them.! Game over. If the Saints got the ball after that and scored a TD, when does the game end? Ten hour time limit, whatever team is ahead when time expires wins? Let it alone!

  59. Another rule change because the Saints lost in the playoffs again? Wouldn’t be surprised if they start floating ideas of rules just for themselves. Saints lost and your dumb PI rule change didn’t save you.

  60. I agree Florio. Honestly if it made any sense I would have both teams play out a shorter quarter. Especially in the playoffs to not have both teams touch the ball over the virtue of four points makes no sense to me. They score, you have to score. They score 7, you have to score 7 to keep it going. I’d be good.

  61. Each team should simply choose three players to participate in a punt, pass, kick contest to determine which team wins in overtime.

  62. I’ve been saying this from day one! A coin flip should not influence the outcome of a game! What’s so hard to understand about this?? I should be on the rules committee. I’m ions ahead of these people!

  63. Oh give it a break already. Each team has more than enough chances to win the game in regulation. If it’s still tied after 60 minutes, your fate lies in a coin flip. Overtime is not supposed to be a reward it’s a final decision for those who can’t win within the 60 minute time frame. Give me a break about the rules!

  64. I don’t want this to be another Saints “lost in the playoffs” rule. We lost the game according to the rules and honestly, most Saints fans aren’t even complaining about it. We lost when Adam Thielen got behind our defense.

    No matter what you do with the rules for OT possession, there will always be an inherent advantage for one team over another.

  65. Here we go again. The rules have worked fine for 100 years. Don’t want OT? Win the game in regulation. What next? Awarding the Saints 7 points at the start of every game? I have never seen a bigger crybaby fan base. Call it Favres Karma

  66. Sometimes teams have to lose.

    Why have overtime at all? Just give them a healthy snack and a participation ribbon.

  67. I think the previous change made 10 years ago, which requires a TD to end the game on the first possession, was the correct solution to the earlier problem of a FG ending the game on the first possession.

    I hate the college OT rules. That’s not football.

    It’s like a hockey shootout, which I don’t like either (and I’m both an NFL and NHL season ticket holder).

  68. Overtimes tweaks will inevitable lead to SOME glitch. Overall, the current system works. You gotta try to win in regulation. You need every incentive to do this.

    I HATE the idea of a 2pt shootout.

  69. The saints fans are reprehensible.

    Also if Jared Cook was the one who caught that TD & Rhodes was pushed off when any saints fans cry for a flag. NOPE

    Hope it stings, hope it burns

    You cheated the Vikings out of their SB in 09. Because you sold your souls you won’t win another playoff game this century.

  70. The Vikings won fair and square. Well, they won.

    I just don’t want to hear complaints about preferential treatment from referees. It all balances out at some point or another.

  71. whatever they do in a few years later everyone will be saying it needs to change. How about a hail Mary contest. You know both QB line up at the 50 and throw to the endzone. If you want to make it really exciting have them both do it at the same time.

  72. I did not read anything but the title of the Florio article.

    I told my wife, right after the Vikings-Saints game, that Mike would lament the overtime rules. So predictable – and so wrong.

    And nobody talks about the second possession in overtime in which the team, if behind, will always go for it on 4th down. The first possession team can’t afford to not not make the first down.

    Like OPI/DPI: stop tinkering with the rules to promote the elusive fairness objective. The coin toss was fair. And you did not win outright in regulation time.

  73. Unorthodox over-time idea: Each team needs to have an over-time goon. Instead of a coin toss, the over-time goons battle with a trash-can lid and a baseball bat. The winner gets to decide if they want to kick or receive. Simple fix.

  74. Bad idea . So tired of the everybody gets a participation ribbon mentality ideas like this want to create . It’s football, offense and defense . Why should a team who fails at a extremely low bar of stopping the offense from scoring a TD get rewarded with a chance to get the football back. If the defense actually does it’s job and stops the offense without a first down they will likely get great field position only needing a FG to win . Seriously, if a defense fails at preventing a TD on the first possession of OT they deserve to lose , no do overs or participation ribbons needed .

  75. Are we going to change a rule every time the Saints choke in the playoffs? My goodness, don’t let a team march 75 yards down the field and score a TD on the first drive in overtime.

  76. Perhaps Drew Brees could have made more plays in regulation? If it was’t for Taysom Hill there would not have been OT to begin with. The real issue isnt’ OT, it’s the fact Drew Brees lacks the clutch gene.

  77. Overtime doesn’t need to be fair. Each team gets the duration of regulation, playing both offense and defense, to win the game. If a game is sent to overtime, it means that both teams failed to win, and they deserve zero pity. If you can’t force a punt or at least hold the other team to a field goal, you deserve to lose. Play better offense, defense, or some combination of the two during regulation. If you just keep adding possessions, more teams will just play to tie, which is the antithesis of competition. Not to mention the added injury risk of an already inherently dangerous game.

  78. Just wondering if New Orleans won the toss and took the opening possesion in for a TD if this article would have even been posted.

  79. Saints homer here. I disagree- stop the Vikes on defense and you have a shot to win. Don’t let them drive 75 yards uncontested. Sad thing is, the Saints win the toss, they probably score the TD and win. All in the toss of a coin. That being said, I really like the college OT rules where each team possesses the ball. Maybe a modified version of that with the ball at midfield?

  80. Stop trying to change the game…. Football has ALWAYS been sudden death play-offs…. It is wildly tense and entertaining, why would you change that. Now if you want to tweek how first possession is determined, instead of a coin toss, I will listen. BUT please do not change the format.

  81. It’s always amazing to me how the conversation about these things seems to hinge on whose ox is gored. I really don’t remember any outcry after the Pats win over the Falcons in the Super Bowl even though Matt Ryan never touched the ball in OT. Was that because St. Thomas of Brady was on the winning side? Or let it happen to Patrick Mahommes last season and Drew Brees this season and the conversation is red hot.

    Personally, I would probable agree with a rule change but only because of the way the modern NFL so heavily favors offensive football. Even very good to great defenses can give up touchdowns in those situations so yes, both offenses should probably get a shot at having the ball.

  82. Or…try stopping the offense to get a chance. If your defense cannot stop the offense, thats on you. The rule doesn’t need to be changed.

  83. If the team who is on defense first can’t hold the team on offense to a FG or less, then they don’t deserve the opportunity to match. It really isn’t asking a lot of the defense to not allow a TD on the opening possession.

    I’m sure Sean Payton will cry about the OT rules all offseason until they’re changed though.

  84. “Both teams should have to play offense and defense if the score is tied at the end of regulation of a postseason game.”

    Why? I understand this as a matter of personal preference, but you’ve not really made a case for it.

  85. What a ridiculous take. Even hockey knows not to use a shootout format in the playoffs. The NFL format is perfect as it is. I don’t need more “fairness.” The entertainment value of the two OT games this weekend was incredible. Change nothing.

  86. There’s a thrilling excitement to the sudden death scenario. But this idea would begin to resemble the college overtime format which isn’t nearly as exciting.

    There was a suggestion by a committee member last year that would automatically give the ball 1st to the VISITING team in any tie/overtime games; the thinking was that since the home team played an entire game with home field advantage, the visitors would have EARNED the ball 1st if the game ends in a tie. This would also eliminate the coin-flip luck factor.

  87. Every sport – literally every sport – when a game ends in a tie, gives both sides opportunities to score and win.

    Except the NFL.

    Baseball? Check.
    Basketball? Check.
    Hockey? Check
    Golf? Check
    Soccer? Check
    Lacrosse? Check
    Tennis? Check

    Hell – COLLEGE football? Check.

    NFL talking heads say giving both teams a chance to score would just make gamess longer. They say “the defense needs to stand up and stop the offense!” Uh…sure. After the league has emasculated defenses they expect them to stop somebody?! The game is now so tilted to the offense that you’ll never see a team chose to kick off in OT.

    When was the last time you heard somebody complain that a college football OT game took too long because both teams got the ball? Find a video of last year’s LSU-Texas A&M 7 OT game.

    The NFL overtime rule is fundamentally unfair and demonstrably unnecessary.

  88. Absolutely not.

    These guys are tired by the time OT starts – we’ve already seen games drag out when they exchange punts, let alone FGs in the regular season overtime. Why do people insist on making OT longer than it needs to be? Sudden death worked for decades until some yuppies started whining “that’s not fair!” Yeah, it is fair – you had 60 minutes to beat the other team. You want a possession in overtime after you lost the coin toss? Play defense and stop them. If they score on you on the first drive from the kickoff, take the L and go home.

  89. Change to what? Are you proposing an end to any type of sudden death OT?

    You gripe about the NFL OT rules, but the college game is far worse because it completely removes decisions on field position from the outcome. You will never see a punt in a college OT game, or see a coach forced into a decision whether to attempt a long FG, punt or go for it on 4th down on his opponent’s 40 yard line. Once a college game enters OT, it ceases being real football.

    You can’t have perfect equity in OT and sudden death. One or the other has to go.

  90. I have always been in favor of a college type OT system. Except that with each possession the offense gets the ball 5 yards further back. And maybe start at the 30, then the 35 etc. You could possibly make the offense go for 2 after a certain number of attempts. This would ensure that each team has an equal chance on offense and defense.

  91. Overtime rules are fine. Saints just can’t win a playoff game. Can’t keep changing the rules to make it easier for them to win.

  92. Give it a rest man, the OT rules do not need to be adjusted any more! Any time a team that is favored seems to lose in overtime via the playoffs people want to be all up in arms and adjust the rules. Had the saints won in OT on the first drive not a peep would have been made about the rules.

  93. And we need more referee supervision in OT. They (or the league) wanted Houstonto advance. Count them, four terrible calls/non-calls in OT against the Bills. A phantom all placement t0o give Houston a first down which the league didn’t review, a helmet hit on Josh Allen, Houston running a 3rd down play after the clock expired and a blind side hit that made no sense. How can the league let this happen in a playoff game??

  94. So instead of flipping a coin, and letting the visitors call it. Just give the home team the ball first. They earned it by having the higher seed.

  95. You know, it’s funny to me that this urgency/outrage about the “unfairness” of overtime rules only comes up when some beloved or promising QB or team does not prevail.

    Recently the initial impetus was after 2009 after the (Bounty Hunting/Late Hitting/Knee destroying) Saints beat Brett Favre in overtime.

    Then last year when Mahomes didn’t touch the ball.
    Now again because Saint Drew didn’t get a chance.

    I know there are not a LOT of playoff games that go to overtime, but nobody seems to care if it’s a team or a player they don’t think “deserved” to be there.

    Riddle me this batman… What would the NFL fandom and critics be saying if it was Minny who never got the chance? Would ANYONE care that Cousins “never touched the ball”?

    My bet is they would NOT care. They would have been reasoning “It wouldn’t have mattered anyway, he’s just a choke. The Viking should have “Just played defense.”

  96. The two point shootout idea is as dumb as it gets.Does anyone like the shootout in hockey? A football game should be decided by two teams playing football under the same circumstances the first sixty minutes were played.I like the rules they have now that result in the team that wins the toss winning 55% of the time. Let’s not go crazy trying to legislate a perfect system.

  97. Stop with this changing of the overtime rules! It’s fine as it is. The other team has a chance to get the ball already, just keep the other team to a field goal or a punt and you can get the ball back. If you can’t stop them, then you don’t deserve to win. The game is long enough already.

  98. “Just wondering if New Orleans won the toss and took the opening possesion in for a TD if this article would have even been posted.”
    ===========

    Yes, because “someone” is a Vikings fan.

    The real reason for this proposal is money, ego, and glory.

  99. Ten minute overtime. No sudden death. Play till the clock runs out. If still tied after 10, then a 2nd qtr of OT will be sudden death. Can be the same for RS or playoff games.

  100. fmc651 says:
    January 7, 2020 at 12:52 am
    The Vikings lost in OT by a FG never saw the ball nobody said a word. Now they have to score a TD.And PFT is saying both teams need to get the ball.

    ________________________

    They changed the rule after/because of that game….

  101. No matter how much Florio wants to try…..you can’t controversy-proof sports.

    And why would we want to??
    Part of the fun and experience is talking about this stuff. You can’t legislate all controversy out of the game.

  102. The rule was already tweaked to TRY to make it a bit more fair, but you have to wonder if it really did make it more fair. A team can STILL essentially win the same was as “Sudden Death” by scoring a TD. The current OT rules are really kind of “Semi Sudden Death.”

    I don’t really advocate changing it (Sudden Death was fine with me) but if we really DO want both teams to have a true “chance” I think it does argue that you need to allow BOTH teams to possess the ball REGARDLESS of whether or not the first score is a TD.

    If they MATCH TDs, then it’s Sudden Death.

  103. I am in the “play defense!” camp. However, if they are determined to give both teams the ball even if first team gets a touchdown, I think it needs to be mandatory that the second team goes for two. This way their is a guaranteed winner or loser then, not drawing it out another potential half an hour waiting for next score wins.

  104. codylaws says:
    January 7, 2020 at 8:33 am

    All you got to do is stop your opponent. If you can’t then too bad.

    *************************************
    I’m not advocating changing rules. But this argument seems to miss the point of the people who argue it is unfair.

    The point this misses is that the team that winds the toss and scores never themselves had to even TRY to “STOP THEIR OPPONENT.” What is so hard to understand about that?

    Again, I’m not advocating either way, but your argument is weak and doesn’t in any way address the argument being presented.

  105. Or…the Saints could have managed the clock better at the end of the game and scored a TD to win. Or, they could have stopped a 43 yard bomb in OT.

    The game has already been changed because the Saints were unfairly treated. How many more times are necessary before a playoff win can be guaranteed for them??

    Sometimes games end.

  106. wnstonchill says:
    January 7, 2020 at 6:43 am
    I’ve been saying this from day one! A coin flip should not influence the outcome of a game! What’s so hard to understand about this?? I should be on the rules committee. I’m ions ahead of these people!
    ————–
    The winner of the coin toss wins the game somewhere between 52% and 53% of the time… Obviously, the coin toss does little determine the outcome.

  107. OT just use kickers. Start at 35 yards and add 5 yards each kick until 50 yards, then add 1 yard per kick until there’s a winner.

  108. 2ruefan says:
    January 7, 2020 at 9:13 am
    @mikethevike11
    Unless he was talking about the 1998 Team Mike.

    And in that case it’s true. Nobody ever complained about that one.

    _______________________

    Fair point.
    Too many OT losses to keep track of…

  109. January 7, 2020 at 9:24 am

    wnstonchill says:
    January 7, 2020 at 6:43 am
    I’ve been saying this from day one! A coin flip should not influence the outcome of a game! What’s so hard to understand about this?? I should be on the rules committee. I’m ions ahead of these people!
    ————–
    The winner of the coin toss wins the game somewhere between 52% and 53% of the time… Obviously, the coin toss does little determine the outcome.

    *****************************************************

    He makes a good point.

    Also, just one question Winston… Did you GAIN or LOSE an electron? Just wondering…

  110. toooverbearing says:
    January 6, 2020 at 11:47 pm
    Simple: possession, down and distance at the end of regulation is the possession, down and distance to start OT. Play to sudden death.

    No kickoffs. No coin flips. No extra possessions or complicated rules.

    Is it fair? Perfectly fair. Possession, down and distance was earned and both teams got an arbitrary kickoff (beginning and half) which cancel each other out.
    ———————————————————————-

    This is the best idea I’ve seen. In essence, the game continues as is in OT and the next score is a walk off win. Eliminating the OT coin toss means neither team gains/loses any advantage they had earned in regulation. Perfect solution.

  111. No second coin flip. No extra periods. No extra time outs. When the clock runs out, just keep playing until a team scores.

  112. Please stop with this asinine concept. It is utterly and totally unneeded.

    Plus, if you change it, what happens when the team everyone wants to win loses even in the changed rules? You’ll want to change them again no doubt so everyone gets the ball twice instead of at least once, ad nausea

    Enough. Its absolutely fine as is.

  113. Excellent concept and fair to both sides.
    each team has to play both offense and defense.
    I would also be ok with an extra 15 minute overtime period instead…THEN go to the current sudden Death format…

    Read some of the comments on this thread…wow…

  114. You are 1000x wrong on this. A team that scores a TD first in overtime is essentially doing it with 3 downs, whereas a team that got the ball 2nd AFTER a touchdown was scored against them would in essence have 4 downs, and an advantage in comparison.

    Play some defense. So tired of new rules to justify these losers, particularly Sean Payton. They got the ball first against the Rams in the NFC Championship two years ago, how’d that work out for them?

  115. OK here is the solution, skip the season and the playoffs, every team gets a Superbowl Trophy and then no one will sit and cry about how they got jobbed by the rules and the refs.
    Little Baby League LBL.

  116. Only people who want an OT rule change are Saints fans and every analyst who picked the Saints.

  117. Defenses are tired after 4 quarters. Telling them to play some defense is easier said than done. I prefer a kick off which is 100% fair but failing that, just have two 5 minute OT periods. Each side gets to pick a kick or receive just like the 2 halves. No sudden death.

  118. Roger Foley says:
    January 7, 2020 at 8:48 am
    The two point shootout idea is as dumb as it gets.Does anyone like the shootout in hockey? A football game should be decided by two teams playing football under the same circumstances the first sixty minutes were played.I like the rules they have now that result in the team that wins the toss winning 55% of the time. Let’s not go crazy trying to legislate a perfect system.

    ________________________

    The shootout in hockey was fun for the first few times. Now it’s just stupid. I do like the 3 on 3 overtime though.

  119. It blows me away the horrific ideas that some believe would be an improvement. A 2-point shootout? Really? I can see somebody saying that each team needs to be guaranteed a possession but where do you go from “regular football” to thinking that a 2-point shootout would be a preferred method?

  120. I would like to see the randomness of the coin toss taken out of it. I think the OT rules should stay the same but the Home team gets to decide who gets the ball first. That would give the home team a true home field advantage. It might encourage the visiting team to be more aggressive towards the end of regulation knowing that they most likely won’t get the ball first in OT.

  121. The ONLY thing I would change would be to eliminate the OT coin toss and give the choice to the home team.

  122. Since it is obvious that the pundits don’t believe in playing defense and giving passes to coaches like Andy Reid who completely neglect the defense then start crying because they lost the coin toss as even a average offense scores easily on Andy’s D. Maybe its time to do away with OT and make the owner, GM’s and head coaches fight it out in a cage match. It would be TV gold to see Virginia Halas McCaskey kick Jerry in balls.

  123. Leave the rules alone. Focus more on the objective of trying to win the game in regulation and using strategy during those 60 minutes in regulation. More 2 point conversion attempts, more 4th down attempts, fake punts, fake FG’s, putting more emphasis on field position or playing defense.

    There are many other ways to approach this issue rather than trying to fix something that is not broken.

    Both the Chiefs (2019) and Saints (2020) will tell you they had opportunities to win those playoff games in regulation.

  124. Teams get equal possessions until one team has more points than the other,
    but NO FIELD GOALS allowed.

  125. Jesus Christ what a terrible idea! If they change overtime any more than they already have then I will become an XFL fan. I mean come on, read the comments in this thread. There is almost nobody in favor of “mAkInG oVeRtImE mOrE fAiR.” The game is being ruined by all these rule changes

  126. I see some people here are not impressed with the 2-point shootout adopted by the XFL, in fact some have even been so bold as to besmirch and ridicule the notion. I’m surprised because if you read the article then you will know this is a PFT idea. So how can anyone object?

  127. Both teams should have to play offense and defense if the score is tied at the end of regulation of a postseason game.
    ——————————————————-
    Yes! Thank you!!! The better all around TEAM should win. Not sure why so many people disagree with this.

  128. How about the defense has to play offense and the offense has to play defense during the overtime?

    There, I can come up with stupid rules, too.

  129. Play true sudden death. Why have a coin flip and kickoff at all???? At the end of the 4th if the game is tied, just switch sides and pick the game up right where it left off at the end of the 4th and next team scores wins. SIMPLE!!!!!!!!

  130. As Herm famously said, you play to win the game. Teams have four quarter to outscore their opponent.
    Saints played for OT at the end of that game, running the clock down to kick a tying field goal rather than aggressively trying to win it when they had a chance. They actively chose to leave their fate in the hands of a coin toss and Kirk Cousins (not necessarily bad at the time). When you make that decision you live with the outcome.

  131. Overtime rules are fine and fair now.

    It’s one thing to win the toss, drive 40 yards, kick a FG and win. That wasn’t really fair.

    But to drive 75 yards for a touchdown, that gives a defense a fair shot at stopping them and getting a shot for their team.

    And considering way less than half of all drives end in touchdowns, it’s no lay-up to get a TD. So, doing so on the first drive in OT should be rewarded with a win.

  132. For the people who are against a team being able to get the ball first and end overtime with a TD, possession isn’t everything. Field position counts. Imagine a scenario in which the kickoff goes into the end zone. Play starts at the 25.

    Who has the scoring advantage at that point. From what I have read, the answer is nobody. In addition, the offense is unlikely to be able to go the length of the field for a TD. If it does, the defense is at fault for not stopping it.

    I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I get tired of people acting as if possession is all that matters. Would you take the ball at the five to start overtime or would you rather give the other team the ball at its five?

  133. any team has a chance to be the aggressor in regulation…wanna win the game? go for it on 4th downs, go for 2 after a TD….then you don’t have to worry about a coin toss

  134. I don’t get the “unfair” logic when it comes to a coin toss. It’s literally a 50/50 chance.

  135. I disagree. Football has 4 quarters, not 5. Overtime shouldn’t be a reward for teams not being able to get it done in regulation – it *should* be dangerous.

    If you give teams more and more chances to win, it drains the meaning from regulation.

    I see OT as almost a form of punishment. The prospect of “sudden death” is exciting! It’s drama. It ratchets up the tension.

    Most importantly, it’s FUN. This is televised entertainment. Choose fun over some stuffy notion of “fair”. Fair is having 60 minutes to score more points than the other team.

  136. I am getting tired of the Saints influencing the rules in the NFL. Every time they lose people start talking about rule changes. It’s ridiculous! They need to play better football the whole game! Not wait for some controversial call to happen so they can win the game. They just need to shut up and play and when they lose shut up and go home!

  137. pocketcow
    LOL cow…
    What EXACTLY do you NOT understand about a playoff game needing a winner?
    Pretty much everyone here with a functional pre-frontal cortex understood the discussion was in context of PLAYOFF games.

    They cannot “end in a tie.”

    I don’t think anybody cares about how they end in regulation nor was anyone talking about it.

  138. I still like my idea of giving each team 2 minutes in the red zone to score as many points as possible. No timeouts, booth reviews only, standard two minute drill time rules. Regular season a tie ties here otherwise in the playoffs and in the unlikely event that both teams score the same points sudden death rules apply for a 15 minute period. It removes the coin toss having so much influence on the game and allows the team that does win the toss to put either their hot defense or hot offense on the field first making for more entertaining strategy.

  139. Just change games. Make it a rugby scrum at the 50. First team to make it to the end zone using rugby rules wins. (no, this isn’t an actual suggestion — just adding to the absurdity)

  140. Florio is right that the overtime rules need tweaking. He could not be more wrong with his ridiculous simultaneous 2 point conversions at either end of the field and some other asinine recommendations.

  141. Here’s an idea. Home team gets to spot the ball anywhere on the field, then the visiting team gets to decide if they want to play offense of defense.

  142. What’s funny is the Saints got the ball first in last year’s championship game against the Rams. Drew Brees threw a pick and the Rams won the game. Everyone cried about the no-call on the obvious PI as the reason they lost and now we have the terrible PI challenge that has been a complete disaster. If winning the toss was basically a guarantee of victory, then we wouldn’t have PI challenges today since the Saints would have won anyway.

    Where does it end? If the other team then gets to try to score a TD and does, because they get to go for it on 4th downs as they know they have no choice but to score a TD. And then the other team gets the ball back and scores again, is it fair to the team that started on defense first? By your logic it’s not!

    Just because teams recently have made great game-winning TD drives in OT doesn’t mean it’s easy to do. The rule is as good as it can be. I think you feel like a team has to earn the win by scoring a TD instead of just making a couple plays to get into field goal range as it used to be.

  143. wnstonchill says:
    January 7, 2020 at 6:43 am

    I’ve been saying this from day one! A coin flip should not influence the outcome of a game! What’s so hard to understand about this?? I should be on the rules committee. I’m ions ahead of these people!

    Wow you are absolutely correct. You are lightyears better than everyone else! We should all bow before our rightful king. After all, he does waste hours of his life on a football blog.

  144. Ditch the OT format altogether and have a shootout like they do in hockey, only with the kickers.
    Start with a 40-yard FG, and keep adding 5 yards until one of them misses.

  145. How about we do old-school XFL rules and make two players fight for the ball? And then each team should get 2 possessions, because what if they don’t score on the first one? Then everyone should be awarded a participation trophy. (Satire)

  146. kemp13 says:
    January 7, 2020 at 8:28 am
    Every sport – literally every sport – when a game ends in a tie, gives both sides opportunities to score and win.

    Except the NFL.

    Baseball? Check.
    Basketball? Check.
    Hockey? Check
    ###

    You just proved you know nothing about hockey.

    In OT, there is a faceoff at center ice. If your team gains control of the puck, skates down the ice and scores, the game is over.

    This could literally happen in 5 seconds with your opponent never touching the puck.

    The current NFL OT rules are just fine as is.

    I can’t believe you tried to compare the NFL to golf, soccer, lacrosse or tennis.

  147. They changed the rules for overtime when the Saints beat Vikings in ’09 because the crybaby Vikings didn’t get possession in OT, which they are still crying about. There is no room for any Vikings fan to say anything about the Saints wanting a fair shot.

  148. “They changed the rules for overtime when the Saints beat Vikings in ’09 because the crybaby Vikings didn’t get possession in OT, which they are still crying about. There is no room for any Vikings fan to say anything about the Saints wanting a fair shot.”
    ———————————————
    And your comment is EXACTLY why Saints fans have no room to cry about this outcome. It benefited you 10 years ago. Now you want to cry?? Please.

  149. How about this: If game is tied at end of regulation.

    Each team gets one point deducted for every penalty they had during the game.

    If still tied.

    The Ref will bring the Captains to the middle of the field for the coin toss. Winner of the coin toss gets the start for Rocks Paper Scissors.

    -Game Over

  150. Extra quarter with same rules. If still tied an extra QT. Let both teams have it as many times as they can who cares. But both teams should get a chance to have the ball.

  151. purpleppleater84 says:
    January 6, 2020 at 11:16 pm
    Whatever we can do to make it easier for the Saints.
    ————————
    Wake up, everyone.

    The reason we ended sudden death overtime is because after the 2009 NFC Championship Game, which the Vikings lost, the entire Vikings front office got into a big Waaaaaahmbulance and drove to Roger Goodell’s house and sobbed for ten hours straight, causing Goodell to change the overtime rules.

  152. Better team won the game, I don’t blame the Refs or the rules. But I laugh at the Vikings fans saying another rule change for the Saints, the Overtime rule was changed the first time because the Vikings lost in overtime to the Saints in the NFC championship game.

  153. Whatever needs to happen to give the Saints every opportunity to win and have do-overs should be done.
    – Signed Sean Payton and Saints fans.

  154. Why is it that the the most hardcore advocates for playing defense in OT are also the most hardcore advocates for one team’s defense never seeing the field in OT? That’s a bizarre contradiction.

  155. or just have a fg contest .. goes through its 3 points, hit the crossbar 4 points, either upright 5 points, bounce if off the upright and goes through 6 points … or just leave it the way it is.

  156. How about the Saint ALWAYS get the 1st overtime Ball, If they score they win, if they dont they flip a coin. If the Saints win good! If not, the other team has to score a touchdown, if they do, Saints get it back, if not not, then Saints get it again, repeat until Saints win

  157. It still needs to be, as evidenced by Sunday’s first-possession, walk-off touchdown from the Vikings in New Orleans.

    ————

    That big advantage didn’t help Brees last year when he threw an INT after getting the first possession in OT.

  158. Well if they do this, bare minimum, regular season they have to go back to 15 minute overtime. Keep it at 10, and if both teams score a TD, you’re going to have tie games all over the place.

  159. Disagree… like a couple of others have said, it would give the kicking team an advantage. Knowing they would have to score a TD, they would go for it on 4th down. No good.

  160. Let each team have one possession, then do a two point shootout. Then it will not matter who wins the flip and each team will have equal chance in overtime. What’s not to like?

  161. Just play an entire quarter of football. If still tied, play another. These guys are getting paid good money to play a game, and an extra 15 minutes of work or more won’t change that.

  162. They can play 1 8 minute overtime period to decide the winner. If the score is still tied after that, then it is sudden death. The next team that scores will win.

  163. ABSOLUTE BALDERDASH!
    Defense is 1/2 the game. If the coin comes up DEFENSE for you, then you darn well better be able to play that half of the game. Same applies for special teams. If you can’t stop a kickoff return for a touchdown, you don’t deserve a mulligan.

    I think Florio might be playing too much golf.

  164. Football is equally offense and defense. The defense has an equal opportunity to prevent a score as the offense has to score. Play defense if you don’t want to lose.

  165. That’s pretty silly of Mike to complain about this when in 2009 the Saints beat the Vikings in overtime on a field goal. Now you’re gonna complain that the rule change that resulted from THAT finally let the Vikings get even? They had to get a touchdown instead of just a field goal. Stop trying to change the game with all these dumb rule changes. Enough of the shoot out idea. This isn’t hockey.

  166. bam5239 says:
    January 7, 2020 at 11:17 am
    I still like my idea of giving each team 2 minutes in the red zone to score as many points as possible. No timeouts, booth reviews only, standard two minute drill time rules.

    ———–

    this may be the most stupid idea I have seen offered yet

  167. oldmanriver55 says:
    January 7, 2020 at 11:56 am
    How about this: If game is tied at end of regulation.

    Each team gets one point deducted for every penalty they had during the game.
    ————————
    I love this idea, actually.

  168. tinye67 says:
    January 7, 2020 at 11:43 am

    “They changed the rules for overtime when the Saints beat Vikings in ’09 because the crybaby Vikings didn’t get possession in OT, which they are still crying about. There is no room for any Vikings fan to say anything about the Saints wanting a fair shot.”
    ———————————————
    And your comment is EXACTLY why Saints fans have no room to cry about this outcome. It benefited you 10 years ago. Now you want to cry?? Please.

    —————————

    Not a Saints fan just an unbiased observation…you Vikings fans are the whiniest crybaby fans I’ve ever seen.

  169. The defense was unable to stop the opposing offense from getting into the end zone on a 75 yard drive in OT? Whatever shall we do?

  170. Don’t change it because of the crybaby Saints, the worst fanbase in football. Change it because as in last year’s Pats/Chiefs game. Imagine after the Pats scored in OT, Mahomes drove them down the field and scored a TD. Then because their defense couldn’t stop the Pats, they chose to go for two. Plays up the suspense a little more

  171. Unless your going to change to a full quarter or half, just stop with this non sense..Giving the ball to both teams without some huge change would highly benefit whoever gets the ball 2nd…Second team would call game different knowing they have 4 downs

  172. Ummmmmm just play an entire overtime quarter and so on ….. it works in the NBA ( yeah it’s shorter ) or MLB …. no NHL example cuz one goal ….. well is all you need

  173. All you guys yelling “just play defense” are missing the point. This isn’t 1976 or 2006 for that matter. The rules have SUBSTANTIALLY changed over the years to highly favor the OFFENSE, which means that a random coin toss in OT will be a huge benefit to the lucky team.

    Case in point – you have 4000 yard passers with 100+ ratings that used to be a rarity, but even pedestrian QBs can do this now. It’s an offensive game, and no mere coin flip should give any one team 1 possession and out benefit.

    If this were 30 years ago when Offenses and Defenses had level playing fields (where QBs could be hit, ticky-tack PI’s weren’t called, and WRs could be laid out, then yes, the “just play defense” would be a valid argument. But in today’s pass-happy, offensive-slanted game, that’s just not the case.

  174. I’m putting two ideas posted above together – thanks, guys.

    Keep the rules the same except the home team always chooses to elect or receive in OT. The random coin flip is eliminated and although the home team does gain a marginal advantage, home field advantage is an accepted norm in sports. This tweak also supports the priority of gaining homefield advantage for the playoff games, which are probably the only OT games that folks really gripe about.

  175. I have a better idea, instead of changing the rules just pick the best (or worst) team in the league, clone all 53 players 32 times. Then wrap the original players in bubble wrap so they don’t get hurt and keep them somewhere safe. Then the 32 teams of clones can just play each other, they won’t even need pads and helmets. If players get injured, tough luck; if they get killed, just clone them again and send them back out to play. Look at all the problems that would solve. Player safety would be irrelevant, just clone a new one. That would certainly solve parity and cap issues, every team has the same players.

  176. No, NFL has a very good balance of fairness. Field goal other team gets a chance to match. touchdown or safety they win. New Orleans failed as a defensive unit so they lost the game everyone forgets there is 2 sides of the ball. If you really want to have some fun go look at all the possessions this year and take the % that end in a touchdown i bet its not over 50%.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.