The NFL had the right idea for the playoffs, but they need to go back to sudden death in the regular season. For the second time in two years, a game was tied because both kickers made a field goal attempt. The whole purpose of overtime is to break a tie so that the game has a winner and loser, but with the new rules on how it can end (not a field goal on the first drive) the NFL opened the door for a lot more ties. This is going to happen every year until they realize how stupid it is to keep playing after a successful field goal attempt. I don't want to read "first tie in Carolina Panthers history" again.
There is a silver lining to the tie today. It will make the season ending tie breakers in both the NFC and AFC less complex.
Quote:There is a silver lining to the tie today. It will make the season ending tie breakers in both the NFC and AFC less complex.
If the Bengals maintain control of the AFC North, the tie is irrelevant to them. Many people expect the Panthers to miss the playoffs. So I don't think it helps either team.
Quote:If the Bengals maintain control of the AFC North, the tie is irrelevant to them. Many people expect the Panthers to miss the playoffs. So I don't think it helps either team.
The AFC North currently is extremely close. The Bengals are only percentage points ahead of the Ravens. Both teams are 2 games over .500. The Browns are only 1/2 game out of 1st place and the Steelers are only 1 game out of 1st place.
Even if the Bengals end up winning the AFC North by more than the difference of today's tie, the tie could still be the difference in what seed they get in the AFC.
Right now, the Panthers have a winning record and the other 3 teams in the NFC South have losing records. It's a long season but at the very least the Panthers have as good a chance as any of the teams in the division to finish on top. Unless something changes in a substantial manner, the NFC South won't have a Wildcard playoff team this season. With Mike Smith in serious danger of losing his job if the Falcons have another losing season.
Of course it is possible at this point for Cincy to miss the playoffs by half a game. Marvin Lewis should call for a return of sudden death overtimes if that happens.
Regardless of playoff and draft pick implications, I see absolutely no reason it should be necessary to let both teams get the ball in overtime. If you let the other team score a field goal on its first drive, it is your fault for playing bad defense.
Quote:The NFL had the right idea for the playoffs, but they need to go back to sudden death in the regular season. For the second time in two years, a game was tied because both kickers made a field goal attempt. The whole purpose of overtime is to break a tie so that the game has a winner and loser, but with the new rules on how it can end (not a field goal on the first drive) the NFL opened the door for a lot more ties. This is going to happen every year until they realize how stupid it is to keep playing after a successful field goal attempt. I don't want to read "first tie in Carolina Panthers history" again.
You'll never have to hear "first tie in Carolina Panthers history" again. The next tie Carolina ties, it will be their 2nd.
Quote:You'll never have to hear "first tie in Carolina Panthers history" again. The next tie Carolina ties, it will be their 2nd.
You don't think they will talk about that historical fact sometime this season?
I assumed you meant at the end of the game.
Quote:I assumed you meant at the end of the game.
Fox reported it on the scrolling text at the bottom of the screen after the game.
What's wrong with ties? They have them all the time in Futbol.
Quote:What's wrong with ties? They have them all the time in futbol.
I have no problem with ties caused by both kickers missing attempts. My complaint is the Bengals had the game won, but were forced to settle for a tie because of this stupid rule that overtimes cannot end with a first drive field goal anymore. That totally defeats the purpose of having an overtime period.
Quote:Of course it is possible at this point for Cincy to miss the playoffs by half a game. Marvin Lewis should call for a return of sudden death overtimes if that happens.
Regardless of playoff and draft pick implications, I see absolutely no reason it should be necessary to let both teams get the ball in overtime. If you let the other team score a field goal on its first drive, it is your fault for playing bad defense.
If the Bengals miss the playoffs by half a game, unfortunately for Marvin Lewis calling for the return of the previous procedure probably isn't going to help him much.
I respect your opinion regarding the OT rules. It comes down to one's preference. Being that I'm old enough to remember the days before OT was implemented in the regular season and didn't mind ties in my youth, I'm comfortable with the outcome of most games that end in a tie. I really like the fact that it lessens the chances of a team not making the playoffs because of a tie breaking procedure at the end of the season.
Quote: If the Bengals miss the playoffs by half a game, unfortunately for Marvin Lewis calling for the return of the previous procedure probably isn't going to help him much.
I respect your opinion regarding the OT rules. It comes down to one's preference. Being that I'm old enough to remember the days before OT was implemented in the regular season and didn't mind ties in my youth, I'm comfortable with the outcome of most games that end in a tie. I really like the fact that it lessens the chances of a team not making the playoffs because of a tie breaking procedure at the end of the season.
When did the NFL invent sudden death overtime?
Quote:When did the NFL invent sudden death overtime?
In the regular season, 1974.
I'd like to see a "kick off" if overtime ends in a tie, kind of like a shootout in hockey and penalty kicks in soccer.
First kick is at the 20 yard line, second kick at the 25, third at the 30, and etc. They can move the ball to the left and right hash marks as well.
You know, something like that.
Quote:I have no problem with ties caused by both kickers missing attempts. My complaint is the Bengals had the game won, but were forced to settle for a tie because of this stupid rule that overtimes cannot end with a first drive field goal anymore. That totally defeats the purpose of having an overtime period.
Huh? The Bengals win the game if their kicker makes the chip shot field goal in the final seconds of the game.
Quote:Huh? The Bengals win the game if their kicker makes the chip shot field goal in the final seconds of the game.
After both kickers made a field goal attempt. The tie that forced overtime was 34, not 37.
Quote:I have no problem with ties caused by both kickers missing attempts. My complaint is the Bengals had the game won, but were forced to settle for a tie because of this stupid rule that overtimes cannot end with a first drive field goal anymore. That totally defeats the purpose of having an overtime period.
No. Just no. The OT rules change was made so that a "pass-happy offense biased" NFL would not decide games by a coin toss- check the statistics. You want to win the game?? Score a TD.
If you have to "settle" for a field goal then you just gave the other team a chance. The coaches and players wanted this.
And Cincy blew it by missing a chip shot at the end anyway. Nobody but themselves to blame...
Quote:No. Just no. The OT rules change was made so that a "pass-happy offense biased" NFL would not decide games by a coin toss- check the statistics. You want to win the game?? Score a TD.
If you have to "settle" for a field goal then you just gave the other team a chance. The coaches and players wanted this.
And Cincy blew it by missing a chip shot at the end anyway. Nobody but themselves to blame...
The few people on the competition committe and some other owners wanted it. Few coaches and no players get to vote on rule changes.
Mike Holmgren is on record saying he only supported doing this in the playoffs when the idea was proposed. At the time he was Seattle's head coach.
I have no problem with the idea to let both teams get the ball in the playoffs because there can't be a tie after 15 minutes.
Quote:The few people on the competition committe and some other owners wanted it. Few coaches and no players get to vote on rule changes.
Mike Holmgren is on record saying he only supported doing this in the playoffs when the idea was proposed. At the time he was Seattle's head coach.
I have no problem with the idea to let both teams get the ball in the playoffs because there can't be a tie after 15 minutes.
Got it
So everybody not named Mike Holmgren wanted this.
The 8 current representatives in the competition committee who represent all the current players, owners, and coaches wanted this rule change. They determined the old OT system was stupid- so they changed it.
Move on.org