So, 2022, Pat Mahomes and Josh Allen in a shootout, overtime ends before Josh Allen gets to touch the ball.
Basically a repeat of what Tom Brady did to Pat Mahomes in 2019.

That doesn't seem fair to most people.

Do you think "both sides get the ball at least once" would actually satisfy people? Do you want that?  If both teams do the same thing in their first possession, it just goes to sudden death anyway, with the same big advantage to the team that won the toss, so does it even fix anything?

It feels like a baby step to college football rules.  Do you want to just go to college football rules?

Sportswriters seem big on this whole "spot and choose" concept where teams auction for who goes first.  Seems to put too much on the coach and too much math for the average fan.  It would be a big change.  What do you think?

What if we said, if a playoff game is tied at the end of regulation, just play the next down until someone scores? Maybe shorten the play clock to increase the excitement.  That's a big change too, but easier to explain.  

What if we made a much smaller change.  One coin flip per game.  If you received the second half kickoff, you kick to start OT.  The end.  If the Bills knew that KC would get the ball at the start of OT, maybe they go for 2 on their last TD, so they go up by 4. Maybe they try harder to run the clock out.

I think the last idea actually solves the fairness problem on its own.  We already know there's a slight advantage to having the ball first in the second half, this change would balance it out.  What do you think?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The overtime rules are right where they need to be. The old rules allowed a team to win the coin toss and only have to move in to field goal range to likely win the game. Too easy. The rule as it stands is the perfect amount of equal opportunity and limits to how much time the league wants to spend in overtime while citing player safety as a major concern. Defense is part of the game. If you want the ball back, hold them to a field goal or get a stop. The advantage of losing the coin flip (and there is one) is that if you are able to get a stop, you only need to now get in field goal range to win or if you hold your opponent to a field goal you can now end the game with a TD.

Also, there were a couple of things they could have done differently with 13 seconds left on the clock that would have won them the game. They assumed the game was over (as most did) and it wasn't and it bit them in the [BLEEP]. Lets not flip the table over now because they lost. They can blame themselves for that.

---

Rules are just fine

---

https://twitter.com/LRiddickESPN/status/...2512776193

---

I don't really mind the rules as is.

I would also be good with a straight up 8 minute OT period. No sudden death.
If that ends in a tie, go to a "penalty kick" type of ending with field goals from 50 yards.
It is FOOTball after all, right?
Would make for a fun new strategy adjustment in acquiring stud kickers in the offseason.

---

https://twitter.com/LRiddickESPN/status/...2512776193

Would you eat a pie that was 21.5% feces?

---

I don't really mind the rules as is.

I would also be good with a straight up 8 minute OT period. No sudden death.
If that ends in a tie, go to a "penalty kick" type of ending with field goals from 50 yards.
It is FOOTball after all, right? 
Would make for a fun new strategy adjustment in acquiring stud kickers in the offseason.

It's not hard to hold the ball for 8 minutes with normal timing rules.  I'd be in favor of that if they shortened the play clock to 25 or 30 seconds. If we're trying to make sure both QBs get a chance, let's make sure.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The overtime rules are right where they need to be.  The old rules allowed a team to win the coin toss and only have to move in to field goal range to likely win the game.  Too easy.  The rule as it stands is the perfect amount of equal opportunity and limits to how much time the league wants to spend in overtime while citing player safety as a major concern.  Defense is part of the game.  If you want the ball back, hold them to a field goal or get a stop.  The advantage of losing the coin flip (and there is one) is that if you are able to get a stop, you only need to now get in field goal range to win or if you hold your opponent to a field goal you can now end the game with a TD.

Also, there were a couple of things they could have done differently with 13 seconds left on the clock that would have won them the game.  They assumed the game was over (as most did) and it wasn't and it bit them in the [BLEEP].  Lets not flip the table over now because they lost.  They can blame themselves for that.

Advantage is the wrong word.  What you described is an upside to the scenario, but it's not good enough to cancel the downside.  No sane coach would defer under the current overtime rules.  There's no advantage. The math says the team that wins the OT coin toss in the NFL wins the game 53% of the time, and lose 47% of the time.  That's a 6% spread.  A coach increases his chance of winning 6% if he gets the ball first in OT.  No coach turns that down no matter how much he likes his defense.  
For comparison, winning the coin toss in college OT only increases your chance of winning by about 0.5%

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The overtime rules are right where they need to be.  The old rules allowed a team to win the coin toss and only have to move in to field goal range to likely win the game.  Too easy.  The rule as it stands is the perfect amount of equal opportunity and limits to how much time the league wants to spend in overtime while citing player safety as a major concern.  Defense is part of the game.  If you want the ball back, hold them to a field goal or get a stop.  The advantage of losing the coin flip (and there is one) is that if you are able to get a stop, you only need to now get in field goal range to win or if you hold your opponent to a field goal you can now end the game with a TD.

Also, there were a couple of things they could have done differently with 13 seconds left on the clock that would have won them the game.  They assumed the game was over (as most did) and it wasn't and it bit them in the [BLEEP].  Lets not flip the table over now because they lost.  They can blame themselves for that.

Advantage is the wrong word.  What you described is an upside to the scenario, but it's not good enough to cancel the downside.  No sane coach would defer under the current overtime rules.  There's no advantage. The math says the team that wins the OT coin toss in the NFL wins the game 53% of the time, and lose 47% of the time.  That's a 6% spread.  A coach increases his chance of winning 6% if he gets the ball first in OT.  No coach turns that down no matter how much he likes his defense.  
For comparison, winning the coin toss in college OT only increases your chance of winning by about 0.5%

I don't care for the college OT rules.  It significantly lessens the effect of having a really good defense by placing the opposing team well within field goal range AND you have the possibility of games that go into 7 overtimes which is ridiculous.  Offenses in this league have enough advantages.  Play defense.  It still matters.  Or squib the kick with 13 seconds remaining.  We don't need to hold up the example of a team giving the game away through poor decisions on special teams and defense as an example to change rules that are working just fine.

---

So, 2022, Pat Mahomes and Josh Allen in a shootout, overtime ends before Josh Allen gets to touch the ball.
Basically a repeat of what Tom Brady did to Pat Mahomes in 2019.

That doesn't seem fair to most people.

Do you think "both sides get the ball at least once" would actually satisfy people? Do you want that?  If both teams do the same thing in their first possession, it just goes to sudden death anyway, with the same big advantage to the team that won the toss, so does it even fix anything?

It feels like a baby step to college football rules.  Do you want to just go to college football rules?

Sportswriters seem big on this whole "spot and choose" concept where teams auction for who goes first.  Seems to put too much on the coach and too much math for the average fan.  It would be a big change.  What do you think?

What if we said, if a playoff game is tied at the end of regulation, just play the next down until someone scores? Maybe shorten the play clock to increase the excitement.  That's a big change too, but easier to explain.  

What if we made a much smaller change.  One coin flip per game.  If you received the second half kickoff, you kick to start OT.  The end.  If the Bills knew that KC would get the ball at the start of OT, maybe they go for 2 on their last TD, so they go up by 4. Maybe they try harder to run the clock out.

I think the last idea actually solves the fairness problem on its own.  We already know there's a slight advantage to having the ball first in the second half, this change would balance it out.  What do you think?

I say play defense and no rules need to be changed....Unless we just go nba and most points win at the end.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

---

Season Tix, Section 409

2023 and still counting.....SB will finally be ours soon enough.
TLaw aka 'the prince that was promised' supporter.

A couple things or so...

I absolutely hate college overtime. If I'm watching a game that goes to overtime, I typically turn it off. It is horrid that a 14-14 slugfest could end up a 37-35 shootout after overtime... gross.

I believe the current overtime rules are just fine, although it annoys me they shortened it to 10 minutes for regular season games. The NFL has been continually looking for ways to shorten the game for decades, all the while raising the crap out of ticket prices and stadium vending prices. We continue to pay more for less.

Mikesez, that 21% analogy just might be the worst analogy in the history of analogies. yuk!

---

A couple things or so...

I absolutely hate college overtime.  If I'm watching a game that goes to overtime, I typically turn it off.  It is horrid that a 14-14 slugfest could end up a 37-35 shootout after overtime... gross.

I believe the current overtime rules are just fine, although it annoys me they shortened it to 10 minutes for regular season games.  The NFL has been continually looking for ways to shorten the game for decades, all the while raising the crap out of ticket prices and stadium vending prices.  We continue to pay more for less.

Mikesez, that 21% analogy just might be the worst analogy in the history of analogies.  yuk!

The 10 minute overtime during the regular season is fine.  It should be enough time for 3 or more possessions (FG, FG and then sudden death) if necessary unless a team has the ability and determination to run clock out and if so kudos to them for being able to impose their will on the other team.  Alternatively, I'd be ok with overtime being removed completely during the regular season which would make for more interesting game ending scenarios and coaching decisions (do you kick the extra point for the tie or go for 2 for the win?), but that's probably not happening.  The league likes overtime but they also like to feign some modicum of concern for player safety which is why they don't want games going on unnecessarily long when a fair outcome could be determined sooner with proper rules like the ones they have now.  10 minutes kinda puts a little pressure on the 2nd or 3rd possession to be in hurry up mode where 15 they probably generally wouldn't be.

Ties are ok and somewhat interesting especially in a long 17 game season.  The Steelers tie helped put them in the playoffs vs. what might have been a loss and missing the playoffs.  A contemplated and almost realized tie in the Chargers/Raiders game would have put the Steelers back on the couch.  I'm ok with the added strategy around record managment with games being able to end in a tie for teams.

---

A couple things or so...

I absolutely hate college overtime.  If I'm watching a game that goes to overtime, I typically turn it off.  It is horrid that a 14-14 slugfest could end up a 37-35 shootout after overtime... gross.

I believe the current overtime rules are just fine, although it annoys me they shortened it to 10 minutes for regular season games.  The NFL has been continually looking for ways to shorten the game for decades, all the while raising the crap out of ticket prices and stadium vending prices.  We continue to pay more for less.

Mikesez, that 21% analogy just might be the worst analogy in the history of analogies.  yuk!

I'm just saying, it's pretty poopy when a coin flip influences the outcome of an athletic contest!

---

A couple things or so...

I absolutely hate college overtime.  If I'm watching a game that goes to overtime, I typically turn it off.  It is horrid that a 14-14 slugfest could end up a 37-35 shootout after overtime... gross.

I believe the current overtime rules are just fine, although it annoys me they shortened it to 10 minutes for regular season games.  The NFL has been continually looking for ways to shorten the game for decades, all the while raising the crap out of ticket prices and stadium vending prices.  We continue to pay more for less.

Mikesez, that 21% analogy just might be the worst analogy in the history of analogies.  yuk!

The 10 minute overtime during the regular season is fine.  It should be enough time for 3 or more possessions (FG, FG and then sudden death) if necessary unless a team has the ability and determination to run clock out and if so kudos to them for being able to impose their will on the other team.  Alternatively, I'd be ok with overtime being removed completely during the regular season which would make for more interesting game ending scenarios and coaching decisions (do you kick the extra point for the tie or go for 2 for the win?), but that's probably not happening.  The league likes overtime but they also like to feign some modicum of concern for player safety which is why they don't want games going on unnecessarily long when a fair outcome could be determined sooner with proper rules like the ones they have now.  10 minutes kinda puts a little pressure on the 2nd or 3rd possession to be in hurry up mode where 15 they probably generally wouldn't be.

Ties are ok and somewhat interesting especially in a long 17 game season.  The Steelers tie helped put them in the playoffs vs. what might have been a loss and missing the playoffs.  A contemplated and almost realized tie in the Chargers/Raiders game would have put the Steelers back on the couch.  I'm ok with the added strategy around record managment with games being able to end in a tie for teams.

I agree, I would be fine with no overtime in the regular season.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The overtime rules are right where they need to be.  The old rules allowed a team to win the coin toss and only have to move in to field goal range to likely win the game.  Too easy.  The rule as it stands is the perfect amount of equal opportunity and limits to how much time the league wants to spend in overtime while citing player safety as a major concern.  Defense is part of the game.  If you want the ball back, hold them to a field goal or get a stop.  The advantage of losing the coin flip (and there is one) is that if you are able to get a stop, you only need to now get in field goal range to win or if you hold your opponent to a field goal you can now end the game with a TD.

Also, there were a couple of things they could have done differently with 13 seconds left on the clock that would have won them the game.  They assumed the game was over (as most did) and it wasn't and it bit them in the [BLEEP].  Lets not flip the table over now because they lost.  They can blame themselves for that.

Advantage is the wrong word.  What you described is an upside to the scenario, but it's not good enough to cancel the downside.  No sane coach would defer under the current overtime rules.  There's no advantage. The math says the team that wins the OT coin toss in the NFL wins the game 53% of the time, and lose 47% of the time.  That's a 6% spread.  A coach increases his chance of winning 6% if he gets the ball first in OT.  No coach turns that down no matter how much he likes his defense.  
For comparison, winning the coin toss in college OT only increases your chance of winning by about 0.5%

BTW, I wouldn't say 53% win percentage in overtime for the team winning the coin toss is worth scrapping the rules over.  I'd think the league is pretty happy with that number.  I'm not sure what the number in college is for win percentage of taking the ball first or second in overtime, but I'd bet it isn't 50% if that's what you're shooting for. 

Also, your stat isn't as relevant as Louis Riddick's.  If the team that wins the toss doesn't close it out on the first possession with a TD (which they aren't doing almost 80% of the time) then the other team got their offense an opportunity in overtime.

---

Bills messed up,and gave game away. you don't kick it deep into the end zone when a good qb is on other side. there was only  13 seconds in game,bills should've kicked a squib kick. 

that would've taken some time off the clock,and there wouldn't of been a need for overtime.

---

snowwolf titans owner in madden.

note titans owner means im undeafted againest them. 

Bills messed up,and gave game away. you don't kick it deep into the end zone when a good qb is on other side. there was only  13 seconds in game,bills should've kicked a squib kick. 

that would've taken some time off the clock,and there wouldn't of been a need for overtime.

This....the Bills really messed up and KC took full advantage.  There was so much they could have done to not lose that game.  A shame.

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

The rule should be that each team gets the ball and has to match the other teams score to win. So if they keep scoring, the other team gets to try also. The focus is too much on the offense now, so the team winning the coin toss is at a big advantage. That gives the defense a chance to play aggressive and try to win the game as opposed to sitting back and trying to stop a TD. Then if your defense is good and stops them, you are rewarded with a short field for a FG win.

---

A couple things or so...

I absolutely hate college overtime.  If I'm watching a game that goes to overtime, I typically turn it off.  It is horrid that a 14-14 slugfest could end up a 37-35 shootout after overtime... gross.

I believe the current overtime rules are just fine, although it annoys me they shortened it to 10 minutes for regular season games.  The NFL has been continually looking for ways to shorten the game for decades, all the while raising the crap out of ticket prices and stadium vending prices.  We continue to pay more for less.

Mikesez, that 21% analogy just might be the worst analogy in the history of analogies.  yuk!

I'm just saying, it's pretty poopy when a coin flip influences the outcome of an athletic contest!

---

The 10 minute overtime during the regular season is fine.  It should be enough time for 3 or more possessions (FG, FG and then sudden death) if necessary unless a team has the ability and determination to run clock out and if so kudos to them for being able to impose their will on the other team.  Alternatively, I'd be ok with overtime being removed completely during the regular season which would make for more interesting game ending scenarios and coaching decisions (do you kick the extra point for the tie or go for 2 for the win?), but that's probably not happening.  The league likes overtime but they also like to feign some modicum of concern for player safety which is why they don't want games going on unnecessarily long when a fair outcome could be determined sooner with proper rules like the ones they have now.  10 minutes kinda puts a little pressure on the 2nd or 3rd possession to be in hurry up mode where 15 they probably generally wouldn't be.

Ties are ok and somewhat interesting especially in a long 17 game season.  The Steelers tie helped put them in the playoffs vs. what might have been a loss and missing the playoffs.  A contemplated and almost realized tie in the Chargers/Raiders game would have put the Steelers back on the couch.  I'm ok with the added strategy around record managment with games being able to end in a tie for teams.

I agree, I would be fine with no overtime in the regular season.

Same here. Ties make positioning for the playoffs more interesting. And the Players Association would love it from the perspective of shortning the game. Vegas oddsmakers would probably hate it tho.

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

The rule should be that each team gets the ball and has to match the other teams score to win. So if they keep scoring, the other team gets to try also. The focus is too much on the offense now, so the team winning the coin toss is at a big advantage. That gives the defense a chance to play aggressive and try to win the game as opposed to sitting back and trying to stop a TD. Then if your defense is good and stops them, you are rewarded with a short field for a FG win.

That would take forever!

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I said above that getting the ball first in overtime only increases your win percentage by 6%.
That's true if you include both regular season and playoff games.
But if you only look at the postseason, the team that gets the ball first has won 10 out of 11 times.
That is absolutely ridiculous.
To have your chances of winning go from 10% to 90% based on one coin flip.
I still think eliminating the coin flip is a good solution. We could say that the team that received the second half kickoff has to kick to start overtime, or we could say that the team that scored last has to kick to start overtime. That way there wouldn't be these wild swings and who is most likely to win coming from a coin toss.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I like current overtime rules.

I've seen countless OT games where the first team to receive the ball either settles for a FG or gets stopped completely, giving the next team the ball anyway.

I'm also good with the 10min time. If the first team to possess the ball burns a lot of clock and settles for a FG,, then the second team to get the ball may have decisions to make scoring-wise if time is limited. It's cool with me.

College OT sucks, I have always hated that JMO.

An NFL defense (especially in a playoff game) should be accountable to force a FG or stop. GET A STOP.

---