Should the OT rules be adjusted? (1 Viewer)

If you are talking about old sudden death rules then there was definitely something wrong. FG is too easy to score for the first team with the ball to be able to win with it.
I didn’t see anything wrong with it. The other team’s defense has a chance to stop them from getting into range. A team should be built with attrition in mind to prepare for games that run either side of the ball tired.
The team kicking still has to have a good enough kicker as well. These are parts of teams that shouldn’t be overlooked.
Both teams had 4 qtrs to prevent going to OT.

With PI happy refs and no legitimate replay of PI, it does make more sense for the current rules I see nothing wrong with sudden death still.

I’ve always been upset with the team for losing and not the rules.
 
I didn’t see anything wrong with it. The other team’s defense has a chance to stop them from getting into range. A team should be built with attrition in mind to prepare for games that run either side of the ball tired.
The team kicking still has to have a good enough kicker as well. These are parts of teams that shouldn’t be overlooked.
Both teams had 4 qtrs to prevent going to OT.

With PI happy refs and no legitimate replay of PI, it does make more sense for the current rules I see nothing wrong with sudden death still.

I’ve always been upset with the team for losing and not the rules.
I just cant see why stop at that then. Let's make so that the team that win the coin win the game if they can get a first down then. The other team defense would have a chance to stop them too if that's enough for a fair game.
 
No. Either win the toss and score a TD or lose the toss and play defense (stop 'em or force a FG). If you start extending games, players will get tired and that causes injuries.
 
I just cant see why stop at that then. Let's make so that the team that win the coin win the game if they can get a first down then. The other team defense would have a chance to stop them too if that's enough for a fair game.
 
It was pretty stupid how they changed the rule because Vikings fans cried about it. The way it is now is way too arbitrary and confusing “first to score wins! Oh, unless it’s a FG. But even then ONLY on the first possession.”
Or a safety also wins it on a first possession. So 2 points is enough to end it, but not 3. What kind of sense does that make where less points is better?
 
No. But if they are, the only way to do it is a 10 minute quarter, no sudden death. If it’s still tied after that, you keep playing in the playoffs.

But apparently, some people think that if the games go too long then they get too tired and the game isn't worth watching anymore. I don't buy it though. I've seen games last a lot longer, and the games were actually pretty great. But really, to me it doesn't have to go that much longer. Make it so both teams get the ball in the OT, then sudden death after that. Not really that complicated imo.
 
I don't think todays rule are unfair. If you stop your opponent you just need a field goal to win. It is very balanced and I feel both teams have equal chance to win. BUT it is very anticlimactic, especially in a game like today.

My vote would be for a simple set of rules: flip the coin to chose which team begins with the ball in OT then the team always have to score more points than the other team scored in the previous drive or they lose. The team with the ball in the first drive is not allowed to try the 2 pts conversion.

For example, if the team with the ball in the first drive score score a FG the team with the ball in the second drive would need to score a TD to win the game. They fail they lose the game.

The team with the ball in the current drive would lose immediately with a safety or turnover returned for TD since in this case the other team would not need anything to score more in their drive.
I actually like this. Pretty good suggestion. :9:
 
That is SO misleading. I guarantee you - like I would bet everything I own - that the Chiefs had MUCH higher odds of winning than 53% - after winning the coin toss. And it would've been much the same for the Bills.

The fact is, the current rules massively favor teams whose strength is the on the defensive side of the ball. Teams should not be penalized for having their strength on the other side of the ball. Offense is equally important.

It's not misleading. The goal of the overtime rules is to be fair in as many games as possible. If you start trying to make rules that are fair for particular team builds, you'll never reach the desired end state (which for the majority of teams has already been reached). In this game, the Chiefs scored touchdowns on 5 of their 11 drives. That's less than 50% chance on any given drive. If you want to argue late-game Mahomes is too overpowered for most defenses, changing the overtime rules isn't really going to change anything.

If the Bills thought they couldn't handle the odds of a coin toss in overtime, there was nothing stopping them from attempting a 2 point conversion after their last touchdown to take away the ability of a field goal tying the game.
 
It's not misleading. The goal of the overtime rules is to be fair in as many games as possible. If you start trying to make rules that are fair for particular team builds, you'll never reach the desired end state (which for the majority of teams has already been reached). In this game, the Chiefs scored touchdowns on 5 of their 11 drives. That's less than 50% chance on any given drive. If you want to argue late-game Mahomes is too overpowered for most defenses, changing the overtime rules isn't really going to change anything.

If the Bills thought they couldn't handle the odds of a coin toss in overtime, there was nothing stopping them from attempting a 2 point conversion after their last touchdown to take away the ability of a field goal tying the game.
Keep in mind both defenses were scoring almost at will late in the 4th quarter. The defenses were tired, as evidenced in the last 4 minutes of the game. It was pretty obvious whoever got the ball first in OT was going to have a massive advantage in this game.

Not all games are like that, but this made it glaringly obvious that it was highly likely the coin toss would determine the winner, and in this case, the results speak for itself.
 
I think they should, at the least, give the other team a chance to score. If anything, they should just have a shootout, start at the 5 and work your way back. It would definitely give the league more money like they want.
 
The biggest Thing I don’t like is that the regular season OT was reduced to 10 minutes. And the reason for that? “Player Safety”. Yeah ok. We’re worried about player safety but let’s add another full regular season game that the players have to play in and let’s have Thursday night games crewtig at least one short week for every team. But we’re worried about “player safety” so let’s reduce OT games to 10 minutes. What a load of BS.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom