Overtime System

[MKdave]

So there's been alot of debate about the pro overtime system. Here's my proposal.

I basically just came up with this overtime system, and you know it (like everything else I say) will be great:

Basically, overtime consists of one possesion. The winner of the coin toss can elect to play offense or defense. If they play offense and score, they win. If they play offense and don't score, they lose. Simple as that. I don't even think it should start with a kickoff. The drive should start from either the 20 or the 10.

I literally just thought of this so there's probably a whole bunch of flaws that I haven't had time to think of. What do you guys think?

[Lets_Go_Joe]

I'm sorry dave but this plan is worse then the one we have currently We complain about the coin toss basically deciding games, this would make that even worse, one possesion deciding the game is not whats needed.

I would much rather see a college football type OT system, but myabe starting from midfield as opposed to the 25. While it would ruin Defensive numbers because theyre almost in FG range already, but thats not the point. Both teams should be given a chance to win the game on the field, not the coin toss.

If the colts win the coin toss with the system your implementing, chances are they win because they can drive on anyone, whereas if we win the toss and play O and dont score, we dont even get a shot at defending the other teams O to get another shot? I just want to see both teams have a shot on the field, and win it by outperforming the other team like its supposed to be.

[MKdave]

[quote name='Lets_Go_Joe' post='92640' date='Nov 19 2008, 08:31 PM']If the colts win the coin toss with the system your implementing, chances are they win because they can drive on anyone, whereas if we win the toss and play O and dont score, we dont even get a shot at defending the other teams O to get another shot? I just want to see both teams have a shot on the field, and win it by outperforming the other team like its supposed to be.[/quote]

Not really. A 50/ 60 yard drive is impressive at any point in the game. It's not like they do that on most drives.

Also, the rule would be better for us. If we win the toss, we can put the D out there and they can shut a team down fairly often. But if the other team wins, they have to pick their poison. Do they give themselves ONE drive to score on the best D in the league, or do they take the game out of their own hands in the belief that they can stop our offense?

Also I disagree with your point about it putting more emphasis on the coin toss. It becomes way more of a tactical decision. Taking most of the luck of the coin toss out of the game. You don't just blindly recieve the ball anymore because you HAVE to score.
Just think about how AMAZINGLY tense that drive would be. With the college system, whether they score or not, it doesn't add tension because the other team's going to come out either way.

[Lets_Go_Joe]

Yeah it would be tense, but its not fair to the teams at all imo. Both teams nees a chance, because no matter what, with a one possesion OT, the coin toss is at least half the battle won already.

[MKdave]

[quote name='Lets_Go_Joe' post='92648' date='Nov 19 2008, 08:52 PM']Yeah it would be tense, but its not fair to the teams at all imo. Both teams nees a chance, because no matter what, with a one possesion OT, the coin toss is at least half the battle won already.[/quote]

I'm still not with you on that one. Who's won half the battle? They still have to go out and score/ stop the other team.

[PuRock]

[quote name='MKdave' post='92649' date='Nov 19 2008, 03:55 PM']I'm still not with you on that one. Who's won half the battle? They still have to go out and score/ stop the other team.[/quote]

I like what I heard on ESPN radio. Since the kicker's already decide overtime games. Let's make it more fun.

Let's let the kickers come out. And bet each other. One kicker will be like , I can kick it from 43 yards. Then the other would say 51 yards. The one kicker will decline to go higher. (Ofcourse this will be shown in it's entirety) So it's up to one kicker to make a 51 yard field goal. If he does they win, if he doesn't they lose.

We'd get some bold attempts.

[Devastat1on]

[quote name='PuRock' post='92654' date='Nov 19 2008, 04:13 PM']I like what I heard on ESPN radio. Since the kicker's already decide overtime games. Let's make it more fun.

Let's let the kickers come out. And bet each other. One kicker will be like , I can kick it from 43 yards. Then the other would say 51 yards. The one kicker will decline to go higher. (Ofcourse this will be shown in it's entirety) So it's up to one kicker to make a 51 yard field goal. If he does they win, if he doesn't they lose.

We'd get some bold attempts.[/quote]

Sounds good as long as we send out Haushka..

But on a more serious not, im for the college football overtime system.. But the only change i would want would be for the drives to start at the 50..

[PuRock]

[quote name='Devastat1on' post='92656' date='Nov 19 2008, 04:16 PM']Sounds good as long as we send out Haushka..

But on a more serious not, im for the college football overtime system.. But the only change i would want would be for the drives to start at the 50..[/quote]

I agree. I like the college system. But if we start at the 20 yard line. The game could go on forever with field goals. A team would need to earn field goal range.

[Sub-Zero]

in college you would be forced to go for a 2 point conversion after doubt OT i believe.

I may be in the minority, but I actually like the current overtime system we have in place.

[MKdave]

[quote name='PuRock' post='92654' date='Nov 19 2008, 09:13 PM']Let's let the kickers come out. And bet each other. One kicker will be like , I can kick it from 43 yards. Then the other would say 51 yards. The one kicker will decline to go higher. (Ofcourse this will be shown in it's entirety) So it's up to one kicker to make a 51 yard field goal. If he does they win, if he doesn't they lose.[/quote]

That'd be cool. I bet Sebsastian Janikowski could work himself a nice little raise if that rule came in.
No one can compete with him for leg strength.

[PuRock]

[quote name='MKdave' post='92662' date='Nov 19 2008, 04:28 PM']That'd be cool. I bet Sebsastian Janikowski could work himself a nice little raise if that rule came in.
No one can compete with him for leg strength.[/quote]

Yea but he could lose a lot of games, by going too ballsy, always knowing he can outkick. He still needs to make the kick.

[MKdave]

[quote name='PuRock' post='92668' date='Nov 19 2008, 09:36 PM']Yea but he could lose a lot of games, by going too ballsy.[/quote]

I doubt anyone would push him outside of his range. Unless it was a wily vet kicker, who knew full well that he would keep going higher. But that's obviously a risky tactic when you're saying you can kick a field goal well out of your range.

[thewarden86]

For OT ONLY, instead of a coin toss why not decide who gets the ball like the XFL did?

[PuRock]

[quote name='thewarden86' post='92672' date='Nov 19 2008, 05:06 PM']For OT ONLY, instead of a coin toss why not decide who gets the ball like the XFL did?[/quote]

I watched that whole season, but I forget how they did it, please enlighten us?

[thewarden86]

[quote name='PuRock' post='92673' date='Nov 19 2008, 05:08 PM']I watched that whole season, but I forget how they did it, please enlighten us?[/quote]


One guy from either team had to "go get " the ball from the center of the field..., faster/stronger guy's team got the ball.

[Shawn`]

That's very similar to the arena football overtime concepts. Which I like, instead of the game based on a coin toss, let both teams get an equal chance at offense.

[FerrariFan87]

A lot of people hate this, but I say the NFL needs to go to a college-style OT format whereby BOTH teams get a chance to win the game and it's not (for the most part) decided by a coin flip. I say, give each team the ball at the 40 or 45 yard line (the toss determining whether you want to go on offense or defense first). If you hold the opponent to nothing and you score a FG then obviously you win. If you hold them to a FG and you score a TD then you win, etc. etc. IF you do score a TD, a 2-pt conversion will be required every time. In my opinion, this will be the best way to settle OT, and will most likely take LESS time to complete!

[dan21236]

Why not just keep playing until someone scores ?

[bossman419]

College Football does it right. now if only they can get rid of that dumb BCS ****

[FerrariFan87]

[quote name='bossman419' post='93179' date='Nov 21 2008, 09:30 PM']College Football does it right. now if only they can get rid of that dumb BCS ****[/quote]

Agreed. They need a playoff system in place... yesterday

[CP`C-Pain`CP]

Its kinda like that in High School only if one team scores the other team has to score and if they dont score the other team wins... I think you start at the 20 or 25.

Only happened once this season so I dont remember how it works very well.

[RoflDogs]

Instead of just scoring, how bout they have to score a TD?

that would be alittle better

[JO_75]

[quote name='Devastat1on' post='92656' date='Nov 19 2008, 04:16 PM']Sounds good as long as we send out Haushka..

But on a more serious not, im for the college football overtime system.. But the only change i would want would be for the drives to start at the 50..[/quote]

I'm all for the college football system myself. The 50 yard idea is alright but as soon as a team gets in FG range they would kick a FG. I think they could go with the college system but heres what I think

- Each team gets a chance on offense, the offense would start on their own 20( The time on the clock would go from 15 to 10 minutes.)

- There CAN NOT be a FG made at all during both teams offensive drives. a TD must be scored and you Punt if you can't score the TD.

- After both teams had a chance on offense and defense, a FG can be made to win the game if its inside the goal line and its 4th and goal.

basically my system prevents a FG from winning the game