Should OT rules be changed?

[LJpalmbeacher2]

I say each offense should get 1 possession....of it's still tied then the home team wins which is part of truly having a a Home Field Advantage....other HFA rules should also be considered 

[Lancer1]

I believe (especially in the postseason) that both teams should have a chance to possess the ball in overtime, regardless of the results of that first possession, barring a safety, defensive or special teams touchdown.  If Team A scores a touchdown,  they must then kick an extra point (or go for 2) and then Team B gets a chance to match it, or the opportunity to win with a 2 point conversion if Team A kicked the XP. If still tied at that point, then it’s sudden death and next score of any kind wins.

[Chrisaaron1023]

Meh.. my thoughts already are it's almost better to have the ball second. So let's say both teams get a chance.. the Chiefs fail on 3rd down and punt. Now the other team only has to kick a FG..

 

I don't know if I'm making sense. But mahomes scored first now the Bills know every single time is 4 down territory..  just keep it the same. It sucks, but at least having to score a TD is better then driving 50 yards then ending it with a FG

[Lancer1]

Crazy idea: each team picks 1 player, and those two have a footrace from one end zone to the other! 

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Lancer1 said:

Crazy idea: each team picks 1 player, and those two have a footrace from one end zone to the other! 

Bo Jackson vs Deion  . Both can run a 4.2 

[Myles]

3 hours ago, Chrisaaron1023 said:

Meh.. my thoughts already are it's almost better to have the ball second. So let's say both teams get a chance.. the Chiefs fail on 3rd down and punt. Now the other team only has to kick a FG..

 

I don't know if I'm making sense. But mahomes scored first now the Bills know every single time is 4 down territory..  just keep it the same. It sucks, but at least having to score a TD is better then driving 50 yards then ending it with a FG

I'm also fine leaving it like it is.  

 

The Bills blew it.   They were up with 13 seconds left and they let the Chiefs go down the field and score.   Then they let the Chiefs easily score a TD in OT.  They have themselves to blame, not the OT rules.  

[Dingus McGirt]

3 hours ago, Lancer1 said:

Crazy idea: each team picks 1 player, and those two have a footrace from one end zone to the other! 

Yes!  “The Freeze”

[waterdog]

5 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

How about this:

 

Offense scores touchdown on first OT possession = W for the offensive team

Offense scores FG = other team gets a possession to try and match or score TD.  After that next points win.

Offense scores 0 points on first OT possession = W for the defensive team.

 

This allows both teams a chance to secure the victory on the first possession instead of just the team that wins the coin flip (and presumably receives the ball).  Those of you saying "if the defense can't stop the other team from scoring a TD then they deserve to lose" should feel the same way about the offense if they can't score any points.  Right?

Not right for me.

Defenses wear out quicker than offenses, so big advantage to OT coin toss winner.

Why can't NFL try  NCAA OT, just for tournament games, or even just for the Super Bowl? (for weeks 1 through 18...no OT... they could just allow ties...so that network scheduling is undisturbed, for scheduled Oprah, or cooking shows, or whatever else that I never watch).

I

 

[shakedownstreet]

14 hours ago, Lancer1 said:

Crazy idea: each team picks 1 player, and those two have a footrace from one end zone to the other! 

 

How about break dancing contest

[RollerColt]

19 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

Chiefs fans, January 2019: The NFL has to change overtime rules! 

 

Chiefs fans, January 2022: Overtime rules are perfect the way they are! 

 

I'd like to see them go with the "5th quarter" idea others have suggested. Make it 10 minutes, and if the teams are still locked up after that, it goes to sudden death. 

 

With 10 minutes added to Chiefs-Bills that game would have ended up being 82-78 or something like that. 

 

I don't understand why it hasn't just been like this from the beginning. Shoot, they could even make it just 5 minutes. Practically every other sport does it. 

[coltsva]

17 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

How about this:

 

Offense scores touchdown on first OT possession = W for the offensive team

Offense scores FG = other team gets a possession to try and match or score TD.  After that next points win.

Offense scores 0 points on first OT possession = W for the defensive team.

 

This allows both teams a chance to secure the victory on the first possession instead of just the team that wins the coin flip (and presumably receives the ball).  Those of you saying "if the defense can't stop the other team from scoring a TD then they deserve to lose" should feel the same way about the offense if they can't score any points.  Right?

The bolded is really interesting. It actually forces a decision if you win the toss. 

 

I think the main issue is the coin toss part of it. So how about this:

 

Teams line up on their own 40 yard line. A jugs machine set up off the field at the 50 yard line throws the ball to the center circle and the team that recovers gets the ball at their own 25. (if you think I'm serious, you may be right. if you think I'm joking, you may be right too). 

[chad72]

19 hours ago, GoPats said:

 

Chiefs fans, January 2019: The NFL has to change overtime rules! 

 

Chiefs fans, January 2022: Overtime rules are perfect the way they are! 

 

I'd like to see them go with the "5th quarter" idea others have suggested. Make it 10 minutes, and if the teams are still locked up after that, it goes to sudden death. 

 

With 10 minutes added to Chiefs-Bills that game would have ended up being 82-78 or something like that. 

 

 

I can bet that if they wanted to change OT rules to keeping the OT time duration but both teams get a possession, regardless of what the first score is, The Chiefs' organization would get behind it because they have been on the other side of it too.

 

Like Josh Allen said, the Bills would be celebrating too if they were the one that got the TD in OT. The rules are what they are and everyone has to play by the same ones, regardless of whether they are changed or not. 

[dw49]

Another thought would be to play it by the college rule. I think the NFL would balk at that because a really prolonged game could lead to too many injuries. So how about the stipulation that if the game is still tied after each team has 2 possessions , that's how the game ends. What's so bad about a tie here and there ?

[King Colt]

My wife has the solution. Pick the team with the best looking quarterback, How can I not love her?

[jvan1973]

12 hours ago, dw49 said:

Another thought would be to play it by the college rule. I think the NFL would balk at that because a really prolonged game could lead to too many injuries. So how about the stipulation that if the game is still tied after each team has 2 possessions , that's how the game ends. What's so bad about a tie here and there ?

Can't have a tie in the playoffs 

[coltsva]

With rules constantly being reworked to favor the offense, and scoring having gone up significantly over the past 20 years, having a sudden death format, even with a TD, is outdated. 

 

My solution (apologies if this has been mentioned already):

Once each team has a possession it becomes sudden death.

In this scenario:

The Chiefs get a TD. They kick the XP to go up 7.

Buffalo gets the ball. They don't get a TD - Chiefs win.

They get a TD -maybe they go for 2 to win the game, knowing that if they kick the XP and tie the game, they have to kickoff to the Chiefs in a now sudden death format, and the Chiefs only needing a FG to win the game. 

 

This seems so simple and easy to put in place, and it gives the coin toss winner a decision to make:

1. Go on defense first, so you know what you need to score when you get the ball. 

2. Go on offense first, to give your defense a bit of a rest before having to go on the field.

 

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, coltsva said:

With rules constantly being reworked to favor the offense, and scoring having gone up significantly over the past 20 years, having a sudden death format, even with a TD, is outdated. 

 

My solution (apologies if this has been mentioned already):

Once each team has a possession it becomes sudden death.

In this scenario:

The Chiefs get a TD. They kick the XP to go up 7.

Buffalo gets the ball. They don't get a TD - Chiefs win.

They get a TD -maybe they go for 2 to win the game, knowing that if they kick the XP and tie the game, they have to kickoff to the Chiefs in a now sudden death format, and the Chiefs only needing a FG to win the game. 

 

This seems so simple and easy to put in place, and it gives the coin toss winner a decision to make:

1. Go on defense first, so you know what you need to score when you get the ball. 

2. Go on offense first, to give your defense a bit of a rest before having to go on the field.

 

 

Agree 100%

 

No point in prolonging it, otherwise we will end up with more 2 OT games after both teams have had a possession. No more excuses at that point. 1 possession each, AND THEN sudden death.

[dw49]

3 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

Can't have a tie in the playoffs 

 

 

I realize that . You would just then go by the college rule.

[rock8591]

On 1/24/2022 at 12:02 PM, rock8591 said:

If you allow a team to score a TD (not FG) in their very FIRST possession in OT, you have just provided enough proof that they deserve to win the game.

 

My previous post was from my phone so it was a bit short, I thought I needed to come back and elaborate more on my post.

 

Again for the current rules, the team that has first possession in overtime needs to score a TOUCHDOWN to win the game, not a field goal. I've heard arguments that leaving the entire game up to a coin flip is unfair, random, and arbitrary.

 

How "random" does the above scenario sound?

[TonyBungee]

Put both teams’ offense and defense on the field at the same time, on both 35 yard lines.   No clock, no down #s, no field goals.  Each team just starts on the other’s 35, and first team to get in the end zone wins.  
 

They’d never do it, but it would be entertaining!

[Chrisaaron1023]

Soo lets reopen this scab..

 

A week later should we still change the rules? Did anyone really think the Chiefs were magically going to wake up and drive the entire field and score a TD when their offense was straight doo doo water the whole 2nd half? Like seriously, the crowd went nuts like the chiefs were just gonna drive right up the field and score 6 no problem. Patrick Mahomes was trying to outdo his Superbowl self those last couple drives.. Chiefs probably shouldve kicked it and stopped the Bengals from scoring a TD which they had done. 

 

This is why this rule is fine IMO.. It seems like only a handful of times when the team just has a hot hand and scores a TD in over time. Its not like your defense has to make all the biggest stops just keep them from scoring a TD.. letting up a FG is fine. Because once you get that stop. It's all on the offense and they have 4 downs (in some cases) to score a FG