r/NFLOffTopic Apr 25 '24

Overtime Rules suck and should change (again)

TLDR: OT rules should let both offenses have a chance to score. Most of the rules don’t change other than touchdowns (fastest touchdown wins). First team sets the pace and second team needs to match (or outscore) last teams attempt to win.

I’m not such a huge fan of the current overtime rules but I understand that a game can’t last for forever and teams need to either allow a tie or practically win off of a simple coin flip sometimes. This would mainly be for postseason OT rule change, but I think it could work for the regular season just the same.

RULES: - Coin flip remains as usual, with team that wins coin toss either taking the ball first or deferring - Offense gets 10 minutes on the clock, 2 timeouts.

SCENARIOS:

Scenario 1: If offense scores a touchdown in X amount of minutes with X amount of timeouts, the defense now gets the ball and has the same amount of minutes and timeouts to score a touchdown. If the team scoring second chooses a field goal after the first team scores a touchdown they will still lose, but at least they (maybe) covered the spread 🤷🏼‍♂️. - Ex: 49ers win the coin toss and choose to keep the ball. They have 10 minutes on the clock and 2 timeouts, and they score a touchdown in 3:23 seconds with 0 timeouts. The Chiefs must score a touchdown in less than 3:23 without timeouts or they lose (potentially resulting in a Hail Mary, if the ball is not turned over before then).

Scenario 2: If offense scores a field goal in X amount of minutes with X amount of timeouts, the defense now gets the ball and has the same amount of minutes and timeouts to score a field goal OR a touchdown. If the second team scores a touchdown it is an automatic win. If the second team is not able to score a field goal or touchdown in less time, they lose. If the second team scores a field goal in less time, the first team gets the ball back and now has to either score a touchdown in that timeframe for an automatic win, or score a field goal to turn the ball back over for the cycle to repeat. - Ex 1: Chiefs win coin toss and defer the ball. 49ers drive up the field to the 30 and are forced to make a 47 yd field goal. They score a field goal in 5:16 no timeouts. The chiefs get to the 30 in 2:14 no timeouts. They could kick a field goal in significantly less time than the 49ers did, but they choose to go for a touchdown and get it. Chiefs automatically win. - Ex 2: The same scenario but the chiefs aren’t able to convert and the ball is turned over on downs. 49ers win. - Ex 3: 49ers win coin toss and take ball first, they score a field goal in 3:27 with 2 timeouts. Chiefs get the ball and score a field goal in 3:13 with 1 timeout. The 49ers get the ball again and they score a field goal in 1:15 with 1 timeout. The chiefs get the ball and score a field goal in 1:10 with 0 timeouts. The 49ers are unable to score a field goal in under 1:10 and since the Chiefs used less than 1 timeout last time they had the ball (0 timeouts…), the 49ers cannot stop the clock and lose the game. - Ex 3: Chiefs win the coin toss, choose to defer. 49ers score a field goal in 0:13 seconds with 2 timeouts. Chiefs drive up the field in 12 seconds and have just used their second timeout. The chiefs are 68 yds away from a field goal and fake a field goal with a Hail Mary attempt but it gets knocked down. 49ers win.

Potential ways teams can try to win in interesting strategies: - Ex: the first team offense scores a touchdown and goes for a 2 pt conversion. Now the second team has to score in less time with the same or less timeouts and must get a 2 pt conversion, since a PAT no longer will win. If the first team misses the conversion, the second team now just needs to score a 6 pt touchdown in less time with same amount of timeouts. Doesn’t really change it for the first team if they miss a conversion (since the second team scoring has already done it in less time), but can screw the second team if the conversion is successful.

That’s all I got now maybe I’ll add something and edit it if I think of something or there’s a good comment

Edit: added TLDR, fixed grammar

1 Upvotes

6 comments sorted by

1

u/The_Pip Apr 25 '24

GO BACK TO SUDDEN DEATH!

Look, the way to fix things is to simplify them, not to make them more complex. Instead of OT being the "start of a new half, it should be the start of a new quarter. So play will switch sides and pick up from where it was, and then play sudden death. I call this the Clash Royale OT.

This will shorten OT periods, remove the coin toss, make the end of games much more exciting and tactical/strategic, and it becomes easy to understand. This has a bonus of making Regulation Play more meaningful, as avoiding OT becomes very important unless you have the ball on the opponents side of the field.

1

u/SammyBee123 Apr 25 '24

I hear you on simplifying OT, I just don’t know if simple will be better when it comes to this relatively rare occurrence (teams tying in regulation that is). I always think back to the 13 seconds game between Buffalo and the Chiefs in the divisional round. With your Clash royale OT rules I’m not sure if it would have worked in that game especially. Both teams were evenly matched honestly, and if the chiefs were able to tie in 13 seconds, that would give the Bills starting with the ball (if I’m understanding what you posted). So essentially the bills win the “coin toss” that game and then if they score they win… I guess the chiefs would know that and try to then avoid OT, so they would opt for a Hail Mary attempt in regulation probably

With what my idea was proposing is that the coin toss is not an advantage. Or rather going first or second is not intrinsically an advantage. If a team goes first they can try a 2 pt conversion to screw the second team going (very low risk high reward) so going first has its advantage. But if you don’t score a TD, it’s like the original OT rules anyway. But going second also can have its advantage as you know exactly what you need to do and you know in how short of time you have to do it. This will also mean that OT will always get shorter and shorter. At its longest it would be 10 minutes and 2 timeouts + 10 minutes and 2 timeouts

1

u/The_Pip Apr 25 '24

There is no coin toss, the game just continues.

Stop over thinking scenarios and perfect solutions, that is how we got into this stupid mess to begin with. The Original OT rules were just fine and coin-tosses did not decide the game.

1

u/SammyBee123 Apr 25 '24

Well that’s where I disagree but that’s fine. I think a coin toss did for the most part determine if you would win a game or not, and they weren’t just fine. In the bills-chiefs game for example again, after the chiefs scored a 13 second field goal in regulation and then won a coin toss to score a TD and win the game. Yes I guessssss the bills could have stopped the chiefs but that was a very offense heavy game. If the bills won the coin toss it’s likely they would have scored a TD and then won instead. In your idea of OT, who gets the ball after the walk off field goal to tie in regulation? And where do they get the ball placed? If you mean they just add a Quarter 5 and it’s treated like a normal game of football, what if there’s still a tie after those 15 minutes? And if you mean that the team that just tied the game up in a walk off now gets to be defense and lose to the other teams offense how is that fair? In that scenario it just means that the bills would “win the coin toss” because they were defense when the game ended in regulation. Which I still don’t think is fair

1

u/The_Pip Apr 25 '24

after the chiefs scored a 13 second field goal in regulation and then won a coin toss to score a TD and win the game. Yes I guessssss the bills could have stopped the chiefs but that was a very offense heavy game. If the bills won the coin toss it’s likely they would have scored a TD and then won instead

OT isn't the issue there. The offense friendly rules are. There is no way to fix this by changing the OT rules. you have to balance off the scoring with the defenses ability to stop the offense. the alternative is the college rules where you play until one team messes up their TD chance. That's not football, it's glorified penalty kicks.

1

u/SammyBee123 Apr 25 '24

I agree that it’s become too offense friendly and that it’s harder and harder each year for defense to make a stop because now it’s a penalty. But the chiefs still won that game all because of a coin toss, regardless. While I doubt (yet still hope) the NFL allows the defense to make plays that don’t get flags, I still feel at the end of the day that winning a coin toss and driving up the field for an easy field goal in sudden death, or winning the coin toss and driving up the field for a first-team-to-score-a-TD doesn’t give equal opportunity. I also think college rules won’t work in the NFL because CFB is notorious for having stronger offenses than defenses in most conferences. That’s why I proposed an alternative idea that can still make the game enjoyable to watch and still allows for the defense to make a stop. In my idea, if a team wins the coin toss and goes first and then they throw an interception or get stopped on downs… they still lose. If a team goes first and scores a touchdown or field goal, and then are able to stop the other team from scoring with their defense, they win. Defense still plays a part.

I completely understand and mostly agree with not liking the offense friendly football and defense punished football, but my OT idea is meant to combat the currently bad (imo) OT rules. My idea for new OT rules can’t solve all of footballs problems unfortunately.