Possible NFL rule changes for 17/18

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
Again it's hard to just change a rule and then extrapolate how things would have gone as strategies might have been different, but this would have changed some of the playoff teams last year.

Shorter OT
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Again it's hard to just change a rule and then extrapolate how things would have gone as strategies might have been different, but this would have changed some of the playoff teams last year.

Shorter OT
Maybe. Teams would have approached it differently though.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,613
Why can't they just admit Thursday night is a trainwreck and drop the whole concept? (yeah, I know...$$$$)
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,283
AZ
I think they should just go to ties. A ten minute overtime seems silly.

I have no problem with letting games end in ties in the regular season.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,463
I'd actually prefer a longer OT

Go 20 minutes
10 minutes in, change half (keep possession)
Allow ties
No sudden death even for TDs
Road team automatically gets ball first
(Coin tosses are stupid for regular season)
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,766
Pittsburgh, PA
No sudden death? So you'd just play another quarter and see where it comes out?

That's a lot of extra wear-and-tear. Player weardown is not linear with the amount of time they're playing - after 60, 70, 80 plays out there you're a lot more susceptible to hurting something with each additional play than you were at the start of the game.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
Here's a proposal: eliminate the clock in OT. Each team gets one drive. If they are tied after that drive, it's a tie. Simple, shorter. Would lead to more ties than the current format, but would also eliminate 10+ minute OT.

Out of curiosity, I wonder what % of OT games go past 10 minutes.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Here's a proposal: eliminate the clock in OT. Each team gets one drive. If they are tied after that drive, it's a tie. Simple, shorter. Would lead to more ties than the current format, but would also eliminate 10+ minute OT.

Out of curiosity, I wonder what % of OT games go past 10 minutes.
For the love of all that is good, let's please not turn this into another "hey, here is an outside-the-box idea for NFL OT!" thread.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
For the love of all that is good, let's please not turn this into another "hey, here is an outside-the-box idea for NFL OT!" thread.
Fair enough. But is this really that outside the box? It is basically just a meet-in-the-middle solution between the "eliminate OT" position, and the "shorten OT" position.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,271
I would still like to know why anyone really cares. There were 5 games in the last 5 years that ended in a tie. Two of the were last season, but this seems like much ado about nothing. Even games that ended near the end of overtime, how many games is that?

They've already tweaked it to make it more fair and not have it be sudden death on a FG. I really have no complaints about the existing system.

I've never thought about wishing the overtime would be over sooner. Usually they end by someone scoring.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,059
Hingham, MA
I would still like to know why anyone really cares. There were 5 games in the last 5 years that ended in a tie. Two of the were last season, but this seems like much ado about nothing. Even games that ended near the end of overtime, how many games is that?

They've already tweaked it to make it more fair and not have it be sudden death on a FG. I really have no complaints about the existing system.

I've never thought about wishing the overtime would be over sooner. Usually they end by someone scoring.
The NFL cares about appearing to care about player safety. #integrity
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
Wouldn't the most likely get higher ratings during OT than whatever else would be on? Maybe the late Fox game is the exception to that. And that's a big maybe.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
CBS-broadcast tied-games should end in a draw; no more late starts for 60 Minutes. FOX-broadcast tied-games should be decided by the visiting-team's starting QB being locked in a steel cage to fight a honey badger. (The NFLPA might object, but it won't really matter.)
 

budcrew08

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 30, 2007
8,552
upstate NY
Here's a proposal: eliminate the clock in OT. Each team gets one drive. If they are tied after that drive, it's a tie. Simple, shorter. Would lead to more ties than the current format, but would also eliminate 10+ minute OT.

Out of curiosity, I wonder what % of OT games go past 10 minutes.
That's how it is in college and it's way more exciting then any NFL OT.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,299
deep inside Guido territory
Tom Pelissero‏Verified account @TomPelissero 3m3 minutes ago
Roger Goodell is expected to tell NFL owners group celebrations, using ball as prop after TDs, going to ground, snow angels are now allowed.
Tom Pelissero‏Verified account @TomPelissero 3m3 minutes ago
Prolonged acts, miming weapons, offensive gestures, sexually suggestive stuff still expected to be banned. That includes twerking. Sorry, AB
Tom Pelissero‏Verified account @TomPelissero 4m4 minutes ago
Goodell has been meeting with players for months on this. Emphasis on spontaneous exuberance. Result should be more fun, fewer flags.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,427
Tom Pelissero‏Verified account @TomPelissero 3m3 minutes ago
Roger Goodell is expected to tell NFL owners group celebrations, using ball as prop after TDs, going to ground, snow angels are now allowed.
Tom Pelissero‏Verified account @TomPelissero 3m3 minutes ago
Prolonged acts, miming weapons, offensive gestures, sexually suggestive stuff still expected to be banned. That includes twerking. Sorry, AB
Tom Pelissero‏Verified account @TomPelissero 4m4 minutes ago
Goodell has been meeting with players for months on this. Emphasis on spontaneous exuberance. Result should be more fun, fewer flags.
Holy shit, they got one right.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
14,943
Silver Spring, MD
If you consider having NFL refs, in real time, judging what is an offensive gesture vs. a snow angel vs. going to ground vs. using ball as prop (non offensively, non weapony, of course) "getting one right" then yes, they did.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
I don't think I like that cut-down change. From both the players and coaches perspectives, step-wise cut-downs allow more flexibility to be picked up and tried out by another team. I wonder what the reasoning is.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,370
I don't think I like that cut-down change. From both the players and coaches perspectives, step-wise cut-downs allow more flexibility to be picked up and tried out by another team. I wonder what the reasoning is.
My guess is that the coaches were complaining that the more restricted practice hours they have with players now made it harder to evaluate players in time for the old staggered cut-down schedule.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
I don't think I like that cut-down change. From both the players and coaches perspectives, step-wise cut-downs allow more flexibility to be picked up and tried out by another team. I wonder what the reasoning is.
I think it's probably better for the end-of-roster guys, who figure to get more reps in the fourth preseason game. It also makes it easier for teams to field a squad for the last preseason game while resting starters.
 

drbretto

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
12,075
Concord, NH
If you consider having NFL refs, in real time, judging what is an offensive gesture vs. a snow angel vs. going to ground vs. using ball as prop (non offensively, non weapony, of course) "getting one right" then yes, they did.
I don't think that's very hard to differentiate...

And I think they got that right, too. Let them have their celebrations, just keep it family friendly.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,252
re: OT - isn't it very possible a team could drive for over 9 minutes, kick a FG, and leave the other team mostly screwed?

10+ minute drives do happen [rarely], but 15 minutes don't. so a new problem definitely introduced there.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
I just did a quick (so I might have mis-counted) look at the 2016 regular season results and it seems that there were 12 OT games in the regular season. That's less than 5% of the games. If a game last 4Q+10minutes, another 5 minutes adds 7% to that game's time. I don't know how many of those OTs lasted more than 10 minutes, but we're talking about removing at most and almost certainly much, much less than 0.35% of playing time from the season... yay, we care about player health!!!!! #NFLISFAMILY
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,252
But the whole point of the new OT system is to give each team an opportunity, outside of a TD
exactly.

I'm just imagining Bill grounding and pounding the clock out and if we somehow fail 3rd & Goal, kick with 30 seconds left. now the opposing team has 2 TO and there is still a two-minute warning, so maybe this won't come up.
 

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
14,542
South Boston
exactly.

I'm just imagining Bill grounding and pounding the clock out and if we somehow fail 3rd & Goal, kick with 30 seconds left. now the opposing team has 2 TO and there is still a two-minute warning, so maybe this won't come up.
Why would there be a 2 minute warning if BB kicks a FG with 30 seconds left?
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,694
um...presumably he's saying the time outs would be used to help keep it from getting to 30 seconds.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,427
If you consider having NFL refs, in real time, judging what is an offensive gesture vs. a snow angel vs. going to ground vs. using ball as prop (non offensively, non weapony, of course) "getting one right" then yes, they did.
Yeah...this is dumb.

You can't tell a gun signal from the Irish jig?

Loosen up a bit.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
re: OT - isn't it very possible a team could drive for over 9 minutes, kick a FG, and leave the other team mostly screwed?

10+ minute drives do happen [rarely], but 15 minutes don't. so a new problem definitely introduced there.
So what? If you can't stop the other team from putting together a 10 minute drive, you deserve to lose. This isn't a problem.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
So what? If you can't stop the other team from putting together a 10 minute drive, you deserve to lose. This isn't a problem.
And if you can't stop the other team from scoring a TD on their first drive, same thing, yet we got national outcry after the SB.

Just friggin leave it alone. It's all posturing about how the league cares about players health.
 

gtg807y

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 31, 2006
3,162
Atlanta, GA
Was there actually a national outcry about that after the Super Bowl? I mean, I'm a Falcons fan and I don't think there is anything unfair about them not getting the ball after the Patriots scored in OT. But me being a Falcons fan also explains why I hadn't heard about a national outcry, since I went out of my way to avoid sports news after. Jesus, why am I still talking about that game?
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
I wouldn't say that it rose to the level of "national outcry", but yes predictably after the evil Patriots won in OT by scoring at TD on the opening drive there was an elevated level of discussion about it being "unfair" because the Falcons never got a possession in OT.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,863
Was there actually a national outcry about that after the Super Bowl? I mean, I'm a Falcons fan and I don't think there is anything unfair about them not getting the ball after the Patriots scored in OT. But me being a Falcons fan also explains why I hadn't heard about a national outcry, since I went out of my way to avoid sports news after. Jesus, why am I still talking about that game?
Well, we're suddenly talking about changing the rule, right?
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,870
ct
The intent behind the changing of the OT rule really had nothing to with the Patriots or how they won the Super Bowl. If there was a Deflategate like national outcry over the way the Pats won the Super Bowl, then they would have changed the rule to state that both teams must have the ball at least once in OT even if a touchdown is scored. There is no connection between the two events.
Do you have any proof of your "national outcry" over the way the Pats won? I fail to see any way the public or NFL acted in a Spygate or Deflategate type response.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
The intent behind the changing of the OT rule really had nothing to with the Patriots or how they won the Super Bowl. If there was a Deflategate like national outcry over the way the Pats won the Super Bowl, then they would have changed the rule to state that both teams must have the ball at least once in OT even if a touchdown is scored. There is no connection between the two events.
Do you have any proof of your "national outcry" over the way the Pats won? I fail to see any way the public or NFL acted in a Spygate or Deflategate type response.
You're welcome to quibble with my choice of words, as 'national outcry' is too strong, but it was most certainly a talking point in sports media in the weeks following the SB. Was it Deflategate or Spygate? No and I don't think that was implied, or at least it wasn't intended.

But it certainly was a hot button issue, sparking debate enough for The Economist to weigh in (http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2017/02/overtime-rules-american-football) and a lot of media outlets chiming in via columns and TV content on the subject for weeks. We had a thread on it here even (http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/overtime-rules.17993/).

(I'm also not implying the rule change is aimed at the Pats. As someone else stated, I think it's about TV schedules and the faux air of caring about player health, but YMMV.)
 

Dan Murfman

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2001
4,186
Pawcatuck