Maybe. Teams would have approached it differently though.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
I 100% agree with thisI 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.
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.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.
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.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.
The NFL cares about appearing to care about player safety. #integrityI 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 also cares about keeping the tv networks happy. Games need to end within their assigned broadcast window.The NFL cares about appearing to care about player safety. #integrity
That's how it is in college and it's way more exciting then any NFL OT.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.
Really? Tell me more about how college games end in ties after each team has a drive in OT.That's how it is in college and it's way more exciting then any NFL OT.
Holy shit, they got one right.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.
Charley Finley loves this change. A whole batch of FA players available all at the same time.Albert BreerVerified account @AlbertBreer 52s52 seconds ago
Per source, the owners just passed a resolution eliminating the 75-man cutdown. So now, there'll be just one cutdown day -- 90 to 53.
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.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.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 don't think that's very hard to differentiate...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.
But the whole point of the new OT system is to give each team an opportunity, outside of a TDWell, yeah, but that happens at the end of regulation all the time.
exactly.But the whole point of the new OT system is to give each team an opportunity, outside of a TD
Why would there be a 2 minute warning if BB kicks a FG with 30 seconds left?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.
Yeah...this is dumb.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.
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.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.
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.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.
Well, we're suddenly talking about changing the rule, right?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?
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.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.