Overtime Rules

Curt S Loew

SoSH Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
6,463
Shantytown
(I hate when people only skim the thread and then make strong statements, like I'm about to do, but I hate even more threads like this.)

First possession in OT should be determined by a game of speed (we need this to be over ASAP!) chess between the two special teams captains. The winner decides what sport the two teams play to decide the winner.

Or, maybe, just maybe - and I know this sounds crazy - they just keep playing football?

Seriously, people: bidding for field position, alternating possessions starting at the 25-yard lines, etc., etc.?

Regular season OT: nothing - it's a tie.

Playoffs OT: play another quarter.
And if it's tied after that? Then, chess?
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
In Bill we trust. Play more of the same game, don't suddenly shift the rules in OT--that means don't "send the kickers to the showers", don't eliminate special teams, don't make it offense-only shootouts, and don't let a coin flip potentially determine who plays O and who plays D (only) for this OT. Put more time on the clock and play football.
To be clear, I said "send the kickers to the showers" only in the context of the college OT format -- I'd rather have no kicking at all than the outsized role that kicking plays in that format.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
14,037
Richmond, VA
I've been drinking:

Each team gets at least 1 possession.
Game must end with a score.

So if you get the ball first and kick for 3, or a td, the other team has a chance to retaliate.
Even if the 1st team gets a td, and 2nd team gets only a FG, the 1st team still needs at least a FG score to win.
That still gives the coin toss a bit of an edge (which is exciting in its own right, both pre game and for OT), but draws it out just a bit.

It totally makes sense I swear
Did I mention I've been drinking?
 

VTSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
293
I've been drinking:

Each team gets at least 1 possession.
Game must end with a score.

So if you get the ball first and kick for 3, or a td, the other team has a chance to retaliate.
Even if the 1st team gets a td, and 2nd team gets only a FG, the 1st team still needs at least a FG score to win.
That still gives the coin toss a bit of an edge (which is exciting in its own right, both pre game and for OT), but draws it out just a bit.

It totally makes sense I swear
Did I mention I've been drinking?
First team scores a TD - up by 7
Second team goes 3 and out
First team then has to score again to get a win?

Or... First team scores TD, up 7
Second team then scores a TD, but misses extra point
Does 1st team win by 1, or does the game continue since it didn't end on a scoring play?
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,647
Good point. First team scores a TD. Some time later, second team scores a TD; if they go for two and make it they win, but if they fail they keep playing.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
14,037
Richmond, VA
First team scores a TD - up by 7
Second team goes 3 and out
First team then has to score again to get a win?
Well, I haven't been drinking as much so it's harder to defend now, but: Yeah. Like, it makes it maybe a lie less flukey. Sometimes you see a game end because a team breaks a play somehow and boom: TD, end of game. But in regular game time you still have to play it out. You benefit from the fluke (or a well executed drive) but you still have to do a little more to close it out.
Or... First team scores TD, up 7
Second team then scores a TD, but misses extra point
Does 1st team win by 1, or does the game continue since it didn't end on a scoring play?
I think I meant it has to end on a positive scoring play by the winner. So in this scenario no: the 1st team would still need to score again. At that stage it's sudden death. However, of the 1st team missed the point after and only gets 6, the td+xp would win the game.
Good point. First team scores a TD. Some time later, second team scores a TD; if they go for two and make it they win, but if they fail they keep playing.
Something like that. It would certainly incentivize 2pt conversions.

Did I mention the drinking?
 

speedracer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,821
Free kicks from 35 yards, best of 5.

G$, Allen, Amendola, Ebner and Brady should crush all comers.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
I think this thread is good evidence there is no great answer. Hopefully, the NFL will avoid tinkering for its own sake.

Part of what drives me crazy is the post-Super Bowl narrative for a perception of unfairness is logically inconsistent. The argument goes that the game was over as soon as New England won the toss. Falcons were gassed and New England was rolling. If that's the premise, then there is no scenario where New England loses the game. Great, give the Falcons their possession. Either they don't score and the Patriots win or the Falcons do score and then New England just gets an easy TD or field goal. Matching possession all the way down? If the original premise is right, New England just always wins eventually unless Brady gets concussed (is that a "fair" scenario) or Falcons successfully go for two.

It's a problem that doesn't need fixing to me.
 
Part of what drives me crazy is the post-Super Bowl narrative for a perception of unfairness is logically inconsistent. The argument goes that the game was over as soon as New England won the toss. Falcons were gassed and New England was rolling. If that's the premise, then there is no scenario where New England loses the game. Great, give the Falcons their possession. Either they don't score and the Patriots win or the Falcons do score and then New England just gets an easy TD or field goal. Matching possession all the way down? If the original premise is right, New England just always wins eventually unless Brady gets concussed (is that a "fair" scenario) or Falcons successfully go for two.

It's a problem that doesn't need fixing to me.
The argument you just spelled out doesn't assume a 100% Patriots win rate, though. The Falcons were gassed and New England was rolling, but if Brady's fade pass into the end zone was a foot lower and Beasley had hauled it in, Atlanta might still have won the game despite the state of its defense. And if the Falcons had been given their own possession and marched down the field and scored, any crazy-ass stuff could have happened at that point.

That said, I agree with your ultimate conclusion. I'm desperately unhappy that the Falcons lost the OT coin toss, but them's the breaks - Atlanta still could have held New England to a field goal, but they didn't. Game over. (Quinn not calling any timeouts in overtime to give his players a rest and/or slow down New England's momentum didn't help.) Unless and until someone devises a new overtime model I haven't seen written about yet, I'm content that the system we have now is pretty fair and balanced. And it certainly isn't to blame for the Falcons defeat.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,144
AZ
The argument you just spelled out doesn't assume a 100% Patriots win rate, though. The Falcons were gassed and New England was rolling, but if Brady's fade pass into the end zone was a foot lower and Beasley had hauled it in, Atlanta might still have won the game despite the state of its defense. And if the Falcons had been given their own possession and marched down the field and scored, any crazy-ass stuff could have happened at that point.
Right, that's actually my point. Of course it wasn't a foregone conclusion. The ball to Hogan is a pick if it's maybe 18 inches to the right. I bet if we saw the stats, one holding penalty by the team with the ball first swings the odds to the other team, etc. My only nit is that since they moved up the touchback average starting position is probably a bit too close. Maybe change the OT touchback to the 20 or even the 15 and I think the present rules are fine.

Edit: clarity
 
Last edited:

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Right, that's actually my point. Of course it wasn't a foregone conclusion. The ball to Hogan is a pick if it's maybe 18 inches to the right. I bet if we saw the stats, one holding penalty by the team with the ball first swings the odds to the other team, etc. My only nit is that since they moved up the touchback average starting position is probably a bit too close. Maybe change the OT touchback to the 20 or even the 15 and I think the present rules are fine.

Edit: clarity
Love the idea of changing the touchback position in OT to the 15. I'm not sure it would be enough to persuade anyone who wins the toss to kick, but it feels like it would balance the odds considerably.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Or eliminate the Touchback rule unless the ball goes out of the endzone, and then it goes to the 25 like in regulation. If it lands in the endzone the receiving team has to try to run it out. Or they can let it bounce and hope it exits the end zone on its own. Ghost was awesome with his last 3 kickoffs, kicking them just deep enough that ATL had to try to return them.
 

Awesome Fossum

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,874
Austin, TX
Not my original idea, but I think lead + possession = victory is an elegant way to do it. Still gives an advantage to the team that wins the coin flip (team that wins the coin flip can end the game in one offensive and one defensive possession; losing team needs at least three total possessions), but guarantees that both teams have the opportunity to posses the ball.

I haven't thought this through at all, but what if the game is tied at the end of regulation, they just turn off the clock and keep playing? No flipping a coin; if it's 3rd and 10 from the 45 when the clock expires, that's where overtime picks up. If you combine with the rule above, there's still a sense or urgency to score before OT, since in OT you'll need to regain possession to win. But by making it a continuation of the second half, you side step the issue of needing to flip a coin.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
36,920
Hingham, MA
Not my original idea, but I think lead + possession = victory is an elegant way to do it. Still gives an advantage to the team that wins the coin flip (team that wins the coin flip can end the game in one offensive and one defensive possession; losing team needs at least three total possessions), but guarantees that both teams have the opportunity to posses the ball.

I haven't thought this through at all, but what if the game is tied at the end of regulation, they just turn off the clock and keep playing? No flipping a coin; if it's 3rd and 10 from the 45 when the clock expires, that's where overtime picks up. If you combine with the rule above, there's still a sense or urgency to score before OT, since in OT you'll need to regain possession to win. But by making it a continuation of the second half, you side step the issue of needing to flip a coin.
The problem with lead + possession = victory is if the receiving team punts, then the other team kicks a FG, they should win. They have had equal opportunity and one team scored while the other didn't.

The current system is perfect.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,874
Washington, DC
Lead + possession means you're guaranteeing OT games end in a non-scoring play, which is in general less interesting than ending in a scoring play.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,578
How about you don't get 4 downs if the other team scored (unless fhey used a 4th down play)? That would present a bit of fairness.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,851
San Andreas Fault
How about you don't get 4 downs if the other team scored (unless fhey used a 4th down play)? That would present a bit of fairness.
Remember, KISS (keep it simple, stupid). No offense, of course. You don't want a protocol that only a small fraction of fans know. Then again, they all do have their iPhones to look it up. I think they keep what they have now for a few years. Maybe some atrocious ending like the center whizzing a snap past the QB for a safety a la Tannehill, but in OT in a conf championship game or SB for the first score causes another serious look at it.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,591
Pittsburgh, PA
A great idea from another thread, which belongs here:

If the NFL wants to do it without the coin toss, pick something skill-based to determine first possession. I'm thinking each team kicking off to the other, who ever has the better run back starts off where they returned it. Touchbacks only allowed if the ball goes over the end zone. If the NFL does go insane, reads this post, and implements it, I want credit and naming rights... and cash.
This post deserves more love for its creativity than it got. It's like lagging for break, in billiards. Awesome. You'd see the second team to do their kickoff doing all sorts of hook-and-lateral mayhem to try and get past that damn 28 yard line or whatever.

My go-to in sports bar debates on this subject - and oddly, I've had a few in recent years - is still the yard-line auction, because everyone loves the drama of coaches betting on confidence in their team, or their opponent's overconfidence thereof. But for sheer, semi-farcical entertainment, a kickoff-return contest would be way up there.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
A great idea from another thread, which belongs here:



This post deserves more love for its creativity than it got. It's like lagging for break, in billiards. Awesome. You'd see the second team to do their kickoff doing all sorts of hook-and-lateral mayhem to try and get past that damn 28 yard line or whatever.

My go-to in sports bar debates on this subject - and oddly, I've had a few in recent years - is still the yard-line auction, because everyone loves the drama of coaches betting on confidence in their team, or their opponent's overconfidence thereof. But for sheer, semi-farcical entertainment, a kickoff-return contest would be way up there.
Any idea that uses a conceit first popularized by "Name That Tune" can't be wrong!
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,369
They could simply end in a tie and only have overtime in the playoffs, where the keep adding quarters until someone wins.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,131
Remember, KISS (keep it simple, stupid). No offense, of course. You don't want a protocol that only a small fraction of fans know. Then again, they all do have their iPhones to look it up. I think they keep what they have now for a few years. Maybe some atrocious ending like the center whizzing a snap past the QB for a safety a la Tannehill, but in OT in a conf championship game or SB for the first score causes another serious look at it.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
14,037
Richmond, VA
Whoever you don't mind being on IR for the season
Well that's no fun.

I wonder if the rate of injury really would be that high.
A. how often would it even happen? and
B. is that more of an injury risk than a kick-off or punt return, or any other scramble for a fumble?
 

PayrodsFirstClutchHit

Bob Kraft's Season Ticket Robin Hoodie
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2006
8,318
Winterport, ME
Well that's no fun.

I wonder if the rate of injury really would be that high.
A. how often would it even happen? and
B. is that more of an injury risk than a kick-off or punt return, or any other scramble for a fumble?
The 30 for 30 on the XFL indicated quite a few players got injured during that play including on the first ever scramble where a player was out for the year with a shoulder injury.

If the NFL and Players Association agreed to outlaw leaping over the center on FG and extra points where no one has ever gotten seriously injured, there is zero chance that play makes it into the rotation.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
14,037
Richmond, VA
The 30 for 30 on the XFL indicated quite a few players got injured during that play including on the first ever scramble where a player was out for the year with a shoulder injury.

If the NFL and Players Association agreed to outlaw leaping over the center on FG and extra points where no one has ever gotten seriously injured, there is zero chance that play makes it into the rotation.
Well then, fine. It's a terrible idea.

How about:

Teams bid for field position, but it's position to snap the ball for a field goal type kick. But if you make it, you only get to receive the kick off (no points).
If you miss it, you either kick off or maybe the other team gets the balk from spot of the kick (which increases the risk for the kicking team, so it starts to limit how far a team might be willing to kick from).

Alternate: instead of bidding, it's a series of clowns goal kicks starting at the 30 and stepping back 10 yards each time until one side misses. The winning team then starts with the ball at the spot of the last missed kick.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
22,763
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
Name that tune auction style

Team captains meet at midfield.
Visiting team makes first call. Saying they can score a touchdown with 4 downs from the 1 yard line. Home team counters, saying 2 yard line. We keep going until one team says, GO FOR IT. Team scores, they win. Otherwise, defense wins.
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,192
CA
I'm fine with the current system, but if I proposed a change it would be to give team B a chance to respond even if team A scores a TD on its first possession. If team B gets a TD to tie the game, the game becomes sudden death.

This gives team B the very real advantage of knowing what it needs. Team A, though, has the advantage of being able to win with a field goal if it's still tied after each has had a possession.

I would be against any format that eliminates special teams, the way college does.
I am here as well. If there was a change, I would only advocate giving each team minimum of 1 possession regardless of scoring. Maybe also require 2 point conversion attempts on every possession where a TD is scored after the 1st possession.
 

simplyeric

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
14,037
Richmond, VA
Name that tune auction style

Team captains meet at midfield.
Visiting team makes first call. Saying they can score a touchdown with 4 downs from the 1 yard line. Home team counters, saying 2 yard line. We keep going until one team says, GO FOR IT. Team scores, they win. Otherwise, defense wins.
Make it more like HORSE:

do the negotiation until 1 team says "ok, go for it"

Then run the four downs. If they score, then the other team gets to attempt to match..like matching the shot in a game of HORSE.
If the first team score in 3 downs, the other team only gets 3.
If both teams score in the same number of downs, you just keep repeating it. You probably wouldn't end up running all that many plays. The only time you'd end up repeating the sequence is when both teams score on the same number of downs.

It's sorta the football equivalent of a soccer shoot-out.
 

pedro1918

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
5,131
Map Ref. 41°N 93°W
So, I never actually watched an XFL game. I always thought "the scramble" was 11 on 11 and a live ball. Each team started at their own goal line (or the 20, whatever) and the ref blew the whistle. I thought you could pick it and advance the ball.

I always thought it was crazy. I guess the actual scramble wasn't quite as crazy.