Jump to content

NFL General Discussion


Mr. Brightside

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Brummie Clyde said:

The original Overtime rules were horrendous, the team that won the coin toss won the game about 70% of the time.

Both teams should have even chances for possession.

Right, but you didn't hear anyone complain about it, because the game as it was wasn't totally predicated on making it as easy as possible to rack up yards and score points. Winning the toss meant that you could usually grab control of the field position, making it much more difficult for the opponent to score, never mind win, but you didn't see teams go the length of the field in three or four plays anywhere near as frequently as you do now.

The problem came about because continual changes to rules designed to make things easier for offenses and much more difficult for defenses meant that what was seen as an even tilt between the two has become practically a foregone conclusion. Perception used to be that if you lost the toss, meh, because it was up to your D to go out and get the ball, whereas now it's pretty much an inevitability that the team possessing the ball is going to score immediately on a gassed D, which is hugely problematic in a scenario with any variation of 'next score wins'. 

I'd have no issue at all with going to a simple 10 minute OT period, no sudden death, scoreboard at the end of the period is final. If the team winning the toss scores inside a minute, fine, but then the other team still has 9 minutes to mount a drive, or score after another change of possession. Likewise, if you take the ball and go the length of the field in 15 plays and eat the whole period, then the D has had plenty of opportunity to stop you. The problem with the ruleset as it is at the moment is the frequency with which the team winning the toss moves down the field and scores within 3 or 4 plays purely because the D is utterly dead on it's feet. That's a consequence of making things far too easy for offenses across the other 60 minutes. Give the team winning the coin toss the option of taking the ball, but starting on their own goal line, or playing with 10 players from the 25 or something.

I think the development of the kicking game has also become a problem for OT ruleset. Any FG attempt from inside 50 yards is, under normal conditions, pretty much viewed as a kick any PK should be making now, so if the old OT rules were still in place you'd see a lot of teams take the ball at the 25, move it 40 yards, then boot the game winning kick. If you go back to the 90's no kick longer than 40 yards would have been viewed in the same way, so teams were naturally more reluctant to settle for a long FG attempt. Legs have naturally gotten stronger league wide, but the field hasn't gotten any longer in the same timeframe, so now the only really neutral part of the field as far as OT is concerned is the 10 yards either side of the half way line. There's a sense of inevitability now whenever a team gets inside an opponents 40. Perhaps it's time to look at eradicating FG attempts from OT altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This problem isn't caused by the newer Overtime rules, it's caused by the fact that you can't go within 5 yards of a QB without it being a foul, or if you tackle a receiver it's nearly always flagged for interference.

They've skewed the game much too far in favour of the Offence.

That's why we get all these frankly dull shootouts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest mistake was cutting the chuck zone from 10 yards to 5. The amount of ticky-tacky illegal hands an holding is ridiculous, and I don't believe there is any such thing as a 'defenseless receiver', but they introduced 90% of the bullshit holding and illegal hands simply by cutting the chuck zone in half. 

I'd happily let DB's batter WR's all the way down the field the way it was in the 70's, but that's never going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I find the tinkering of overtime rules rather interesting, as each tinker makes ties more likely than before, when the whole point of introducing overtime to the regular season was to reduce ties.

Allowing both teams the opportunity to possess the ball sounds good in theory, but will lead to more ties. It would also change strategy imo to make kicking if you win the toss a viable option, whereas now it just isn't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/03/2022 at 18:13, The Golden God said:

Both teams will get a possession in OT, but only in the playoffs. Just get rid of it in the regular season and have ties.

Can someone explain to me why, in the event of a tie, they don’t play a straightforward extra time period, just like football? Whoever scores most points wins. 

Edited by pozbaird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...