Options
Imagine in baseball..........
edmundfitzgerald
Posts: 4,306 ✭✭
in Sports Talk
If your team was playing the AL or NL championship series. It was game seven. Your team battled hard but it was a 5-5
tie going into extra innings in game 7. The other team won a coin flip and was awarded to bat first. They scored. Your team
was not allowed to hit, and the other club went to the world series.
Sincerely,
Wake up NFL
tie going into extra innings in game 7. The other team won a coin flip and was awarded to bat first. They scored. Your team
was not allowed to hit, and the other club went to the world series.
Sincerely,
Wake up NFL
0
Comments
Sudden death may not be perfect -- far from it -- but the other suggestions to make it more like a college overtime fundamentally alter the game and it's natural flow.
Once upon a time, statistically winning the coin toss barely mattered, if at all. I think since the early 1970s until the early 1990s, the coin toss winner won something like 51-52% of the time -- statistical noise, more or less, essentially "fair" for most purposes.
That changed when the kickoff was moved back to the 30 yard line in 1994. That change in average starting field position for the receiving team (together with more accurate and strong-legged placekickers) has resulted in the coin toss winners winning in OT about 60% of the time since '94.
So maybe part of a solution would be to change to a "neutral" field position. Since 1994, stat geeks and number crunchers have determined that the "neutral" starting field position (the one where, in sudden death, the team which first gets the ball gains no advantage) is at about the 15 yard line. Behind the 15, the team playing defense first has an advantage; beyond the 15 the advantage shifts to the team on offense first. Putting the ball on the 15 pretty much statistically evens the odds.
One possibility, then, would be for the ball to start on the offense's own 15 yard line in overtime. The winner of the coin toss could choose to play offense or defense. One neat thing about this (but probably why coaches would hate it) is that it introduces strategy and potential second-guessing of the decision by the coin toss winner. Right now when teams win the coin toss in OT, it's a no-brainer in the NFL to receive the opening kickoff in OT, and in college it's a no-brainer to go on defense first. This would make the decision interesting.
I'm all in favor of scrapping sudden death and playing additional 10- or 15- minute periods to determine a winner, but losing the toss does not equate to losing the game.
Edited for the following:
Moving the kickoff spot back may indeed contribute to more toss winners winning in OT, but it may also be the result of the new, offense-friendly (particularly in the passing game) rules that took effect in the '90's. It's simply harder to stop an offense, no matter where they begin a drive.
I think there are only 2 viable alternatives to the current format: 1. Coin-flip winner starts at own 20. 2. you need to score 6 pts win in OT. The downside to #2 is that OT would take longer than it currently does, exposing players to more plays/injury risk, and would likely result in a lot more ties.
One possibility here would be that the first possession can only end the game if it ends in a TD. If the first possession of OT results in a field goal, the other team gets the ball for one last chance. If they kick a field goal to tie it, it becomes sudden death. If they score a TD, they win. (If they don't score, they lose.)
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
First: I never cared for the term "sudden death", always preferred "instant win".
Second: In a game of the magnitude of playoffs such as yesterday, perhaps a special rule should come into effect. Instead of whoever scores first wins, I think there should be a 5th period, or some amount of time allowing the opponent at least a shot at scoring other than via a defensive play.
Let us not forget that the Saints got a freebie touchdown, when in fact the runners knee hit the ground and then he stretched to cross the goal line. How the line judge missed that is beyond me. The Vikings OTOH, were inept and shot themselves again and again. Favre knows better than to make the pathetic toss he did, when he fact he should have run the ball, called time out and have the kicker come in...ain't that why da kicker gets paid, to kick da ball??
All is moot, but I'll bet you my entire collection Favre would love a do over on that bone-head toss he made. Not to mention that Favre at that point was so hurt he really couldn't throw as well as a healthy Favre...why risk the interception when the potential win was at hand?
<< <i>Let us not forget that the Saints got a freebie touchdown, when in fact the runners knee hit the ground and then he stretched to cross the goal line. >>
Bad call, yes, but far from a "freebie" when it still should have been second and goal at about the one-half yard line. The chances of a subsequent Saints TD are still very high even if they got the call right, which is why I assume Childress opted against burning a challenge there.
That would make for some interesting OT games. The defense would have to step things up like never before while at the same time making sure that the defense did not commit a foul to give the opposing team a free throw.
Such a sudden death rule in the NBA would not work but it would be interesting to see it tried for a stretch of same 20-30 games.
While it may not seem like a perfect system, its worked well forever and gives drama to the game.
I understand your point, but if you are successful in both challenges, you get a third. Clearly this one was winable, besides, who's to say there wouldn't have been a fumble or interception on the next play? All history now.
Or the refs on that bogus PI penalty..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>and they couldn't stop the Saints in overtime.
Or the refs on that bogus PI penalty.. >>
Bad calls went both ways all game. Yeah it was but the Saints had their fair share of bad calls against them as well.
Or the refs on that bogus PI penalty.. >>
Bad calls went both ways all game. Yeah it was but the Saints had their fair share of bad calls against them as well.
None as significant as that one, though. That penalty basically sealed the win for NO (and I'm not a Vikings fan, either.)
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>and they couldn't stop the Saints in overtime.
Or the refs on that bogus PI penalty.. >>
Weak penalty calls against the Saints turned what would have been a Vikings punt into a TD earlier in the game. But because it wasn't in OT, we tend to forget about that one even though those 7 points counted just as much as any other.
<< <i>
<< <i>and they couldn't stop the Saints in overtime.
Or the refs on that bogus PI penalty.. >>
Weak penalty calls against the Saints turned what would have been a Vikings punt into a TD earlier in the game. But because it wasn't in OT, we tend to forget about that one even though those 7 points counted just as much as any other. >>
Yep, which was my point exactly. There were calls on both teams throughout the game that they should have been upset with. If you want to pinpoint one play as the key to the loss, its not the PI call, its Favre throwing that pick late in regulation which would have prevented OT from ever happening in the first place. I'm not one to look at this play or that play, I look at the entire body of work.
<< <i>If you want to pinpoint one play as the key to the loss, its not the PI call, its Favre throwing that pick late in regulation which would have prevented OT from ever happening in the first place. I'm not one to look at this play or that play, I look at the entire body of work. >>
Actually, I'd go with the bonehead penalty for 12 men on the field which immediately preceded the last Favre pick. That put the Vikes on the outer limits of FG range and probably forced them to go downfield instead of running a safer play followed by a game-winning FG attempt.
True, but as I recall, Favre had some running room after the 12 man debacle, which could have put the FG back into play if only he'd run instead of throwing off balance for the pick.
I think we've just about beaten this thing to death. I'd much rather have seen Favre in the big game, but sometimes you're the bug and sometimes you're the windshield.
Kinda like the Bucky Dent and Aaron Boone homers, not to mention the Billy Bucks faux pas. Painful stuff, and the Favre toss will long be remembered methinks in Minnesota.
<< <i>First team to score 6 points wins would be one solution. Mike and Mike talked about that today. >>
I've heard a variant on this idea (which I like better), which requires the winning team to score 7 pts. In other words, you're basically getting rid of field goals- which in a perfect world the NFL would get rid of anyway.
Steve