Anyone have a problem with the OT rules?

[Jangler]

16 hours ago, mc52beast said:

 

Me personally, I think that if you want a chance to get the ball back your defense should actually play defense.

I like them just fine. 

As a fan of a team that lost a Superbowl because the best defense didn't do their job. ((38)(for those that don't know)) I like the overtimevthe way it is, it's better than it was, and makes the defense stand up....

sorry, I mean Rise up!

 

 

 

 

 

 

LOL!

[AceBoogie]

16 hours ago, OneBadCat said:

Should just play an extra quarter

Exactly this. 

[jumpman910]

I'm fine with it, the coaches and most players know the setup. It is what it is. Even if we get burned by it one day, we should've played better defense. Or just dont put yourself in a overtime position to begin with.

[Untouchable]

They had their chance in regulation. Falcons couldn't stop them anymore because they were dominated in time of possession.

Injury risk would be a better reason to change it. As fatigue sets in injury risk increases and in that way college rules are significantly better. Can't see it happening though because of betting.

Sent from my D6708 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[CoastalCat]

17 hours ago, Saca312 said:

Bet no one would be talking about this if the Falcons won the toss.

Fug the Failcons. Keep rubbing it in.

Pats fans would be. 

[CoastalCat]

17 hours ago, mc52beast said:

Heard people talking about how the OT rules are not fair to the team that loses the coin toss, because if they allow a td the game is over... some want the NFL to adopt the college rules.

Me personally, I think that if you want a chance to get the ball back your defense should actually play defense.

I think both teams should possess. Period. Hate the Falcons, but their defense spent the entire second half on the field. The offense may have been able to answer back if they had the chance. 

[ncfan]

17 hours ago, GoobyPls said:

I hate both. Each teams offense should get a shot, but they shouldn't start at the 20 like in college 

This.  I like the college rule each team gets a shot.  But put the ball at midfield.  Still have to get at Least 15 yards to get a legit shot (52 yard fg) and that's not even guaranteed (see gano)

[Ricky Spanish]

23 minutes ago, KSpan said:

Defense is completely removed from the equation in soccer and hockey OT and baseball, by nature of only being able to score on offense, requires it. Basketball's format is similar to baseball's. 

I personally think the NFL's format is fine. If you want to win, prevent a TD and get your offense the ball back. Would people be saying that NE deserved another drive if the Falcons D had managed to score a TD on that drive?

No, because both teams would have held possession of the ball. That's the big issue. Not every team is guaranteed possession in extra time. They have the ability to gain possession, but generally speaking, offensively is the most likely way to score. 

I think they should go college style rules in the NFL. Not necessarily at the 20 of the opposing defense, but at least have them both start at your own 35 or so. Give both teams a chance to score. If the first team on offense scores, let the other team on the field to score too. If the first team on offense throws a pick 6 or loses a fumble and the defense scores, call the game because both teams were allowed possession of some kind. I don't think it's rocket science, but the current format just isn't fair to all teams involved in the OT setting. 

And I say this as a general complaint about OT in professional football without the slightest hint of longing for the Falcons to get another chance to score, because screw them. If nothing else, I would want the rule to change now after the fact just to rub the salt in the wound more. 

[Jangler]

9 minutes ago, ncfan said:

This.  I like the college rule each team gets a shot.  But put the ball at midfield.  Still have to get at Least 15 yards to get a legit shot (52 yard fg) and that's not even guaranteed (see gano)

This is what I thought when the new OT started. They can change now. lol

But if after both team score the same, its a tie. Except in the playoffs...

[pantherclaw]

16 minutes ago, CoastalCat said:

I think both teams should possess. Period. Hate the Falcons, but their defense spent the entire second half on the field. The offense may have been able to answer back if they had the chance. 

It's no one's fault but the Falcons offense, for the defense being out on the field most of the second half. 

The Falcons also had the ball on the Pats 22 yard line. All they had to do was run 3 times, and kick a fiels goal. This would be a moot point. 

Instead, we have people who can't grasp such simple facts, and want to argue that our OT is wack.

[Cj72]

Personally I would rather they just add another quarter and play on. Maybe after the second ot go to the college rules.

[CardiacCat]

I'd say a penalty shoot-out should do the trick.

[Jon Snow]

I've got a better idea!  Just put the kickers out there a let them take turns kicking from the 50 yard line until one misses.  The one that missed gets kicked in the nuts by the winning kicker.   How's that for motivation?

[Ricky Spanish]

20 minutes ago, Bogart said:

I've got a better idea!  Just put the kickers out there a let them take turns kicking from the 50 yard line until one misses.  The one that missed gets kicked in the nuts by the winning kicker.   How's that for motivation?

I mean they're trying to get rid of kickoffs it seems so might as well give kickers more of an opportunity to actually contribute. have the kickers go toe to toe progressively going out 5 yards each kick until someone misses or one is blocked. It'd be kind of like hockey shootouts and would really separate the men from the boys in the kicking world/build up some good suspense.