Football overtime--what do you prefer?

[John_DiFool]

How is playing a full quarter of OT football so much worse than playing half a quarter? Will that extra 7 or 10 minutes or whatever really kill them? I’m off to see just how long a typical OT quarter lasts, be back soon…

Having said that, the NHL’s postseason modus operandi does go too far in that direction-when you have to play the equivalent of an entire extra game on one night, something’s FUBARed there. Just let it go to 4-on-4 for the 2nd and subsequent periods. Note that football gives them a whole week off to recuperate, while in the NHL you’re playing again 1-2 days later (and the physicality of both sports is about equivalent more or less).

[John_DiFool]

Just as I suspected: average NFL OT for the past 3 seasons lasted an average of 7:02 minutes. I don’t think playing the rest of the quarter is going to kill them.

[Interestingly, the NFL switched sometime recently from elapsed time to clock time for denoting the occurence of key events in their box scores, which makes more sense and is less annoying.]

[Nightfall1]

I like the overtime in the NFL. If you whine about your side not getting a chance to score in overtime than darn well WIN the game in regulation time.

[Ruby]

5th quarter is the only thing that makes sense to me if you can’t have a tie.

[tpatsfan]

@Nightfall1

I like the overtime in the NFL. If you whine about your side not getting a chance to score in overtime than darn well WIN the game in regulation time.

Good point. Straight and to the point love it. I agree. But do you think that people dislike OT because that means more game to watch and they really don’t want to watch more football? And who doesn’t more??

[ReticulatingSplines]

I favor keeping the sudden death format, only the winner of the coin toss can choose either to kick the ball off OR take possession of the ball on their own 5.

@Nightfall1

I like the overtime in the NFL. If you whine about your side not getting a chance to score in overtime than darn well WIN the game in regulation time.

:rolleyes:

[armedmonkey]

I dig the college overtime. It’s just fun to watch.

[Invisible_Chimp]

Ties are un-American. That’s why hockey and soccer have never caught on as big as basketball, football and baseball.

I like the college way because I don’t like the outcome of the game dependent on a coin flip.

[sitchensis]

I’m a fan of the Kansas city tiebreaker (college), I just wish they would move them back to the 50, out of field goal range to start. It’s the best system, totally fair and you get to see a lot of exciting football at the end of the game.

[BigDadWolf]

My friend and I have an old Atari 4-player football arcade game and play against each other about once a week. We came up with a tie-breaking system which I think is really fair and has only one rule - loser is the first person who gives up the ball while trailing.

Opening drive team A gets a FG then team B must get at least a FG on their drive. If team B gets a TD then team A must get a TD and until a team turns the ball over on an interception, fails to convert on 4th down, or misses a tying or go-ahead FG.
The thing I like about this system is each team has a chance keep the game going. The only drawback is that it can lead to some long overtimes but realistically in the NFL it is unlikely to go for more than a quarter.

[garygnu]

Ties are an abomination, unacceptable to anyone with a brain.

The Kansas Plan isn’t perfect, but it is dramatic and fair.

[KennerTheGreat]

Let 'em play all night if we can’t have a tie. Suck it up and play football (or hockey, or whatever.)

[OldGuy]

@Invisible_Chimp

Ties are un-American. That’s why hockey and soccer have never caught on as big as basketball, football and baseball.

That would explain why there are no ties in NHL hockey and it’s possible to have a tie in NFL football?

[Marley23]

I voted for sudden death, but I’d be just as happy with a full quarter of play. The other options change or remove elements of the game and I don’t like the idea of deciding the games by altering the way they are played.

@OldGuy

One thing I’d definitely like is for an overtime win to count less than a regulation time win.

No, no, no, no, no. I despise that system. If you want credit for winning the game, win the game. You shouldn’t get points for almost winning. So what if you went to OT and lost?

[Spit]

@Roland_Orzabal

A tie. Barring that since many consider it unpalatable, play more football, in whatever time increments you care to set. Never will I understand the tendency among sports leagues to settle ties by having teams engage in an activity that is almost, but not quite, the sport in question.

The purpose of a football game is to determine which of two competing teams will defeat the other at football, yes? Given that, when time expires without producing a clear winner (and we presume that a tie is unacceptable), is the purpose of the game better achieved by determined by A) playing more football, or B) playing a football-like subgame that is altered from the initial game in one or more crucial aspects?

Baseball gets this right. They don’t like ties, so when nine innings doesn’t tell the whole story, they just continue playing the damn game until somebody wins. They don’t stop after the ninth and say “Okay, we need a clear victor here, so here’s what we’re gonna do: same basic game, but you only get two strikes, and first one to score or have three batters walked wins it all.”

The only way to determine the better football team is by having them play football. If you don’t want to do that — takes too long, too much risk of injury, or whatever — then suck it up and call it a tie. Anything else, and you might as well pick a winner by having the head coaches play parcheesi.

This changed my mind on the subject. Good work.

[Do_Not_Taunt]

@Invisible_Chimp

I like the college way because I don’t like the outcome of the game dependent on a coin flip.

I don’t watch the college game much, but isn’t the first team to get the ball dependent on a coin flip? Isn’t that a disadvantage?

[EllisDee]

@Do_Not_Taunt

I don’t watch the college game much, but isn’t the first team to get the ball dependent on a coin flip? Isn’t that a disadvantage?

Yep, it sure is. Teams that win the toss elect to have the other team start first because going second gives you an advantage.

@Larry_Borgia

Sudden death, but the first team cannot end the game on a field goal. If the first posession end in a field goal the other team gets a chance. If they score a field goal, it’s sudden death from then on. If they score a
TD they win. If they don’t score they lose.

@BigBadWolf

My friend and I have an old Atari 4-player football arcade game and play against each other about once a week. We came up with a tie-breaking system which I think is really fair and has only one rule - loser is the first person who gives up the ball while trailing.

Both of these scenarios – as well as the college system – have the same issue as any “fair ups” system: whoever goes second has the advantage of foreknowledge.

The first team to get the ball, they have to play real football. They can’t go for it on fourth down deep in their own territory, they have to punt. In the college system, they can’t go for the touchdown on fourth and long, they have to kick a field goal.

The second team to get the ball knows exactly what they need, and so they get the benefit of knowing ahead of time that they get four downs to work with. This gives them a clear advantage, and that’s why in college overtime the winner of the coin toss chooses to go second.

Sudden death is the closest thing to real football there is that also reduces the risk of injury. Nobody gets a free pass to use four downs with impunity. Based on the average of 7:02 per sudden death overtime, the sudden death format cuts the injury risk by more than half while maintaining the real game of football.

[Little_Nemo]

A full extra quarter. After that let it remain a tie in necessary.

[furt]

HS/College: Ties during the season, sudden death in playoffs.

NFL: Sudden death

I could live with a “both teams get the ball” modification of sudden death.

The current college system is asinine beyond words.

[Sateryn76]

I struggled with this, and initially hated the NFL system. But arguments on The Dope convinced me.

1. Ties suck - we need a winner
2. Playing until someone wins could mean a ten hour game, which no one wants
3. The team is made up of two parts - offense and defense. The job of the defense is just as important as that of the offense, and if they can’t stop the other team, they lose.