Ties suck
NFL format works
College format is most exciting, based on my viewing experience
Re: posts about “real” football
If this is part of the game due to the rules then it is just as real as when touchdowns were added to the game. That argument doesn’t make much sense to me.
I was going to post, but ElvisL1ves did it for me…
The first team to score six points in OT wins.
Why is it more “fair” than the NFL system? Both have coin tosses which have important decisions.
I like the idea of an extra quarter, with a modified “sudden death” rule - to win, a team must be four points ahead.
That way, it’s not immediately over when one team gets down and kicks a field goal, and teams won’t be only trying to get in range and end it. They ought to at least be considering their defense and trying to get to the endzone.
One way to ditch the coin toss would be to award the choice to the team that led most recently. (OK, except for scoreless draws, which happen approximately never so I’m not too worried).
This is far better than any “fair ups” system in that it doesn’t give one team an extra down. If the first team scores a FG, the second team can’t go for it on 4th and long, instead they have to punt. Just like real football.
If we had to change sudden death, I’d vote for “race to 4.” Though it would bother me tremendously that a safety didn’t win overtime, I suppose I could live with it.
Honestly, I don’t understand why people have a problem with the NFL’s regular season sudden death format. I guess this is one of those times when people’s intuition is faulty. (“Fair ups” intuitively feels fair despite it being roughly as “unfair” as sudden death.)
It happened once since overtime became a fixture.
No, it isn’t. Regulation play is four quarters of 15 minutes each, ending when the clock expires in the last quarter. When you alter the regulation ruleset, you’re playing a different game, regardless of what you care to call it.
If a given set of overtime rule changes were to be added to the regulation game, then they’d become part of football, just as touchdowns and the forward pass did when they were added. Until and unless that’s the case, the overtime procedure is (sometimes) part of a football game, but not part of football, and that’s exactly the distinction I have a problem with.
Suppose the NFL were to decide that, to minimize injury, the result of the start-of-OT coin flip determined the winner of the game. Would you consider this resolution method to be part of football by virtue of being in the rulebook, and thereby fulfill the purpose of a football game? If so, then I applaud your consistency, but you and I have very different ideas of the definition of any given sport.
I LOATHE the college OT rule! Whenever a game goes to OT, I turn the channel! My prefered systems:
NCAA:1 15 minute OT
NFL:Sudden Death
I voted “other”, which is just a slight modification to the current NFL rule:
Have a second coin flip at the start of every game to determine who gets the ball in a potential overtime. This gives a bit more strategic flexibility to the team that won’t get the ball in OT.
I voted other. The main change I’d like is to have overtime wins not count as much in the standings as regulation wins so we could get away from n-level tie-breakers. Let a regulation win count 4 points and overtime win count 3 points, a tie 2 points, an overtime loss 1 pt and a regulation loss 0 points. Standings are based first on points. You could do it with winning percentage if you prefer by counting an overtime win as 3/4 a win and 1/4 a loss.
Regular season: let a tie be a tie. I can see no need to resolve it.
Postseason: an extra full quarter, with sudden death commencing at the beginning of the second OT quarter if the game is tied at the end of the first OT quarter. However, the second OT quarter, if needed, will be a continuation of the first OT quarter with reversal of direction, just as between the first and second quarters of regulation. So no coin flip necessary.
I went with college rules. It’s a better chance of a win and how disappointing would it be if we kept ties and your team ends up with, oh, six of 'em?
But I will offer an alternative: One possession each, then we go to hockey playoff rules. You play till someone wins. Makes games longer, won’t have to lengthen the season.
OR… In OT, no field goals. Touchdowns or safeties only. First one to score wins.
OR… just let the ESPN guys pick the winner. 
I don’t hate the system we have. It could be worse anyway. Imagine if we decided a winner by total yards or less penalty yards. Shit, don’t send that to NFL.
I like both of these too. The pre-determined coin flip would be very intriguing. If near the end of a game you miss a field goal on fourth down, no prob. You already know you’re getting the ball back.
And I really like the points system, Old Guy. It could bring a little more drama to division standings throughout the season.
Ugh, no. Earning points from losses is an abomination. I’ve always hated that about the NHL, where you can mathematically lose every single game of the season – not one stinkin’ win – and still easily make the playoffs.
5th quarter. I HATE the college OT. Anything is better than that.
I tend to agree with your point, however the last time a team made the NHL playoffs with 82 points or less appears to be 1999.
I really like the college OT system, and I think it would be great in the NFL. Only adjustment: Give the teams the ball on the 50 yard line.
You’d rather a playoff position is determined by net touchdowns scored or something equally arbitrary? I only want to use tie-wins and tie-losses as a tiebreaker for determining playoff positions.