I'm THRILLED the Saints won, BUT I hate the way the NFL does overtime. HATE IT.

[Captain Hilts]

The Vikes should have had a chance with the ball.

[Iggo]

1. But they lost the coin flip, man!

Jeez!

[Awsi Dooger]

2. Couldn't disagree more

The Vikings did have a chance with the ball. A simple tipped ball interception opportunity in overtime was dropped.

We've had two playoff overtimes this season, both decided on the first series, one by the defense and one by the offense. Why are we determined to remember only the latter?

There's one thing wrong with NFL overtimes: Kicking off from the 30 instead of the 35 or 40. That rule change was designed to promote runbacks and scoring. It does the job. But they neglected to consider impact on overtimes. Last night I posted on a college football site that NFL overtimes are strange in that the kickoff man seldom gets typical depth, and the cover team is spent after 60 minutes. It results in longer runbacks which equates to field position and alters the basic math, providing a greater opportunity to score first. The Saints began at the 39.

The break even position in the NFL is the 15 yard line. That's when both teams have 50/50 opportunity to score next, based on thousands of samples of every starting field position. You could merely stick the ball there, but that would be an absurd deviation from the sport as we know it. I'd move the overtime kickoff back to the 40, like the '70s and earlier, even if it meant boring touchbacks.

Another change would be to extend the delay between end of regulation and overtime. The teams are mentally and physically spent after 4 quarters. But the league will never go that route, due to TV purposes.

College overtimes are inane. I refuse to watch them, in the vast majority of cases. My Las Vegas friends always laugh when I walk away as soon as a game heads to overtime.

Bottom line, it's very simple. If you want a public outcry for a format change, you need the Super Bowl to reach overtime and be decided on the first possession, leaving a star QB on the sidelines. Otherwise the owners and rules committee are properly content to keep things the way they are.

[Hokie]

8. College overtime is fantastic

I will watch a college overtime even if I could care less about the teams that are playing. You can pick apart any overtime method but a system where the team that wins the coin toss wins a statistically significant portion of the time is flawed badly. Sure the college OT eliminates some parts of the game such as punting and kickoffs but it is much fairer than the NFL system. I think the NFL will eventually adopt a similar system. It is only a matter of time.

[Condem]

9. Agreed.

Equal opportunity.

[JonLP24]

14. Not really

Look at this season. It was roughly 50/50 in terms of won losing/winning toss. q

[Awsi Dooger]

23. The past two seasons have been 50/50

Prior to that there was a run of 6-7 years with big edge to the receiving team. That led to the fan and media outcry.

Since overtime was adopted in the mid '70s, only 30% of the time has the game been won on the first possession by the receiving team.

[Awsi Dooger]

22. College overtimes are a farce; ZERO chance the NFL will ever adopt similar

Literally zero chance. You've never paid attention to the argument if you think they'll ever go that route. The overtime format comes up frequently at NFL winter meetings and the college system is properly ridiculed. The games have a tendency to go on for several possessions, to the point the teams are worn out the following week. That's even more of a concern in the physical NFL. One college football betting trend is to go against any team that played an overtime that went at least two possessions and particularly three or higher. It was so successful the oddsmakers now adjust the line severely before those games are even on the board.

The owners and general managers understand variables that fans and media are happy to ignore. For one thing, if both teams are guaranteed a possession in overtime it impacts strategy late in regulation. A team with a dominant QB can be smug in its chances if both teams will get an opportunity. But if it's true sudden death they can't afford that gamble, and therefore play it more aggressively in regulation. The last thing the league wants is games that extend well beyond the 3 hour TV window, and with potential for coasting late in regulation, a team willing to take its chances in overtime.

College overtimes are hardly balanced. The team that wins the flip always chooses to go on defense first. There have been only 4 exceptions in 15 seasons, among something like 350 games. And the team that wins the flip and chooses to go on defense wins the game 54% of the time. That's the type of thing you need to know as a sports bettor. The books often stick quick lines on the overtimes and they wait until the toss. Then the team winning the toss becomes the favorite, unless they were a major underdog to begin with. It's sheer ignorance to think college overtimes are a 50/50 proposition.

Bottom line, the NFL's problem is the kickoff location, as I posted last night. Prior to the kickoff being moved from the 35 to the 30, the receiving team won the game 51% of the time. After the change to the 30, it's almost 59%. The idea to move it up to the 35 in overtime has come up at the rules meetings, but been voted down.

I think you'll see more and more kickoff specialists, guys who can jam the ball into the end zone. Carolina has used a roster spot for a few seasons on Rhys Lloyd, and Dallas had great success this year with David Buehler. They are the only two in the league.

[qazplm]

31. then why not simply play an extra quarter

tied at the end of that, then tie game.

Playoffs? Easy, make all extra points required to go for 2. You'd have precious few that ended in ties with that one change.
Obviously, for playoffs, you'd go extra periods as needed.

[KamaAina]

38. Um, Pierre Thomas returned the OT kickoff from a yard deep

and he isn't even the Saints' regular kick returner.

[rep the dems]

34. College OT sucks.

But so does NFL. Neither one should be looking to adopt the other, imo. College football makes it way too easy for teams to score, distorts the final score, and often takes forever to complete. NFL is often over too quickly because teams simply want to kick a field goal and walk off with the win.

I don't think that teams should have to score a TD to win in OT; that gives the defense an advantage as they're no longer too worried about the team getting into field goal position, but only the end zone. However, if the winning team had to win by 6 or more, 2 field goals OR a touchdown, I think it'd be a little more fair. Yes, the game could still end up taking a while, but we're much more likely to see the best team win.

[Captain Hilts]

11. Guaranteeing the other team a chance with a ball encourages teams to go for touchdowns. nt

[Onceuponalife]

3. They blew it by calling heads

I don't know the exact numbers but I believe tails comes up more often. I used to flip quarters with my friends for $5 a pop and I was very good at it. I prefer to call it while the coin is in the air and NFL rules do not allow that. The vast majority of the time I call tails. I have noticed that NFL players for some reason like to call heads a lot. They need to wise up and call tails more often.

[caraher]

5. I'll bet the stats are out there

and if it were true that the NFL uses unfair coins, some stat maven would figure it out and all the teams would call tails - and there's be an outcry and they'd fix it.

There's too much money at stake for me to believe your gut feeling is correct here about NFL games.

[caraher]

17. I did find one interesting piece on coin flip bias

According to this Stanford study, there's a 51% chance that a coin will land with the same side up as the side that was up at the start of the flip. If refs have a habit of flipping with tails up, then there should be a small bias in favor of tails.

[caraher]

4. I hate the system too

but it's awfully hard to come up with an OT method that doesn't overemphasize certain phases of the game, is not driven by luck and doesn't overtax already-spent players. I'd like to see a long break followed by a full quarter for playoff games, but I'd worry that guys would cramp up, get injured, etc. at an unacceptable rate.

I don't mind the current OT system much for the regular season games, but the only sudden-death OT I like in sports is in hockey, which has a truly neutral start to OT.

[Goblinmonger]

10. Yeah, I agree that sudden death

is fine in sports like Hockey. It sucks in football.

Even in wrestling, they have gone to giving both wrestlers a chance if nobody scores points in the first OT (which is neutral like hockey).

[Auggie]

6. Play to win in regulation. Overtime is another way to lose a game.

[caraher]

7. I agree, but that didn't apply yesterday. Nobody played for a tie

[Auggie]

12. Of course

But consider overtime the penalty for not making the plays you are supposed to make. Or for that matter, making mistakes. The Vikings played their way into overtime with their fumbles, penalties and one or two ill-advised passes. They had plenty of opportunity to win the game in regulation.

[joeybee12]

13. Yeah, but if they played college rules, I'd bet we'd still be watching...n/t

[jimnasium]

30. Yeah, because the game would still be going on...

At the end of the 80th overtime period...

Still tied at 666!

Seriously. If you go by NCAA rules, all scores are TDs and all 1 and 2-point conversions are successful.

[El Supremo]

15. Agreed.

College Overtime is more fair.

But I'd also like to see no play reviews. That was boring.

[madinmaryland]

18. You gotta have play reviews. I'd rather they take an extra couple of minutes

to get the call right. Otherwise Jerry Jones will replay the screwup on the Jerrytron for the rest of the game!

[Liberal_Dog]

16. I Can't Stand It Either

I would like to see OT eliminated entirely for regular season games. It is an easy out for coaches.

For the playoffs, I would play one 15 minute quarter. If the game still is not decided, then it would go to sudden death.

[Yavin4]

19. How About You Can Only Win In OT If You Score A TD?

No FGs. That would make it fairer for the defense.

[Hippo_Tron]

20. I agree with that

Even better would be no punting as well.

[caraher]

21. Apparently they've considered making it "first to score 6 in OT wins"

Very similar...

I also read of a proposal to do away with the OT coin toss; instead, the teams would bid and which ever team's bid is closest to their own goal line starts OT with the ball places where they bid for possession.

[rep the dems]

35. Didn't know they were considering that, but good to hear! nt

[DaveinMD]

24. they should change it

to first team to 6 points. Getting in position for one field goal is nonsense.

[wilt the stilt]

25. Here's the problem with all the solutions

you are fundamentally changing the rules of the game. I think sudden death also stinks. I think a 15 minute qtr. is probably the best solution and have ties in the regular season and sudden death after a 15 minute period.

[DaveinMD]

26. I don't mind that idea

though first team to 6 doesn't really alter the rules too much

[many a good man]

27. I have a better OT idea for playoffs

If the game ends tied they just continue playing, untimed, until the first team scores. If the winning goal is scored in OT then there is a kickoff and the other team gets one possession to tie the game or lose.

Under the current rules, the team winning the coin toss wins on the first possession 30% of the time, and wins the game 70% of the time. My solution maintains end game strategy and is completely fair.

[JonLP24]

28. Your number is high

From the 2000 through 2007 regular seasons, there have been 124 overtime games. In every single game except one (I believe), the team that won the toss elected to receive. And those receiving teams won 60% of the time (and tied once).
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/10/how-important-is-coin-flip-in-ot.html

It was roughly 50/50 in '08 but I won't break down game by game to prove it. In 2009 the team that won the toss won 8 and lost 7. Only 5 out of 15 were on the first possession which disproves the "unfair" meme. Nothing is unfair about giving a team a chance to stop them on defense. Many of these 'solutions' would potentially prolong the game far too long causing injuries and exhausting players in a 16 game season. Also some would completely change what is 'normal' football meaning a kickoff, move the ball, score a TD, FG, or punt.

Maybe I'm biased because the last two overtime games my team the Cardinals were in they won dispite losing the toss. Last one was the Wild Card game where they won on a fumble return for a TD. Last year was against the Cowboys where they blocked a punt and returned it for a TD. Also my very first NFL game I attended was in '97 against the Cowboys. In OT Dallas had the ball first but Emmitt Smith fumbled, AZ then kicked the winning FG with their opportunity. I have always been in favor of leaving the way things are, it may be a bias but what is stopping other teams from making plays on defense to win the game?

Here is my legwork for the 2009 season.

Steelers won toss and won on first possession in the first game of the season against Tennessee. (Maybe "unfair" but there is nothing preventing them from playing defense)

Week 4
Yes Bengals won the toss and won the game against the Browns but possession changed 6 times before the Bengals won so this game was completely "fair" meaning both teams had multiple chances on offense.

Week 5
Kansas City won the toss but Dallas won the game. Plus possession changed 4 times, completely fair.

Denver won the toss and beat New England on the first possession. Again New England could have stopped on defense but didn't.

Week 6
Jacksonville won the toss and beat St Louis on the first possession.

NY Jets won the toss but lost to Buffalo. Plus the ball changed possession 5 times.

Week 11
Pittsburgh won the toss but lost to Kansas City. The ball changed possession once.

NY Giants won the toss and beat Atlanta first possession.

Week 12
Pittsburgh won the toss but lost to Baltimore. The ball changed possession 3 times

Week 13
Washington won the toss but lost to New Orleans. The ball changed possession once.

Week 15
Miami won the loss but lost to Tennessee. The ball changed possession once.

Week 16
Tampa Bay won the toss and beat New Orleans first possession.

Chicago won the toss and beat Minnesota but the ball changed possession 4 times.

Wild Card
Green Bay won the toss but lost to Arizona. AZ scored on a defensive touchdown in the first possession. Also they allowed 45 points.

Conference.
New Orleans won the toss and beat Minnesota first possession(the reason for this thread).

[jimnasium]

29. Overtime Sucks!!!

I'd like to see the NFL just do away with regular-season OT, and just let the game end in a tie.

In the playoffs - perhaps play two 5-minute quarters, then sudden-death if its still tied.

[ProfessorGAC]

32. I Know I'm A Week Late, But. . .

. . .i'm going to disagree, totally.

The number of games that go to overtime is quiet small. The Vikes/Saints game was the first playoff game to go to OT in 4 years. Counting the SB, that makes 36 playoff games, In those games, the team winning the toss wins on the first possession 9 in 16 times. So, 9/16ths of 1/36th means that this all means something 1 in every 65 games.

It seems like an awful lot of people are trying to fix a problem that barely exists.
GAC

[JonLP24]

33. "Vikes/Saints game was the first playoff game to go to OT in 4 years"

You're not including Wild Card games which I think are playoff games. Just 2 weeks before the Vikes/Saints games the Packers/Cardinals game went into OT, that game Green Bay won the toss.

Last year in the Wild Card round Colts/Chargers went into overtime, Chargers won the toss and won the game on first possession but they were helped a lot by 2 defensive penalties.

Otherwise I agree but I'm trying to understand the first playoff game to go to OT in 4 years comment.

[ProfessorGAC]

36. Sorry, You're Right.

I was including just divisional and conference games. That was stupid of me.
GAC

[Harry Monroe]

37. 2 years ago, the NFC Championship went into overtime

New York Giants beat Green Bay and Farve at Lambeau field in OT. They then went on to upset the Patriots in Super Bowl 42!! THE SAINTS ARE COMING!!!