NFL Overtime

[DMN in the House]

I don't like the idea of taking away FGs in overtime, because they're a part of the game. Thats like taking away blitzing, or play action passing. You should be capable in all three facets of the game (offense, defense, special teams) if you want to win anyway.

[Hellfire]

XFL rules, with the kickers. Put one on each side and make them run for the ball. At least they would have another use, and it'd be entertaining to see them run into each other because honestly, who doesn't like seeing kickers get hit?

Edited November 5, 2007 by Hellfire

[Cactus Drags]

I think if your defense can't make a stop when it counts then you shouldn't win, and shouldn't be awarded with an opportunity to do so

Exactly. It's a two sided game, offense and defense. If your defense screws up, then that's it.

[Mr. X]

I think overtime should be scrapped and it should all go to either a win-loss-draw column. I believe that taking out overtimes makes the 16 games more important than they already are and adds something newer to the modern way of the major professional sports in North America.

In theory, overtime also gives someone an additional opportunity to win. My problem also lies in the idea that football is a defensive sport, when it has been proven (Chicago Bears) that a great defense can do nothing with an average offense. Taking away overtime also doesn't penalize an underdog from being able to stand toe to toe with a better team, and in some cases may make teams play a in-significant game as there will be no additional opportunity if the game ends in a tie (without necessarily being penalized).

[Cactus Drags]

The best thing about overtime occurred in 2005, when Mike Brown returned INTs for the winning TD two consecutive weeks. CONSECUTIVE.

[gunnar hendershow]

Sudden Death overtime is the bullshit of bullshits in sports. Well almost as much as shootouts. Play an extra quarter, if nobody can emerge as a winner then you have a tie. None of this 2 minutes and OT is over crap that makes for "compelling" TV.

[Lowerdeck]

At least there's a lengthy overtime and a chance to win, instead of some bullshit fucking shootout (soccer, hockey)

[TheSqauredCircleMessiah]

I think overtime should be scrapped and it should all go to either a win-loss-draw column. I believe that taking out overtimes makes the 16 games more important than they already are and adds something newer to the modern way of the major professional sports in North America.

In theory, overtime also gives someone an additional opportunity to win. My problem also lies in the idea that football is a defensive sport, when it has been proven (Chicago Bears) that a great defense can do nothing with an average offense. Taking away overtime also doesn't penalize an underdog from being able to stand toe to toe with a better team, and in some cases may make teams play a in-significant game as there will be no additional opportunity if the game ends in a tie (without necessarily being penalized).

[HailtotheYo]

My problem also lies in the idea that football is a defensive sport, when it has been proven (Chicago Bears) that a great defense can do nothing with an average offense.

Um, the '85 Bears and '01 Ravens would like to argue that fact.

[Blitz]

Draws suck. Isn't a game played to see who the better team is on any given Sunday? Not to see teams that are apparently equal.

[Mr. X]

I think overtime should be scrapped and it should all go to either a win-loss-draw column. I believe that taking out overtimes makes the 16 games more important than they already are and adds something newer to the modern way of the major professional sports in North America.

In theory, overtime also gives someone an additional opportunity to win. My problem also lies in the idea that football is a defensive sport, when it has been proven (Chicago Bears) that a great defense can do nothing with an average offense. Taking away overtime also doesn't penalize an underdog from being able to stand toe to toe with a better team, and in some cases may make teams play a in-significant game as there will be no additional opportunity if the game ends in a tie (without necessarily being penalized).

There are ties in the NFL. I'm in favor of each team getting one possesion, sudden death after that.

Ties in the NFL are pretty rare now compared to in the earlier years. My point is that overtime seems to be an excuse for advertisers and to make a winner out of a team (which if overtime was cut down would mean that there wouldn't be a winner based merely on additional time that is relatively unnecessary.)

My problem also lies in the idea that football is a defensive sport, when it has been proven (Chicago Bears) that a great defense can do nothing with an average offense.

Um, the '85 Bears and '01 Ravens would like to argue that fact.

WOW! You can pick out two teams that won on defense. My point is that most NFL fans want to say football is all about either the offense or defense, when generally speaking you need a bit of both to win the big games.

Draws suck. Isn't a game played to see who the better team is on any given Sunday? Not to see teams that are apparently equal.

Draws don't 'suck'. I've taken a liking to soccer because it doesn't add un-needed extra time to find a winner in the regular season matchups because the best team SHOULD be able to win without an overtime. During playoffs, it is an entirely different story. Draws could also make the games more exciting as a team wanting to have a 16-0 season realize that they don't have any extra time to fall back on if they are merely relying on a huge comeback (I am implying before the game, as mentality has a huge impact on teams.)