Mr. P Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 BobGlauber Breaking news: NFL owners have approved overtime change ... only in playoffs. Adam_Schefter In May, NFL owners will discuss whether to amend the modified OT proposal to also include the regular season for 2010. richeisen Change is here RT @JasonLaCanfora: NFL's OT changes for playoffs passed. press conference upcoming. check out NFL.com and NFL Network BobGlauber NFL owners meet May 24-26 in Dallas to discuss OT for reg. season, as well as award 2014 Super Bowl. NY, Tampa, S. Fla. in running. im sure an article will be coming soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted March 23, 2010 Author Share Posted March 23, 2010 im still officially against the change. dont wanna lose? play defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted March 23, 2010 Author Share Posted March 23, 2010 Overtime proposal passes The National Football League owners have approved a change in overtime, starting with the playoffs following the 2010 season, that will modify the sudden-death format and prevent a team from winning a game with a field goal on the opening possession. The vote was 28-4. It needed at least 24 votes to pass. It's the first change in playoff overtime rules in the NFL in 52 years. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/23/overtime-proposal-passes/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted March 23, 2010 Author Share Posted March 23, 2010 The overtime rules proposal has passed by a vote of 28-4. The proposal was passed as written just for the postseason, but the owners have decided to discuss adopting the changes for the regular season at their next meeting, in May in Dallas. The new rule says a team losing the coin toss and then surrendering a field goal on the first possession should have a series of its own in OT. It needed 24 votes for ratification. The Competition Committee recommended the change in a vote of 6-2, and commissioner Roger Goodell supported the plan and was able to secure enough votes to get the move passed on Tuesday, a day before the expected Wednesday vote. "We've had this discussion for a number of years," Competition co-chairman Rich McKay told ESPN.com's John Clayton. "We feel this year's proposal gave us the opportunity to a pretty good rule. Statistically we felt it needed to be changed. It wasn't creating the fairest result as far as field goal accuracy, field goal distance and drive starts." The reason for the change was the increased accuracy of kickers since 1993. In 1994, the NFL moved kickoffs from the 35 to the 30, which created better field position for the teams that won the coin toss and received the kickoffs. Since 1994, kickers have had better than a 50 percent accuracy level on field goals longer than 50 yards. Statistics examined by the committee showed that since 1994, teams winning the coin toss win the game 59.8 percent of the time. The team that loses the toss wins the game 38.5 percent in that 15-year span, or since kickoffs were moved back 5 yards to the 30. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5022064 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 This is stupid... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treehugger Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 I like it. A team should never be encouraged to play for a FG, even in OT. ...and we still have Party Tynes on the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 I like the change personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 What if: There's a turnover on the opening kickoff and the team that lost the coin toss scores a FG -or- There's a turnover on the kickoff after the first FG -or- There's a turnover during the first possession resulting in a FG -or- There's a safety in the first possession ---- This is why my plan "first team to score 6" is inherently simpler and better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 What if: There's a turnover on the opening kickoff and the team that lost the coin toss scores a FG - The team that recovered and kicked the FG wins, both teams had possession of the ball. -or- There's a turnover on the kickoff after the first FG - The team that scored the FG and recovered would win, both teams had possession of the ball. -or- There's a turnover during the first possession resulting in a FG -The team that got the turnover and scored the FG would win, both teams had possession of the ball. -or- There's a safety in the first possession - The teams D that got the safety would win the game. Defense can still win the game with a pick 6 or a safety. ---- This is why my plan "first team to score 6" is inherently simpler and better. Maybe this isnt all new to me because the CFL has similar OT rules, but it's really not all that hard to understand, not to mention the first team to put up 6 does win the game. The new system just makes it so that a team cant play for a FG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 Maybe this isnt all new to me because the CFL has similar OT rules, but it's really not all that hard to understand. this ain't CFL, sweetie we need everything 'splained. you're just guessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueInCanada Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 this ain't CFL, sweetie we need everything 'splained. you're just guessing. No, thats how the games would end in your examples that you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BronxRik Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 The reason for the change was the increased accuracy of kickers since 1993. In 1994, the NFL moved kickoffs from the 35 to the 30, which created better field position for the teams that won the coin toss and received the kickoffs. Since 1994, kickers have had better than a 50 percent accuracy level on field goals longer than 50 yards. Statistics examined by the committee showed that since 1994, teams winning the coin toss win the game 59.8 percent of the time. The team that loses the toss wins the game 38.5 percent in that 15-year span, or since kickoffs were moved back 5 yards to the 30. So, um, why not just move kickoffs back to the 35 -or- if you're feeling generous, up to the 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 No, thats how the games would end in your examples that you posted. in your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 This seems like one of those rules that will be eliminated as soon as something controversial happens.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 im still officially against the change. dont wanna lose? play defense. Still a game of inches. Wanna win? Score a touchdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BronxRik Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 This seems like one of those rules that will be eliminated as soon as something controversial happens.... You mean like Favre or Brady "winning" in overtime by a FG, only to have the ball run back for 6 on the ensuing kickoff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishgutmartyr Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 I wonder if Reid is briefing McNabb about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BronxRik Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 I wonder if Reid is briefing McNabb about this. :LMAO: That's fucking hilarious. I envision McNabb going for 6 in the regular season when he's got the ball at the 7....and falling short. "But, but, coach, you said we had to win by 6 in overtime". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 in your opinion. No I'm pretty sure that common sense dictates what BiC said is right cupcake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 No I'm pretty sure that common sense dictates what BiC said is right cupcake i know- i was just busting him on his aloof answer. thanks for chiming in, pumpkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMFP Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 McKay stressed that the new overtime rule, which says the team receiving the kickoff can't end the game on the first possession unless it scores a touchdown, will apply only to the playoffs. Seems pretty reasonable to me. Kick a FG, and the other team gets a shot. Score a TD, and you win. If anything, it will make OT more dramatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmenroc Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 I hated the idea of changing OT to match that which college has. This is a nice compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rphguy Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 after a tie, why not just flip a coin to see who wins? or, each team picks a champion and sends them to the cage on the 50 yard line. 2 men enter, 1 man leaves. The team of the one who walks out is the winner. I am glad to see them change it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted March 26, 2010 Author Share Posted March 26, 2010 after a tie, why not just flip a coin to see who wins? or, each team picks a champion and sends them to the cage on the 50 yard line. 2 men enter, 1 man leaves. The team of the one who walks out is the winner. I am glad to see them change it. who in the nfl could beat justin tuck in your thunderdome deathmatch scenario? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nas Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 who in the nfl could beat justin tuck in your thunderdome deathmatch scenario? Sproles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now