Three teams voted against the NFL's new overtime rule, including one that played in Super Bowl LVI
The NFL's new overtime rule wasn't passed unanimously
www.cbssports.com
Miami one of three teams against new OT rules
- Thread starter Finsational
- Start date
www.cbssports.com
traptses
Starter
Glad I’m on the same page with Miami
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2016
- Messages
- 3,952
- Reaction score
- 7,003
Yep, new rule sucks. There are advantages to both the team that posses the ball first and the other team with the old way. All the team has to do who loses the coin toss is get a stop or hold them to a FG and then control their own fate. You are risking significant injury by having players subject to an extra game and now playing well past what they normally play in OT during the playoffs after playing a 17 game schedule.
Just another of the many reasons to love the Phins
Joe Dolfan
Active Roster
I don't mind the ties. I'd be in favor of longer OTs in the playoffs, if all games ended in regulation during the regular season.
Joe Dolfan
Active Roster
Maybe Ross voted against it, because Miami had just signed Hill, and he plans on letting him return kicks.
Both QBs need the ball in their hands. Period. After that go to sudden death.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2012
- Messages
- 13,285
- Reaction score
- 32,034
I'm all in for a green white checker type OT! For the ladies in the house that's NASCAR style.
Sorry but ties are unacceptable in this day and age. There needs to be a winner and loser after every game played. Ties are useless. It's like they never played the game in the first place.
Dolph N.Fan
Active Roster
Not sure why there is such an overreaction just because Josh Allen didn't get to touch the ball in OT. Where was the outrage when Matt Ryan didn't touch the ball in OT vs Tom Brady in the Super Bowl? Or when Mahomes didn't touch the ball in OT in the championship game vs Tom Brady?
For starters, OT needs to go back to 15 minutes, the move to 10 minutes has pretty much gotten us at least one tie a year.
I propose in OT both teams get a chance to match, if team A wins coin toss and elects to receive first, if they score a TD on their first drive, they must go for 2. Team B then gets a chance to match, if they score they must go for 2 to extend the game into sudden death (if team A converted their 2 pt attempt), OR they can kick an XP to win the game if they were successful in stopping team A's 2 pt attempt, if team B misses XP then OT is extended into sudden death.
That way both teams will touch the ball at least once so there is no bitching and depending how good your offense or defense is it will switch the strategy up on whether they actually want the ball first if they win the coin toss.
For starters, OT needs to go back to 15 minutes, the move to 10 minutes has pretty much gotten us at least one tie a year.
I propose in OT both teams get a chance to match, if team A wins coin toss and elects to receive first, if they score a TD on their first drive, they must go for 2. Team B then gets a chance to match, if they score they must go for 2 to extend the game into sudden death (if team A converted their 2 pt attempt), OR they can kick an XP to win the game if they were successful in stopping team A's 2 pt attempt, if team B misses XP then OT is extended into sudden death.
That way both teams will touch the ball at least once so there is no bitching and depending how good your offense or defense is it will switch the strategy up on whether they actually want the ball first if they win the coin toss.
I don’t mind ties either. They add intrigue to the playoff race.
Yeah I don't like it, play some defense. I think the concession for an initial FG not ending the game is a good one, but if you let a team march all the way down the field for a TD when the season is on the line, in 1 play or 13 plays, then take the loss like a man! This may have more to do with extending viewing time than competition.