Overtime Rule | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Overtime Rule

they neutralize the effect of winning the initial coinflip, I dont see any reason they wouldnt at the start of overtime when the stakes are much higher. It simply doesnt make any sense...
 
OT needs to be re-evaluated. College OT isnt perfect but it’s more fair than the NFL OT. A toss of a coin shouldn’t give a team such a significant advantage
 
The NFL needs to stop pretending that a coin flip sudden death overtime makes any sense in 2019. The new rule book puts the defense at a huge disadvantage, so the age old argument "if you want to win, stop the other team" holds no water whatsoever anymore.
good-point-gif-2.gif
 
A full 15 minute overtime. If there's a tie, then the offense that gets closest to the goal line or scored the most yardage in that period gets the win. It's patently unfair to a team to have gone this far to have their fate determined by a flip of the coin.. not to mention unsatisfactory to fans who've, in this case watched Mahomes shake off the nervousness in the 2nd half and outscore the Pats by 2 touchdowns, not to touch the ball!
 
I think its fine. If you don't receive the ball first, get a stop. What % of drives end in a TD in the NFL? Has to be less than 33%. If you get a stop on defense, you then have a huge advantage. All you need is a field goal to win. I think its completely fair. The chiefs just have a shitty defense and they went up against the best QB ever. The Rams got a stop in overtime and won. The coin flip doesn't decide it. I would like to know what % of overtime games end with the first team possessing the ball scoring a TD. Probably pretty low.

Say the chiefs were able to get a possession after the Patriots TD and they score a TD. We are back at square one with the patriots only needing a field goal to win.
 
College overtime is insulting. I click away and refuse to watch. Often I don't bother to check the outcome. I certainly didn't watch one play of that LSU/Texas A&M disgrace from a couple of months ago.

That college overtime is equivalent to soccer games switching from overtime to penalty kicks. Fans may like the cheap excitement variable but it doesn't resemble the actual game at all when the offense is already in field goal range or ability to throw a mid ranged ball into the end zone. It would be like starting a golf overtime on the putting green or nearby. At least the old NASL rule forced the offensive player to dribble beginning at midfield, like the NHL shootout rule. That gives the goalie numerous options instead of just standing there on the end line and (supposedly) not allowed to move until the ball is struck.

The college overtime likewise should begin at midfield, if they are going to maintain the farce of alternating possessions. Force the offense to do something.

Overtime rules are contrived. That is the common denominator. I don't mind ties at all. For one thing, very few regular season football games would end in ties if there were no overtime. Some of the greatest games in Canes history came down to 2 point conversion attempts prior to the introduction of overtime -- 1983 championship game vs. Nebraska, 1987 at Florida State, 1988 at Notre Dame. All three times the team trying to win the game via 2 point conversion failed in the final seconds, and lost.

I have no idea how anyone can argue that both teams are entitled to the football. You have already played 60 minutes. That was your opportunity. It was a lifetime of chance. IMO, it is a bar stool argument to demand both teams with the football. The old NFL overtime rule was superior to the current one, which is the definition of contrived.

Why is the team that gets the ball first punished for having a great quarterback and/or great field goal kicker? Why is the team that goes on defense first rewarded with a second chance if it has a lousy defense?
 
Each team should get one possession.

Chances are a coin flip decided the KC/Pats game and that shouldn't be. Both teams deserves a shot in OT.

If it goes to double OT then go sudden death.
 
I think it is fine the way it is. Both teams had 60 minutes to win the game. Each has an equal chance to win the coin toss and even winning coin toss isn’t a sure victory.

And college overtime is ridiculous.
 
It needs to be like this: if TEAM 1 scores a TD they must go for 2 PTS then TEAM 2 has a opportunity to answer an must score a TD and 2 PTS to continue. NO FGS!! If TEAM 1 Intercept or gets a FUMBLE recovery on TEAM 2's drive the GAME IS OVER. Because they did not match. But if 1 and 2 are tied 8pts - 8pts or 6pts to 6pts they continue all 10 minutes till there is a winner. If both are tied its a tie. But, it could also go to a shootout. FG of 55 yards to win. If both hit they continue till one misses.
 
Last edited:
I miss Suh :(

Thanks for all the restructures TannenRoss. Dude is, was, and always will be elite, this organization didn't deserve or appreciate him enough and our defense is a f****** joke in part because of this (other part being coaching, come on Flores).

Chris Grier better step his s*** up and quick, no more Harris's!
 
Last edited:
One thing I can guarantee you, is if Brady and the Pats lost the coin flip and it was KC that drove right down and scored. That rule would’ve been changed Monday freakin morning!!!
 
Of course the name of the game is F O O T ball! If they don't want to change the format, instead of a random flip of a coin, how about having the kickers compete from 50 -55- 60- -62 yards out for the privilege of receiving the ball.. make it into a skill based contest. It would also ramp up the interest IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom