NFL Overtime Rules

[Cam L]

As a Vikings fan, I've grown quite accustomed to watching my team lose in overtime (cough 2009 NFC Championship cough), but when I was watching the Denver-Pittsburgh game today I started to wonder something. While the officials took 2 minutes to explain the rules of what would be the ~10 second overtime, they stressed that each team is entitled to a possession. This makes sense to me; both teams stayed even throughout all four quarters and ended regulation with a tie, why not? They then went on to say that the first team to score a touchdown or score on defense wins the game. Scoring defensively makes sense; one team commits a turnover, the other team scores on it, game over. However, the first team to score a touchdown rule fails to make sense to me, as it may or may not comply with the rule that each team is entitled to a possession - in this case, it didn't, as Tebow threw the 80 yard TD pass on the first play.

TL;DR - If it's stressed that both teams are entitled to a possession in OT, but the first offensive touchdown wins, don't the rules contradict each other? Technically, wasn't Pittsburgh entitled to a possession after Denver scored, even though it was a touchdown?

Discuss.

[Zach]

The NFL has stupid rules. They lied and said that this was "the first non-sudden death OT playoff game," but it wasn't. All they did was eliminate teams getting to the 25-yard line and kicking a FG on 2nd down. It's just one of the many reasons why I like NCAAF a lot more than the NFL.

Edited January 9, 2012 by Knightmare25

[The Rocket]

They don't really contradict each other as it is just a separate stipulation within the rule. Pittsburgh wasn't entitled to a possession because the main thing taken from the "new" OT rule should be "If you score a TD on the opening drive of OT, you win" and "if you throw a pick resulting in either the defense or the opposing team's offense to score, you lose."

If you look at the statistics from the last 10 years (2001-2011), games that have gone to OT have been won roughly 75% of the time by a field goal and 23% of the time by a TD. The remaining 2% consists of 1 game won by a safety and 2 games ending in a tie. The reason for this new "sudden-death" OT in the playoffs is to prevent teams from making their way in to field goal range and then giving up trying to score a TD since a FG would win it as well. How is that fair?

The "new" OT puts more of an emphasis on actually trying to get a TD. If the opening drive results in a TD then that team deserves the victory but, given a 75% chance of it resulting in a FG, it seems only fair for the other team to get a shot at it as well.

Edited January 9, 2012 by The Rocket

[Devin]

Who's Tebow?

[Joshjrn]

Vikings fan

As has already been stated, the rule isn't contradictory because the purpose of the rule isn't to give both teams a possession. The purpose of the rule is to negate some of the advantage of getting the ball first. To that end, it is effective.

Also, Vikings fan

[Deathstar]

seems fair to me

[Muse]

NFL overtime rules are stupid, that's for sure.

[Hobdog]

Vikings fan

As has already been stated, the rule isn't contradictory because the purpose of the rule isn't to give both teams a possession. The purpose of the rule is to negate some of the advantage of getting the ball first. To that end, it is effective.

Also, Vikings fan

SAGADGADGADGA

good post

[*Tom*]

Yeah, not a huge fan of NFL overtime rules. The NCAA has a much better overtime procedure in my opinion.

[Joshjrn]

College overtime rules have their flaws as well. First and foremost, it completely cuts out the third phase of the game: special teams. Teams with great kick/punt return units are at a distinct disadvantage in college overtime. Second, it rewards mediocrity. It seems completely counter-intuitive that a team can drive to the one yard line, lose a fumble, and then lose on the next play of the game when their opponent lines up for a field goal without having to run a single offensive play.

Now, the first problem might not be fixable. However, the second most certainly is. Starting from the 25 yard line is a joke. College overtime should start from the 40 at least, preferably the 50. That way, you actually have to gain a few yards before being able to kick a field goal.

[Ymesocool]

Why can't we have a possession each at least? That part I will never understand.

[Joshjrn]

Why can't we have a possession each at least? That part I will never understand.

Then you've basically just created the college system on steroids. Now the team on defense first has a huge advantage. If your opponent scores a TD, you now know that you should go for it on every single 4th down across the entire field.

Just strikes me as silly.

[Ymesocool]

It doesn't strike you as silly that one team can score and the game is just over without the other team even touching the ball? This is especially bad in offensive shootouts.

[Cordeiro]

It's better than sudden death IMO

[Joshjrn]

It doesn't strike you as silly that one team can score and the game is just over without the other team even touching the ball? This is especially bad in offensive shootouts.

The game has to end at some point. Would you prefer a tie?