Monday, September 18, 2006

OT or not to be?


58% of OT winners are decided by a coin toss. yep that's right 58% of the team who wins the coin toss ends up winning the game. Is it going to take the NFl for a team to be robbed in a OT Super Bowl for them to change this ludicris rule? A Super Bowl hasn't ever went to OT so I guess it's not an issue. But I believe there are some other alternatives that we could come up with if we were the Commish...

13 Comments:

Blogger Steve said...

Leave it as is - that's my decision if I were the commish. Here's why...

58% is not stating it correctly. 58% is the team who wins the coin toss wins the game, but 28% of teams who win the coin toss win the game on their initial drive. (Source from NFL.com)

Sure the odds are good if you win the coin toss, but as professionals, you would expect your defense to shut down the other team. It's the same situation if a team ties up the game or takes the lead by 1 or 2 points with 2 minutes left in the game. Well the team trailing now gets the ball and all they need is a fieldgoal.

Any other option just does not make sense. Doing the college routine where each team gets a possession from the 25 is plain silly. One team getting a drive and if they don't succeed allowing the other team to kick off for them to have a drive doesn't make a whole lot of sense either. What you should do is break out all the options so we can discuss each one. As with ALL options, each one will have positives/negatives.

5:52 PM  
Blogger CosmicPal said...

I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to not give both teams a chance. It's fair. It's absolutely fair. It's a lot more fair than the current system.

Trust me- the day your team is in the Super Bowl and they lose the coin toss only to see the other team drive half way down the field to win on a FG, you'll be stomping the ground, breaking the TV, and killing your neighbor's dog to defend your team's right to have another opportunity to win that their defense squandered away.

And puhhleezze for those of you who are saying, "Oh, I could live with it if my Super Bowl team lost in OT on the first drive." You're only kidding yourself.

Both teams get one chance. Imagine this: Team one drives down the field and instead of quitting on the 20 yd line to kick a FG, they decide they are moving the ball well enough to challenge the endzone. Instead of a FG, it's a TD! Team 2 now HAS to make a TD to tie the game instead of settling for a FG. No TD, Team 1 of course wins.

No team scores on their first try, then it's whoever scores first. It's fair. Screw the percentages and everything else- it's simply fair. And anyone who doesn't think so- I'll ask you if you think it's fair the day your team loses a very important game on the first drive in OT.

6:03 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

So it makes sense why Cosmic thinks it's fair - his team just lost on the first drive!

Look Cosmic, I agree with you for the most part. Is it fair for both teams to have a chance? Yes - absolutely! But coming up with a system that makes it fair is the challenge. I don't see a way to make it "fair" without changing the way the game is played, and that's the problem!

Would I be upset if my team lost - freakin' A right I would be, no question. But if your defense can't figure out a way to hold the other team in the most critical part of the game, then perhaps your team doesn't deserve to win.

Toss out ideas that make it fair in your opinion...lets discuss them rationally.

6:11 PM  
Anonymous nn said...

58% isn't far enough from 50% to convince me to do away with coin tosses. I wonder what the win percentage is for college teams who get to the ball first in OT.

10:04 PM  
Blogger RED said...

nn - Not as good as the ones who get it last I'm sure. you always want to go on D 1st is what I would assume because of you stop em you are more confident knowing you only need a fg to win.

12:27 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

But keep in mind NN and Red, that 58% is the team that wins the coin toss wins the game, but only 28% actually win the coin toss and win the game on their initial drive. So that means of all the OT games, there is a 28% chance that you win the coin toss and drive down the field for a win. There is a 58% chance that you win the coin toss, start your drive and punt (or turnover) then stop your opponent (with either a punt or turnover) and you then go down the field to win the game.

The real number here is 28% because if both teams get the ball during OT, then it's completely fair

7:41 AM  
Anonymous JohnnySox said...

One more point, if both teams do not have one possession, then the special teams have too large an impact on OT. A long kickoff return on the opening OT kickoff is dooms day for the defense, there is even the possibility that the D never gets on the field.
I would be more fair to start the team that wins the coin toss at the 20 yard line if the 2 possession rule is not used.

6:31 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

Good point Johnny - now here's why I disagree - most options to make it fair, change the way the game is played. At no point does a team get to start at the 20 after a kickoff unless the ball is a touch back. If you just start a team there, it flat out changes the way the game is played.

7:06 AM  
Blogger Jamezwp said...

leave it the way it is. You are in a benificial situation no matter where you begin. If you recieve the ball first, it gives you the opportunity to score first. If you kick first, you are winning the field position battle. If I were a head coach, I would put my starting defense (DB's & LB's) on the kickoff team and put it in their hands to stop the initial return. Therefore there's no scapegoat.

3:03 PM  
Blogger RED said...

I dunno man I think it would be a good idea for each team to recieve a kickoff and if that ends in a tie, then another coin toss would be flipped and then and only then whomever scores 1st wins. I just think it's fair for each team to get one shot. With this setup the games won't be running too long and statistics won't be effected too much but it does give each team a shot. I think we as fans pay damn good money to see each team get a shot in OT. Thats the thing man is doing it for the fans , they desearve to see their team get a shot. Mark my words if this ever happens in a Superbowl it's going to change things.

3:27 PM  
Blogger Satan™ said...

I think they should just have both teams kick 50 yard field goals. It would almost be like a shootout in hockey, (which is the most entertaining and fair way to settle overtime, in any sport), and maybe they could have players that are non-kickers try their foot out.

2:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like Satan's idea... kind of.

The shootout is a great way to go. Only, instead of 50-yard field goals (which aren't really exciting), each team lines up at the 10-yard line and has :60 seconds to punch in the score. Now here's the real catch: it all happens at once! That's right, both offenses and both defenses are on the field at the same time, (opposite ends of the field) and who ever scores the most points in that :60 seconds wins! It would get really exciting in the event one team turns it over and has to run all the way back through the other two teams going at it at the end of the field.

NOW talk about excitement!!!

OR

Naked Cheerleader jello wrestling.

---OTG---

10:22 PM  
Anonymous Lionel Baca said...

Those were the dumbest freaking ideas I've ever heard. You guys are dumber than me!

1:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home