I hate the NFL's overtime setup

[TitanTiger 20,499]

To watch a great Atlanta-NY Giants shootout all second half, then the Giants get the kickoff in OT, drive down and kick a FG...game over and ATL never touches the ball. What a letdown. I'm not saying the college setup is perfect, but at least both teams get a crack at scoring.

If I could do one thing to the NFL game, I'd tweak the OT. Make it so both teams are guaranteed a normal possession (kickoff, drive the field, not setup at the opponent's 25 automatically). If the game is still tied at that point, then it goes to sudden death.

[kickerman97 3]

I think the NFL has a lot of things right in football. I agree with the OT because I don't think it's supposed to be "fair". If you don't like it, win in regular time.

[SLAG-91 1,483]

I like the NFL overtime better than the college OT...I like to see all aspects of the game featured in OT (field position, defense stepping up to force a punt, etc.) just as they were in the first 4 quarters.

I'm probably in the very distinct minority on this, but I don't have a problem with regular season games ending in ties. It doesn't happen very often (I think there have been fewer than 20 ties since OT was started in the NFL back in 1974) and I don't have any philosophical issue with a tie as a possible outcome.

[kickerman97 3]

I like the NFL overtime better than the college OT...I like to see all aspects of the game featured in OT (field position, defense stepping up to force a punt, etc.) just as they were in the first 4 quarters.

I'm probably in the very distinct minority on this, but I don't have a problem with regular season games ending in ties. It doesn't happen very often (I think there have been fewer than 20 ties since OT was started in the NFL back in 1974) and I don't have any philosophical issue with a tie as a possible outcome.

I agree with the tie thing also. There are plenty of professional sports that do just fine allowing ties.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I prefer the NFL's setup in the sense that it involves all aspects as well. I just think it sucks that a game can be won with one team never even getting a possession. That's the only thing I'd change...each team gets one possession in OT. If one team is ahead after that, game over. If they are still tied, it goes to sudden death.

[jared52 4,354]

Why not let the game just continue from where it was for OT? Why start over?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Continue for how long? And if whoever has the ball scores on that drive, does the opposing team get a chance to answer or is the game over? Or do they play a full extra period and if the game is tied, it goes down as a tie but if someone's ahead they win?

Maybe they should do what the NHL does, just tack on a extra period. They could shorten it to 10 minutes. Have them play 10 extra minutes just like regular football and whatever the score is at that point is what it is.

[SouthLink02 8]

When my team wins in OT, I love it

When my team loses in OT, I hate it and wish it had never been implemented

[jared52 4,354]

Continue for how long? And if whoever has the ball scores on that drive, does the opposing team get a chance to answer or is the game over? Or do they play a full extra period and if the game is tied, it goes down as a tie but if someone's ahead they win?

Maybe they should do what the NHL does, just tack on a extra period. They could shorten it to 10 minutes. Have them play 10 extra minutes just like regular football and whatever the score is at that point is what it is.

In the NHL the game ends on a goal in OT but both teams get an equal shot because the puck drops and you play. I think the "extra" time idea would be good, but no one should have time outs and there should be no 2:00 warning.

[Shire5k 19]

I'm on the "I hate it" side of the fence. To have the game basically decided on a coin flip...mehhhhhhh.

[dyehardaufan 0]

Since 1994 the team that wins the toss in overtime only wins 59% of the time so I dont think its as automatic as winning the coin toss. And I use 1994 because thats the year the kickoff was moved back 5 yards, pre-1994 the coin toss winning % was even lower.

[BamaGrad03 0]

NFL overtime should be:

If the team winning the coin toss scores on their first possession, the opposing team gets ONE possession to score. If they score, then the game continues in sudden-death fashion.

Otherwise, the end.

That way, both teams get a chance to stop the other and both get a chance to score.

[kickerman97 3]

I just don't agree that both teams should have a chance. If you don't like it, win in regular time.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I just don't agree that both teams should have a chance. If you don't like it, win in regular time.

I just don't agree that overtime should be that strategically different than regular time. You have this great battle for 60 minutes, then arbitrarily decide that whoever scores next wins? Bah.

For the record, I don't think the college version is any better because it takes out elements of the game that should matter such as punting and the return game, plus the teams are set up too close to the red zone. But it seems just wrong to have such a great game essentially decided by a coin flip.

[SLAG-91 1,483]

NFL overtime should be:

If the team winning the coin toss scores on their first possession, the opposing team gets ONE possession to score. If they score, then the game continues in sudden-death fashion.

Otherwise, the end.

That way, both teams get a chance to stop the other and both get a chance to score.

I'd be OK with this.

I don't know what the percentages are as far as how often a team scores on the first possession of OT, but I imagine it's not as high as we might think.

Because I love oddball trivia, this struck me as amusing and somewhat ironic: The first-ever regular season OT NFL game was between the Steelers and the Broncos in 1974...and it ended in a 35-35 tie.