Jim has been railing against the NFL’s overtime rules for years, and for the most part I have turned a deaf ear. To me, you can’t complain about the League’s overtime rules too much, because your team had the chance to win the game in regulation and didn’t. But this season, between watching the games and listening to Jim’s ranting, I am starting to change my tune as evidence mounts that the overtime rule (sudden death for a maximum of one quarter) is inherently flawed; Rules should exist to give balance between the two teams, not to assign advantage.
This season, there have been 11 overtime games. Seven of those games were won by the team that won the coin toss (64%), six of those times the team won on a field goal on their first possession, and only three times (27%) did the team that won the coin toss lose the game. Last season, 60% of the teams that won the coin toss won the game in overtime. This is really substantial evidence that there is a problem: After playing an even game, a simple toss of a coin by the official becomes the most important play of the game.
The chances of the NFL changing the rule are slim. The NFL is bought and sold by television, and TV wants a predictable length to the games. So what option do the coaches have while the present overtime rule exists? The 2-point conversion.
Coaches get praised as “risk-takers” for going for 2 after a touchdown at the very end of regulation, instead of kicking a PAT and going to overtime. They get called “gutty” when they go for a big play late in the game all tied. But, with the odds I gave above, the riskiest play at the end of a game is becoming putting a coin in the hands of the referee. The success rate of 2-point conversions in the NFL is anywhere from 44-51%, depending on whom you ask. The success rate for kicked PATs is about 96-98%, depending on whom you ask. So, given the chance you have in overtime, where a lost coin flip could seal your doom, why not just go for 2 and forgo the coin toss?
Take the Patriots-Jets game a couple weeks ago. The Patriots score a touchdown with :01 to go in the game and decide to kick a PAT to send it to overtime. They lose the coin toss and their team never touches the ball again. If they had gone for 2, they could have won; At the very least, the ball would have been in their hands at the end of the game.
Teams that have decided to go for 2 instead of the PAT on, essentially, their last play are 1-1 this season (Denver won, Kansas City lost). I just wonder if you’re going to see more teams opting to win in regulation instead of facing the dreaded coin toss.
Despite that, it would be ideal if the NFL changed the rule. Whether you’re OK with the present system or you want it thrown out, I have to believe almost everyone would agree about that: That it would be ideal to change it.
on Nov 25th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
For those who say that each team should have a possession in overtime because otherwise “it’s not fair”: by the same token, does that mean each team should have the same number of possessions in regulation time? If the trailing team has had one less possession after 60 minutes, why not let them have the ball one more time to try and score again? After all, it’s only fair.
on Nov 25th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
In regulation, each team gets to start the half with the ball, so it is fair. The # of drives is based on time of possession and other things within a team’s control. The current OT rule relies too much on the chance of a coin toss.
on Nov 25th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Thank you Cyd, i’ve been harping to whomever will listen that when faced with the option of tying pat or 2 points for the win in the final half minute of play in regulation….always…always go for two.
Quite simple, put the outcome of the game in your own hands. Don’t leave it to chance.
on Nov 26th, 2008 at 3:17 am
In the CFL each team is guarenteed at least one offensive series in Overtime. They start at the opposing teams 35-yard line and must try and score. Once that series is done, the other team will start at the 35-yard line and try to score.
They do this twice and if it’s still tied, they declare the game tied. (Regular Season only).
I think it’s a good system… fans get some excitement, TV networks can’t complain too much, and each teams offence can get the ball at least once. It’s a win-win-win situation.
on Dec 15th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
What if the nfl just gave the ball to the team that asks for worse field position? That way if you get scored on right away it’s your fault for not asking for worse field position.
on Dec 22nd, 2008 at 12:47 pm
It’s really very simple. If you don’t want the team who wins the coin toss to win the game STOP THEM! Play some defense and stop them! Stop whining and play better defense!
To make a little more complicated than that, although it’s not necessary. Each team has 3 units, defense, offense, special teams - both get 2 out of 3 of those units on the field in OT!!! You didn’t lose the game because you lost the coin toss. You lost because the other team scored more points than you did. There were likely dozens of things during the game you could have done differently to win the game - you should have done one of them.
on Jan 5th, 2009 at 3:29 am
Why not keep it simple and just keeping on playing until there is a winner.
No restart, no coin tosses or special Mickey Mouse rules - just a continuation of play as it was at the end of the final quarter.
what do ya think
see ya
ET
Tariksports Rankings
http://www.tariksport.com/superbowl.shtml
http://tariksport.com/nfl-blog/