NFL 2021 Season

[Moranis]

After the Patriots game the Chiefs lost in overtime, they made a proposal to the rest of the NFL to change the rules, which was not even sent out of committee to vote on.  Maybe now there will be more momentum to change the rules.  No other professional sports league has the potential to have their game decided by a coin flip.  It is a ridiculous outdated system.  And for all of the flaws of the college system, at least both teams get a chance to score making it a superior product.

[nickagneta]

How are you not playing cover three and instead decide to go man with a blitz? What a ridiculous call on defense.

Lol, ESPN with an entire article talking about exactly what I said in this quote, minutes after the play happened.

https://www.espn.com/blog/los-angeles-rams/post/_/id/43224/from-love-of-the-game-to-rams-game-winner-inside-the-matthew-stafford-cooper-kupp-play

[Roy H.]

How are you not playing cover three and instead decide to go man with a blitz? What a ridiculous call on defense.

Lol, ESPN with an entire article talking about exactly what I said in this quote, minutes after the play happened.

https://www.espn.com/blog/los-angeles-rams/post/_/id/43224/from-love-of-the-game-to-rams-game-winner-inside-the-matthew-stafford-cooper-kupp-play

Maybe the craziest thing is that Lavonte David missed the play call.  He was supposed to blitz, and instead pretty much did nothing:

Graphic analysis shows that six Bucs defenders blitzed Stafford while four dropped back in man coverage. David, meanwhile, played in a shallow zone with no Rams receivers nearby. The Bucs essentially played with 10 effective defenders on the play.

https://sports.yahoo.com/bruce-arians-defends-blitz-on-cooper-kupp-catch-blames-communication-execution-014423431.html

Would an extra blitzer have made a difference?  It's hard to say -- and it's a play call that I would never endorse -- but an all-out blitz is a lot better than a 6-man blitz with another guy covering nobody.

[gouki88]

Are the people demanding that both teams have a chance to score in OT, the same people that think all kids should receive a participation trophy too?

How does that analogy make sense?

Participation trophies are mocked under the theory that they reward everyone, rather than the meritorious.  How does a system that slants heavily in favor of the team winning the coin flip compare to a meritocracy?  If anything, it's allowing luck to put its finger on the scale of determining merit.

It doesn't. Opposing changing the OT rules is just silly

[Celtics2021]

If the rule is changed, and both teams score touchdowns, then what?  Just wondering what the proposal is.  The team that won the coinflip gets the ball again, and if they score this time they win?  Or does Team B get another chance too?  At what point does it stop?  Just asking because while I see the NFL rule as flawed, I think the college overtime situation is worse.

[gouki88]

If the rule is changed, and both teams score touchdowns, then what?  Just wondering what the proposal is.  The team that won the coinflip gets the ball again, and if they score this time they win?  Or does Team B get another chance too?  At what point does it stop?  Just asking because while I see the NFL rule as flawed, I think the college overtime situation is worse.

I think you could go the spot-and-choose route after both teams get the ball. Meaning one team would choose the yard line where the overtime drive starts and the other team would choose whether they want to play offence or defence. This is what the Ravens proposed IIRC.

Or, just go straight to sudden death after both offences and both defences have had a chance.

[Roy H.]

If the rule is changed, and both teams score touchdowns, then what?  Just wondering what the proposal is.  The team that won the coinflip gets the ball again, and if they score this time they win?  Or does Team B get another chance too?  At what point does it stop?  Just asking because while I see the NFL rule as flawed, I think the college overtime situation is worse.

I think you could go the spot-and-choose route after both teams get the ball. Meaning one team would choose the yard line where the overtime drive starts and the other team would choose whether they want to play offence or defence. This is what the Ravens proposed IIRC.

Or, just go straight to sudden death after both offences and both defences have had a chance.

Yeah, I’d say sudden death.  The second team would then possibly go for two.

[sgrogan]

What about play on?
If the game is tied at the end of regulation, just continue to play, until one team is ahead?

[gouki88]

What about play on?
If the game is tied at the end of regulation, just continue to play, until one team is ahead?

What is the difference between that and sudden death?

[Celtics2021]

If the rule is changed, and both teams score touchdowns, then what?  Just wondering what the proposal is.  The team that won the coinflip gets the ball again, and if they score this time they win?  Or does Team B get another chance too?  At what point does it stop?  Just asking because while I see the NFL rule as flawed, I think the college overtime situation is worse.

I think you could go the spot-and-choose route after both teams get the ball. Meaning one team would choose the yard line where the overtime drive starts and the other team would choose whether they want to play offence or defence. This is what the Ravens proposed IIRC.

Or, just go straight to sudden death after both offences and both defences have had a chance.

I’m in favor of spot and choose from the getgo, because I’m an economist and that is obviously the best route.  I’m also ready for the drama where the coach has told the QB ahead of time the defense/offense line, and the QB, when offered the ball at his 1-yard line, accepts regardless of instruction because he’s got a QB’s ego and can score from anywhere.

[Celtics2021]

What about play on?
If the game is tied at the end of regulation, just continue to play, until one team is ahead?

What is the difference between that and sudden death?

Presumably you wouldn’t kick off, but the OT would start at whatever down and distance the 4th quarter ended with.  It’d cut down on the boring play for overtime strategy — you get the ball back with a minute to go in a tie game, just run your regular offense, ignoring the clock.  Eliminates the coin flip altogether.

[sgrogan]

What about play on?
If the game is tied at the end of regulation, just continue to play, until one team is ahead?

What is the difference between that and sudden death?

No coin toss, the game just goes to "extra time"
If you tie the game at the end of the 4th quater, you kick off.

Does anyone have the stats of Win% vs. coin toss at the beginning of the game?

[gouki88]

If the rule is changed, and both teams score touchdowns, then what?  Just wondering what the proposal is.  The team that won the coinflip gets the ball again, and if they score this time they win?  Or does Team B get another chance too?  At what point does it stop?  Just asking because while I see the NFL rule as flawed, I think the college overtime situation is worse.

I think you could go the spot-and-choose route after both teams get the ball. Meaning one team would choose the yard line where the overtime drive starts and the other team would choose whether they want to play offence or defence. This is what the Ravens proposed IIRC.

Or, just go straight to sudden death after both offences and both defences have had a chance.

I’m in favor of spot and choose from the getgo, because I’m an economist and that is obviously the best route.  I’m also ready for the drama where the coach has told the QB ahead of time the defense/offense line, and the QB, when offered the ball at his 1-yard line, accepts regardless of instruction because he’s got a QB’s ego and can score from anywhere.

It would create some really epic drama, and it seems fair to me. Certainly more entertaining than the current format

[johnnygreen]

I heard an OT idea on the radio, which sounded reasonable. Base the idea of who receives the opening possession in OT, on the coin flip to start the game. Whoever receives the opening kickoff to start the game, gets the ball first, if the game goes into overtime. This way, both teams know towards the end of regulation, who will receive the opening kick in OT, and can strategize.

[Redz]

Here's an idea that's completely impractical and would be nearly impossible to officiate and/or watch, but you could both teams offenses line up the opposing team's 35 yard lines simultaneously, defenses line up to defend on either side.  You then synch up the plays and who scores first wins.

Honestly, why not just include touchdowns the same way they use field goals?  Defensive TD or safety would still end it on the first possession, so that gives some advantage to be on D first and would offset the advantage of getting a second possession if both teams are tied after scoring on the first possession.