Thread: NFL proposes rules changes for 2017 season

Originally Posted by Joel

College OT is the answer to the question, "Sure, sudden death OT was arbitrary, but how can we make it MORE arbitrary...?" If regulation ends in a tie, why not have the head ref write down a number between 1 and 100, then whichever QB guesses closest wins? That's equally "fair" (i.e. random.)

How is it "arbitrary?"

Originally Posted by spikerman

How is it "arbitrary?"

Why does each teams possession begin at the opponents 25 yard line, as opposed to the 35 (as in the CFL) or 10 (as in most HS games)? Answer: Because.

Kickoff after a coin toss (solely because that's the only fair way to determine the kicking team) and play 15:00, at which point the current score is the FINAL score.

Originally Posted by Joel

Why does each teams possession begin at the opponents 25 yard line, as opposed to the 35 (as in the CFL) or 10 (as in most HS games)? Answer: Because.

Kickoff after a coin toss (solely because that's the only fair way to determine the kicking team) and play 15:00, at which point the current score is the FINAL score.

So every OT game goes 5 whole quarters? Sorry man, but I think that's a horrible idea, and opposite of the direction the NFL wants to go for player safety. If we are going to do it that way, they might as well just call a tie after the 4th quarter.

Being brought up on soccer, I am used to tied games, so I have never really saw the problem.

But if player safety IS the real driver.... Just have a kicker shoot out after the end of regulation.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

So every OT game goes 5 whole quarters? Sorry man, but I think that's a horrible idea, and opposite of the direction the NFL wants to go for player safety. If we are going to do it that way, they might as well just call a tie after the 4th quarter.

In the regular season, fine by me, if the NFL truly cares about player safety. The reality is the NFL couldn't care less about player safety, only league liability and marketability: That's why all "player safety" rules focus on positions with the LEAST contact and thus longest careers, yet ignore those with the MOST contact and thus SHORTEST careers. "Player safety" is a rationalization the League Office dons and removes as convenient, so won't be allowed to ITSELF become inconvenient.

Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis

Being brought up on soccer, I am used to tied games, so I have never really saw the problem.

But if player safety IS the real driver.... Just have a kicker shoot out after the end of regulation.

I'm sure you realize why that option's impractical (especially in the current political climate.) And while I also don't see why regular season ties are inherently undesirable, that particular problem applies there, too: People would scream that "the NFL is awarding godless commie participation trophies!")

Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis

Being brought up on soccer, I am used to tied games, so I have never really saw the problem.

But if player safety IS the real driver.... Just have a kicker shoot out after the end of regulation.

With pistols?

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

With pistols?

Ar15?

Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis

Ar15?

"Sudden death"

Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis

Ar15?

AR-15's would be a great way to get the crowd involved too.

Originally Posted by Joel

I HAVE tried, but its very nature always repulses me: The SECAA puts the "amateur" in "amateur sports." And OT rules are a good example of it getting worse.


Last time I recall watching a college game was my first year in Norway, when I was absolutely desperate for SOME kind of football; college nominally (if marginally) qualifies. The whole thing feels very gimmicky to me. People call the SEC college balls best conference as if that's not part and parcel with its self-fulfilling basis.

You are chock full of contradictions.

Originally Posted by Jaded

You are chock full of contradictions.

I'm an enigma wrapped in a riddle wrapped in a mystery wrapped in a tortilla.

Originally Posted by Joel

Why does each teams possession begin at the opponents 25 yard line, as opposed to the 35 (as in the CFL) or 10 (as in most HS games)? Answer: Because.

Kickoff after a coin toss (solely because that's the only fair way to determine the kicking team) and play 15:00, at which point the current score is the FINAL score.

By this logic, everything is arbitrary. Why are quarters 15 minutes instead of 20? Why kickoff from the 35 instead of the 15? College OT rules, while not my favorite, do guarantee an exciting finish and eliminate the possibility of a tie.

To me, the NFL overtime solution is so simple that I can't believe nobody has proposed it. Each team gets one possession, whatever the first team does, the second team gets a chance to match or beat. If they each do the same thing on their first possession (FG, TD, punt) then it becomes sudden death.

Originally Posted by spikerman

By this logic, everything is arbitrary. Why are quarters 15 minutes instead of 20?

Because an hour is 60:00, not 80:00; maybe if metric time ever caught on we'd play 10:00 quarters, but it didn't, so we don't.

Originally Posted by spikerman

Why kickoff from the 35 instead of the 15?

To eliminate kick returns, but I grant that one's pretty arbitrary, hence the spot for NFL kickoffs has changed twice in as many decades.

Originally Posted by spikerman

College OT rules, while not my favorite, do guarantee an exciting finish and eliminate the possibility of a tie.

Playing a full OT period would guarantee an exciting finish also, and why is eliminating the possibility of a tie a goal?

Originally Posted by spikerman

To me, the NFL overtime solution is so simple that I can't believe nobody has proposed it. Each team gets one possession, whatever the first team does, the second team gets a chance to match or beat. If they each do the same thing on their first possession (FG, TD, punt) then it becomes sudden death.

Sudden death will always suck because it's SO arbitrary. Using a coin toss to determine INITIAL possession is one thing; it's got to be decided somehow, anything deterministic would also be unfair, and it doesn't matter much who gets the ball first unless they can end the game on the spot before the other team can do anything (note, of course, that "feature" of NFL sudden death remains largely in place.) But using something like that to decide which team can win the game while the opposing offense watches helplessly isn't exciting, just unfair (the Falcons surely agree.) Postponing that result until after both teams have had an opportunity to match each other once, twice or a dozen times doesn't change that dynamic, only delay it. If that's just to prevent a tie, we're back to "what's so bad about a tie?"

Originally Posted by Joel

Because an hour is 60:00, not 80:00; maybe if metric time ever caught on we'd play 10:00 quarters, but it didn't, so we don't.


To eliminate kick returns, but I grant that one's pretty arbitrary, hence the spot for NFL kickoffs has changed twice in as many decades.



Playing a full OT period would guarantee an exciting finish also, and why is eliminating the possibility of a tie a goal?


Sudden death will always suck because it's SO arbitrary. Using a coin toss to determine INITIAL possession is one thing; it's got to be decided somehow, anything deterministic would also be unfair, and it doesn't matter much who gets the ball first unless they can end the game on the spot before the other team can do anything (note, of course, that "feature" of NFL sudden death remains largely in place.) But using something like that to decide which team can win the game while the opposing offense watches helplessly isn't exciting, just unfair (the Falcons surely agree.) Postponing that result until after both teams have had an opportunity to match each other once, twice or a dozen times doesn't change that dynamic, only delay it. If that's just to prevent a tie, we're back to "what's so bad about a tie?"

I don't think I understand your argument. The only reason I'm not in favor of the old sudden death system is that the kickers are so good now that teams only have to get 2 or 3 first downs and they're in FG range. In my scenario neither team can say they didn't have a fair shot to win. At some point it's up to the players to stop or to overpower the other guy. It's, in no way, left to a coin flip.

Why play football at all? That is the real question.