The vote was 29-3 https://t.co/9YszdDjXUZ
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 29, 2022
Here are the rules changes and resolutions passed during the Annual League Meeting: pic.twitter.com/b1K3ZaIp2L
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 29, 2022
Sigh....
Imagining what might have happened for #Packers in 2014, not to mention 2015, under the NFL's new postseason overtime rules. And how that might have bolstered Aaron Rodgers' legacy.
— Ryan Wood (@ByRyanWood) March 29, 2022
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Did not realize teams were 10-2 based on the coin toss, ooof..
Funny how changing OT wasn’t “compelling” to owners when the #Packers were getting screwed in 2014 and 2015. 🙄 https://t.co/pzDw4gJKXq
— Michael Rodney (@PackersNotes) March 29, 2022
I know I'm in the minority but I'd prefer to go back to no OT in the regular season and then use this rule in the playoffs. Why scrap OT and create more ties? It'll significantly reduce the playoff tiebreakers at the end of the season. No more "strength of schedule" tiebreakers or whatever they use. Those are so annoying and if I was a team who lost out on the playoffs due to these crazy tie breakers, I'd be pissed. And if each team doesn't want a tie, then win it in regulation. Also reduces playing time and chance for injury. Nothing ruins my NFL season more than Packers' injuries.
And selfishly, I just wanted to see Josh Allen get a shot in OT in that playoff game.
I saw a suggestion on insider inbox to eliminate OT in the regular season and if the game ends in a tie, both teams get a loss.
I'm fine with this rule change but why not make it valid in the regular season too? It's a 17 game season and all these games matter. It's not the NBA or MLB where you can throw away games here and there that don't matter.
10 minutes in the regular season would be too short if they had this rule, too. They would need to go back to a 15 minute OT or something between 10 and 15 minutes.
I think everyone should get a participation trophy too
@CUPackFan posted:I know I'm in the minority but I'd prefer to go back to no OT in the regular season and then use this rule in the playoffs. Why scrap OT and create more ties? It'll significantly reduce the playoff tiebreakers at the end of the season. No more "strength of schedule" tiebreakers or whatever they use. Those are so annoying and if I was a team who lost out on the playoffs due to these crazy tie breakers, I'd be pissed. And if each team doesn't want a tie, then win it in regulation. Also reduces playing time and chance for injury. Nothing ruins my NFL season more than Packers' injuries.
And selfishly, I just wanted to see Josh Allen get a shot in OT in that playoff game.
I've been 100% on this train for a while now. There is no point to OT in regular season. And ties work great for soccer. I went to an MLS vs PL exhibition match that ended in tie... at the end of the game the refs had to drag very confused Aston Villa players back onto the pitch so they could win their penalty shootout. It was actually pretty hilarious.
For that matter the endless playoff tiebreakers suck. I could accept the case for division record being a tiebreaker for division championships... aside from that? What's the point... even the head to head is kind of silly. Just look at point differential first. That makes most regular season games more interesting from start to finish. It gets rid of the Drew Brees stat-chasing because kicking the living shit out of the rotting corpse of a team just becomes a normal part of the game.
The cliche you see a lot is "playoff football is different". And that's not really the case. Playoff games are effectively the same as regular season, aside from the stakes. Change those two things though and they really will be two different things, which I think would be a massive improvement.
My personal playoffs-only overtime would go like this. 2x 7.5 minutes halves, pretty much normal rules otherwise. Don't even bother with a coin toss, whoever lost the coin toss for the game is the 'winner' of the coin toss for OT, correcting for that very minor inequality.
After that, I'm guessing nobody would want to go for a 6th quarter in the NFL... so for the final tiebreaker go ahead and do whatever. Be it a field goal competition, make the QBs throw ball through hoops, whatever... I don't really care. It can be silly, it just needs to be fair. Again that's why penalty kicks work in soccer, you get to take your shots regardless of what the other team does. Every NFL OT in my lifetime hasn't had that aspect of fairness, and that's kind of pathetic.
OT in the regular season, but no OT in postseason?
That would really shake things up.
It would be so Viking-like for them to make it to the superb owl and end in a tie, not winning it.
Simple…the team that wins the coin toss at the START of the game can choose to receive, defer, or get the ball first in a possible overtime. The team that loses the opening toss can choose to do whatever it wants (receive…defer) at the start of the game and the start of the second half. The toss loser would get 2 extra possessions in this scenario. The OT remains the same as it is now.
If the team that wins the OPENING toss chooses to either receive the opening KO or defer, the team that loses the toss can choose to get the ball first in OT. The OT remains the same as it is now.
I like that idea!
College OT is great
Now the third possession in OT will end in a game winning field goal and everyone will still complain.
I think regular-season OT was instituted for the benefit of the broadcasting networks (primarily) and fans (secondarily). If this went away, I wouldn't be disappointed.
Since a winner has to be determined for playoff games, obviously, I'd personally want to see an extra quarter played.
It would eliminate the importance of the coin toss, each team gets at least one
possession, and doesn't require the implementation of yet more rules.
Dear NFL Commissioner,
I am writing to let you know that football has to many rules.
Please eliminate three.
Timmy
P.S. - I am not a crackpot!
Edit: too
@4 Favre posted:I've been 100% on this train for a while now. There is no point to OT in regular season. And ties work great for soccer. I went to an MLS vs PL exhibition match that ended in tie... at the end of the game the refs had to drag very confused Aston Villa players back onto the pitch so they could win their penalty shootout. It was actually pretty hilarious.
I bet. Americans have been brainwashed that a tie will lead to the end of western civilization. Something about getting it on with their sisters(West Virginia does just fine with their sister, BTW).
Ties can be amazing. Tottenham 3 West Ham 0 with 7 minutes left. Final score? Tottenham 3 West Ham 3.
As a Tottenham fan I felt just like I did in 2014 when the Pack blew it in Seattle. The West Ham players? They celebrated like they had just won a World Cup. West Ham fans still rub our noses in it.
The winning tying goal was a beauty of a rocket.
Ties don't have to be drab affairs. There are wins and loses in football that are pretty boring.
Teams shouldn't get an advantage in the standings for a tie game.
The first time this new format happens is going to be in the playoffs. Hell, it might be in the Super Bowl? Seems like a great time to try out a brand new rule. 
@GBFanForLife posted:Teams shouldn't get an advantage in the standings for a tie game.
As of right now a tie is considered half a win. Is that what you mean by advantage? If you don't like that, soccer again has the system for you. 0 points for an L, 1 point for a draw, and 3 points for a win. Winning is still incentivized above all, but it acknowledges that getting a tie is better than losing.
So it is overtime, do you take the ball first, assuming you will score and in the event the other team scores, you have the ball first in sudden death?
or
Do you defer, take the ball second. You know the situation, giving your QB 4 downs to work with. Then, when you score, go for 2 like you have a pair.
That is like a math question.
I spent 6 years in college avoiding math questions, so fuck you.
18 games, two byes and no regular season overtime sounds like a workable idea.
And if any teams tie, their season is over.
We need to start referring to individual games as "ties," like they do in soccer.
@Dr._Bob posted:And if any teams tie, their season is over.
Or maybe relegate them to the USFL.
No OT in the regular season.
When they go to 18 games, 2 bye weeks.
Playoff OT? Mark Tauscher's idea:
Visitor gets the ball and gets 10 plays to score. If they score or fail to score within 10 plays, home team gets 9 plays to tie or win.
Each team would get equal number of "chances/possession".
Continue this process decreasing the # of plays on each possession until there is a winner. Home team would continue to get a "bottom of the inning" chance to match visitor's previous drive score.
Each team has to play all 3 phases of football in this scenario.
No clock. 3 timeouts per team. All booth reviews.
Maybe start the first series of drives at the 25, then increase by 5 yards for each subsequent drive pair.
Would be exciting football.
And if the 3rd drive results in TD force them to go for 2 point PAT.
Regular season OT decided by sudden death field goal kicks. Start at 35 and move back 5 yards for each kick until someone misses or is blocked.
Fooootball solution.
FGs, but after the first round, players other than the kickers attempt them.
So, if these OT rule changes only are in effect for the playoffs, will the vikings even be informed of those changes? Still Keep On Losing!
@H5 posted:No OT in the regular season.
When they go to 18 games, 2 bye weeks.
Playoff OT? Mark Tauscher's idea:
Visitor gets the ball and gets 10 plays to score. If they score or fail to score within 10 plays, home team gets 9 plays to tie or win.
Each team would get equal number of "chances/possession".
Continue this process decreasing the # of plays on each possession until there is a winner. Home team would continue to get a "bottom of the inning" chance to match visitor's previous drive score.
Each team has to play all 3 phases of football in this scenario.
No clock. 3 timeouts per team. All booth reviews.
I can see where teams could get an equal number of possessions, but it would seem to me that the visiting team is getting more chances (plays). I'm assuming if it follows the sequence of 10-9, 8-7, the home team always has 1 less play.
Again assuming each team has 5 possessions, the home team will have had 5 less plays.
Or did I miss something?
Does the game end if one team fails to score, but the opposing team does?
The same for the visitor kicking a FG and the home team scores a TD?
Jesus. Give me some of what y'all's smoking. One possession each, then sudden death is fine. No gimmicks.
Paging Goldie.
You are wanted on the red courtesy phone.
Just keep sudden death.
