Playoff OT Rules

TdogProspective Member

as posted by Siefert on ESPN:

• At the end of regulation time the Referee will immediately toss coin at center of field in accordance with rules pertaining to the usual pregame toss. The captain of the visiting team will call the toss prior to the coin being flipped.

• Following a three-minute intermission after the end of the regulation game, play will be continued in 15-minute periods until a winner is declared. Each team must possess or have the opportunity to possess the ball unless the team that has the ball first scores a touchdown on its initial possession. Play continues in sudden death until a winner is determined, and the game automatically ends upon any score (by safety, field goal, or touchdown) or when a score is awarded by Referee for a palpably unfair act. Each team has three time outs per half and all general timing provisions apply as during a regular game. Try is not attempted if touchdown scored. Disqualified players are not allowed to return.
------------------------

can anyone help me understand this statement from above?:
"or when a score is awarded by Referee for a palpably unfair act"

1/5/1210:51 AM

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

TdogProspective Member

answered my own question. but I never knew that before, makes sense.

http://quirkyresearch.blogspot...palpably-unfair.html

1/5/1210:56 AM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

I thought the new playoff rules were on hold while BrINT contemplates retirement.

1/5/1211:02 AM

ZUFMember

quote:
Each team must possess or have the opportunity to possess the ball unless the team that has the ball first scores a touchdown on its initial possession.

So in other words, the game won't end if the first team to get the ball makes a 55 yd FG after only driving 30-35 yds. But the game would end if that team scored a TD.

I think this makes sense, not necessarily the best way, but it would at least give the other team a chance to come back.

1/5/1211:35 AM

ZUFMember

quote:
answered my own question. but I never knew that before, makes sense.

http://quirkyresearch.blogspot...palpably-unfair.html

Interesting how Bret Bielema is mentioned for masterful exploitation of the clock prior to half-time in a game vs Penn State. Unfortunately he seems to have forgotten some of those savvy skills vs the Ducks

1/5/1211:45 AM

FedyaMember

Times Four solved this problem last year

1/5/1212:27 PM

BorisPerson Man Camera Dildo Shop - NFLFU®

The best thing is a team can't win the coin flip, drive down kick a FG and win in OT without the other team having a chance to touch the ball.

I like it because it will be interesting to see if coaches on that first possession will "go for it" to get the TD and win the game without the other team touching the ball.

Think about it. It's the Super Bowl. It's OT in Indianapolis. Mason Crosby has been kicking 65-70 yard FG's all during practice before the game. Packers are at the AFC teams 45 yard line. It's 4th & 2....

Does McCarthy let Crosby try a 62-63 yard FG? Or does he go for it attempting to get a first down?? Or simply punt the ball?

Not an easy decision....

1/5/1212:32 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

I still think it is stupid that the game can end on a turnover in the field of play.

1/5/121:12 PM

BorisPerson Man Camera Dildo Shop - NFLFU®

You mean like, in OT, Packers win toss, go down and kick a FG. Opposing team gets the ball and promptly throws an INT to Sam Shields who then steps out of bounds at the 20 yard line. Game over...

Like that?

1/5/121:21 PM

Point BrewmasterMember

Packers beat the Eagles in the Wildcard game last year on a Tramon Williams interception with 33 seconds left. That the defense makes a great play should not diminish a victory.

1/5/121:23 PM

BorisPerson Man Camera Dildo Shop - NFLFU®

No, last play was a kneel down, yes?

1/5/121:25 PM

Point BrewmasterMember

Yes, a kneel down is a much more exhilarating way to end a game, more so than an interception or fumble recovery.

1/5/121:27 PM

BorisPerson Man Camera Dildo Shop - NFLFU®

Not disputing the "exhilaration" of a particular play, just trying to understand each viewpoint

1/5/121:30 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by Point Brewmaster:
Packers beat the Eagles in the Wildcard game last year on a Tramon Williams interception with 33 seconds left. That the defense makes a great play should not diminish a victory.

Packers had to run out the clock to win the game.

The game should end on a score or if the clock expires with one team having more points than the other.

The SB should not automatically end on a sack-fumble and a DLman falling on the ball in the field of play with 14+ minutes to go in OT.

1/5/121:37 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
You mean like, in OT, Packers win toss, go down and kick a FG. Opposing team gets the ball and promptly throws an INT to Sam Shields who then steps out of bounds at the 20 yard line. Game over...

Like that?

Yes, that seems like a lame way to end a playoff game.

1st to 5 is how it should be.

1/5/121:39 PM

Point BrewmasterMember

For the record, I was not in favor of changing the overtime rules for the playoffs. It only happened because the Vikings got all butthurt over how they lost the NFC championship game against the Saints.

The object of overtime is (or should be) to end the game as quickly as possible. First to 5 presents a greater chance for overtime to continue for a long time as the winning team will require a minimum of two possessions. Take the Broncos/Steelers match-up this weekend boasting the offensive prowess of Tebow and a severely hobbled Roethlisberger (or worse yet, Charlie Batch). I could easily envision two possessions not being enough for either team to score five points.

1/5/122:18 PM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

I like the rule. The old way a team could watch the other team win the coin toss, drive 35 yards, kick a field goal. Game over. Drive safe!

This way the other team get's a shot to match the FG or win the game with a TD. If they turn it over then it's on them. At least they have a shot.

The comedy is going to come the first time Walt Coleman takes 5 minutes butchering the new rules the first chance he gets to the point no one has a clue what he's talking about. Can't wait for that.

1/5/122:23 PM

TdogProspective Member

quote:
"or when a score is awarded by Referee for a palpably unfair act"

Walt is why this phrase had me worried.

1/5/122:35 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by Point Brewmaster:
First to 5 presents a greater chance for overtime to continue for a long time as the winning team will require a minimum of two possessions.

Rong.

Score a TD. It is 6 points. Game over.

Return the opening KO for a TD and the Steelers can win the game and Big Ben doesn't even need to hobble onto the field.

There is no downside to 1st to 5.

It is simply the best, most fair way to play overtime.

1/5/122:36 PM

Shoeless JoeMember

quote:
The comedy is going to come the first time Walt Coleman takes 5 minutes butchering the new rules the first chance he gets to the point no one has a clue what he's talking about. Can't wait for that.

I'd watch myself dissin' the officials... they're ancient and slow but they're feisty.

1/5/122:39 PM

Point BrewmasterMember

Let me rephrase: First to 5 creates a longer game should two good defensive teams be able to keep opposing offenses out of the endzone. At least the current scheme allows for a winner if one of the two teams can kick a FG, so long as the other team has the opportunity for a possession.

1/5/122:44 PM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

I started to panic thinking Slocum could submarine an OT game on the kickoff.

Then I remembered he could have done the same thing using the old rules. So I feel better. I think.

1/5/122:55 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by Point Brewmaster:
Let me rephrase: First to 5 creates a longer game should two good defensive teams be able to keep opposing offenses out of the endzone. At least the current scheme allows for a winner if one of the two teams can kick a FG, so long as the other team has the opportunity for a possession.

If a team doesn't want to play the game they should just forfeit.

If you are afraid you might get hurt because it takes too long for your team to score 5 points you are a sissy.
Just forfeit.

1/5/122:58 PM

Point BrewmasterMember

What do your proposed overtime rules have to do with forfeiting? You are simply creating requirements for overtime that do not exist with regulation play. There is no minimum score required for any regulation game, so why should there be for overtime?

With the First to 5, a team able to score two safeties still would not meet the requirements to end the game, even though one safety would be enough for the both the current and the most recent overtime rules. Why do you feel the need to prolong the game?

1/5/123:14 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

Why is the goal to finish the game quickly?

Why not just flip a coin then? That would be the quickest.

A required number of points in OT is no more foreign to the regulation style play than sudden death.

The goal of 1st to 5 is to avoid ending the game on a turnover.

1/5/123:32 PM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

Now that the kick off has been moved up to the 35. If you lose the OT coin toss, don't you have to give serious consideration to an onside kick?

Don't get it, the ball is somewhere between the 45 and 50. Short field but you just have to keep them out of the end zone.

Recover it and that counts as the other teams posession and you just need a FG to win. Rule says both teams have the "opportunity to possess the ball".

Regardless, you have to be aware one might be coming if you win the toss.

1/5/123:38 PM

BorisPerson Man Camera Dildo Shop - NFLFU®

2 safeties....

I believe we mentioned putting a provision in the 1st to 5 rule, if a single safety was scored first, (before any other scoring) the game would be over.

A Safety is basically a touchdown for the defense

1/5/123:41 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by ChilliJon:
Now that the kick off has been moved up to the 35. If you lose the OT coin toss, don't you have to give serious consideration to an onside kick?

Don't get it, the ball is somewhere between the 45 and 50. Short field but you just have to keep them out of the end zone.

Recover it and that counts as the other teams posession and you just need a FG to win. Rule says both teams have the "opportunity to possess the ball".

Another reason why the current rule is stupid.

1/5/124:02 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by Point Brewmaster:
What do your proposed overtime rules have to do with forfeiting?

My point about forfeiting was in response to your implication that teams were afraid of a prolonged game.

If you don't want to play the game anymore, you can forfeit.

1/5/124:04 PM

Point BrewmasterMember

If the length of overtime is unimportant to you, then why not adopt an NBA style overtime? Whoever is leading after 15 minutes of overtime is the winner. If it is still tied, you go to double-overtime of another 15 minutes, and so on.

1/5/124:38 PM

floormasterMember

Also (and I might have got this wrong), if you possess the ball first in OT and score a TD, shouldn't you *definitely* go for an onside kick?

It gives you a reasonable chance of not allowing the other team to possess the ball, and 45+ yards of field still to defend if you don't recover it.

1/5/124:39 PM

Timmy!TIMMAAAAYYY!!

quote:
Originally posted by FreeSafety:
...is no more foreign to the regulation style play than sudden death.
The goal of 1st to 5 is to avoid ending the game on a turnover.

If a TO can end a game in regulation, why should SD be different?
I know we're just splitting hairs, but if the object is to keep the rules the same/close as they can be in the regulation period, a defensive TO should be able to end the game.

1/5/124:52 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

How does a TO end a game in regulation?

It doesn't.

That is exactly my point.

1/5/125:14 PM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by Point Brewmaster:
If the length of overtime is unimportant to you, then why not adopt an NBA style overtime? Whoever is leading after 15 minutes of overtime is the winner. If it is still tied, you go to double-overtime of another 15 minutes, and so on.

If the length of the game is so important to you, then why not just flip a coin if regulation game ends in a tie?

Stupid extreme strawmen arguments are lame.

Sudden death play is very foreign to the regulation style of NFL football. Game plans, coaching, player development, drafting and FA acquisitions...none of that is done with Sudden Death style play in mind.

1/5/125:15 PM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

quote:
Originally posted by floormaster:
Also (and I might have got this wrong), if you possess the ball first in OT and score a TD, shouldn't you *definitely* go for an onside kick?

It gives you a reasonable chance of not allowing the other team to possess the ball, and 45+ yards of field still to defend if you don't recover it.

If you get the ball 1st and score a TD the game is over. Other team only get's a shot if you kick a FG to start OT.

1/5/125:15 PM

"We"-Ka-BongYou ungrateful biscuit eating son of a bitch

I'm pretty sure O'doyle rules

1/5/126:15 PM

Blair KielGOOD OL' FAKE BLAIR KIEL - My Hood? nice Henry. Fuck You!

1/5/126:39 PM

"We"-Ka-BongYou ungrateful biscuit eating son of a bitch

quote:
Originally posted by FreeSafety:
Sudden death play is very foreign to the regulation style of NFL football. Game plans, coaching, player development, drafting and FA acquisitions...none of that is done with Sudden Death style play in mind.

disagree. Sudden death is no different in actual play from what happens in regulation. Similar strategies are thought out to end play in regulation.

1/5/126:54 PM

PackdogMember

quote:
Originally posted by FreeSafety:
I still think it is stupid that the game can end on a turnover in the field of play.

Not sure why you would have a problem with this. Overall, I like the fact that the game can't end with a FG on the initial possession. I like the 1st to 5 overall, but this seems pretty good too.

Assuming the team with the initial possession scores, the team that gets second possession can either score to win or tie, turn it over on downs(lose), or lose because of an int or fumble.(..and a couple of other less likely scenarios)

You are fortunate enough to get a possession, better make the most of it.

1/5/127:36 PM

FedyaMember

quote:
For the record, I was not in favor of changing the overtime rules for the playoffs. It only happened because the Vikings got all butthurt over how they lost the NFC championship game against the Saints.

I think Indy's loss to SD the year before was the real catalyst. Peyton Manning complains constantly about the rules, and since Indy is on the committee charged with adjusting the rules, when he bitches, they listen.

(Manning complained after the 2004 AFC Championship Game, and then again in the 2010 preseason when the league was trying to keep umpires safer. That safety kept him from running his precious no-huddle offense in the preseason game against the Packers, so he bitched and bitched.)

1/5/129:16 PM

Skip to main content

Add Reply

Membership Required

Remove From Your Block List

Manage Follow Preferences

Block

Please wait...