Zombo said:

Instead of sudden death, they should just play a fifth quarter. And in the playoffs, it becomes sudden death only after time expires in the fifth quarter.

Don't change the game or the normal rules ... last man standing.

Z

That would probably be OK....though it would not bother me if they played a reduced period, say a 10 minute OT period. That way the teams would feel more of an expediancy to score in OT...but also not just settle for FGs. Then Sudden Death if still tied.

@taco918 said:

I understand your position from a baseball and basketball stand point. But like the overtime rules for baseball and basketball the first one to score doesn't automatically win. I would be fine with just playing a 15 minute overtime period but the sudden death rule would have to be done away with. As far as soccer and hockey are concerned they don't have much in common with the other popular sports due to their scoring methods. Shootouts are necessary to prevent ties which is why you see shootouts in playoff/tournament formats. Im pretty sure hockey goes to shootouts in the regular season now but that's more to bring interest to the game then in the interest of fairness (although the points system evens it out). As far as the NFL goes they either need to go to a 15 minute period without sudden death and continue playing until someone wins (no ties) or go to the college system (where there are no ties). Their problem is that the 15 minute period without sudden death takes away excitement and the college system runs into problems with the fundamental properties of the game itself so instead of making a tough call they prefer to create convoluted rules in the interest of placating all parties involved but in the end, end up pissing off all said parties. Bottom line the NFL needs to decide between those two options stated above and stick with it. Those are the only two options that they can realistically pick while being able to say their overtime rules are fair to both teams.

My point about OT is that I want teams to play the game....not some bastardized, pussified version of the game.....that goes for football, hockey, basketball, whatever. The college system is a bastardized, pussifies version of football. Play fucking football.

@taco918 said:

As far as the NFL goes they either need to go to a 15 minute period without sudden death and continue playing until someone wins (no ties) or go to the college system (where there are no ties).

The losing team is going to be unhappy no matter what the rules are. You can't just keep adding extra quarters to football games unless you want to see both teams decimated by injuries..

Gipper already explained why the college system blows.

@taco918 said:

Do you mind telling me why your so staunchly opposed to the college OT rules? I get that you don't like it but you haven't really provided the logic of how you've arrived at this belief or at least not in this thread. I do agree with you that OT rules need to be same in the regular and post seasons.

The reasons I am against the college rules are voluminous. First off, it is not football. It is a bastardization of football. It takes away ALL special teams play except the field goal.

It is complete an utter horsheshit.

It is like deciding a baseball game by not playing baseball, but by having a home run derby contest.

It would be like deciding a basketball game by having a three point,or foul shot shooting contest.

You are not playing the game.

It is like these shootouts they have in certain hockey games or soccer. It is a joke.

@the-gipper said:

The college rules are the biggest abomination in sports. Nobody in their right fucking mind would ever use those rules.

Do you mind telling me why your so staunchly opposed to the college OT rules? I get that you don't like it but you haven't really provided the logic of how you've arrived at this belief or at least not in this thread. I do agree with you that OT rules need to be same in the regular and post seasons.

@taco918 said:

I really don't get why the NFL doesn't just use the college rules regarding overtime. The only thing I would change about the college rules is move the ball back to either the 50 or to the 20 of the team in possession of the ball. How can you not like colleges overtime rules? It's fair, compelling and most importantly entertaining. Isn't that everything you look for in a football game?

The college rules are the biggest abomination in sports. Nobody in their right fucking mind would ever use those rules.

@king-ghoolie-lives said:

HEre is the difference between you and me. I believe in doing the right thing, even if it means my family, friends or even I suffer because of it.

In your mind, as long as the Steelers lost, the rules were fine.

You lack of character and principle is direct testimony to why teh workd is getting more and more fucked up each day. You are all for fairness, unless it hinders you. This is Madoff thinking. This is Joe Paterno and Tressel thinking................. Hey, if its good for winning, its good for everyone.

This is CEO thinking to take $30 million bonuses when workers are being laid off.

Hey, it's the Steelers, right? Condemn Big Ben, but ignore that Jim Brown was tried for rape, TWICE.

Let me tell you something fuck-up, whenever ANY RULE favors one entity over another, it is a bullshit rule.

The NFL system of overtime has never been fair and this playoff system is even more flawed.

Both teams deserve a chance at the football. No need to even comment because there is no rebuttal.

You are an asshole. The justification you have for supporting this rule is that it went against a team you hate. When it goes against the Browns, you will hate it. Fortunately for you, the Browns are not likely to win many games or be competitive in many so you won't have to worried about even seeing the Browns in overtime.

The Steelers got screwed.

Blah Blah Blah. I liked the new rules as soon as they were implemented 2 years ago. My opinions have nothing to do with the steelers or any other team. But if you honestly think the new rules make it easier for the receiving team to win the game, you clearly still don't understand the rules. Why don't you read them sometime instead of ranting about random shit that has nothing to do with this thread?

@king-ghoolie-lives said:

HEre is the difference between you and me. I believe in doing the right thing, even if it means my family, friends or even I suffer because of it.

In your mind, as long as the Steelers lost, the rules were fine.

You lack of character and principle is direct testimony to why teh workd is getting more and more fucked up each day. You are all for fairness, unless it hinders you. This is Madoff thinking. This is Joe Paterno and Tressel thinking................. Hey, if its good for winning, its good for everyone.

This is CEO thinking to take $30 million bonuses when workers are being laid off.

Hey, it's the Steelers, right? Condemn Big Ben, but ignore that Jim Brown was tried for rape, TWICE.

Let me tell you something fuck-up, whenever ANY RULE favors one entity over another, it is a bullshit rule.

The NFL system of overtime has never been fair and this playoff system is even more flawed.

Both teams deserve a chance at the football. No need to even comment because there is no rebuttal.

You are an asshole. The justification you have for supporting this rule is that it went against a team you hate. When it goes against the Browns, you will hate it. Fortunately for you, the Browns are not likely to win many games or be competitive in many so you won't have to worried about even seeing the Browns in overtime.

The Steelers got screwed.

I don't think the Steelers got screwed. Not by the rules anyway. (they screwed themselves by playing poor defense on that "drive"). You play the game with the framework of the rules and you live with it.

Under the OT rules that were in place for the last nearly 40 years, the Steelers would have lost that game. Under the new rules that were in place for just this year, the Steelers did lose that game. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Steelers.

I don't mind the new rule, if that is going to be the rule.

Like I said before, I do NOT think there should be different rules for the playoffs than for the regular season. If you don't want sudden death on the first possession of an OT by a FG, fine. Implement that for the entire season.

I bet that when the Competition committee meets next that is just what they do.

Zombo said:

Look to the upper left hand corner of the page...

"Browns Board!"

Who gives a shit what you think?

Zombo

Yep by the time the Browns make the playoffs the rules would be changed atleast 3 times so need to discuss the rule here.

In regards to the overtime rules, either make it sudden death or make each team have a chance at the ball(not the well each team has a chance if), also the rules should be all year and not just the playoffs. I would prefer atleast each team having a shot with the ball, specially since it seems the league is now in the mind set, the best defense is a good offense.

Endymion said:

There were two overtime games this past post-season (and there should have been three). Frankly, I don't understand why the NFL has implemented these new rules. If the idea is they don't want the coin flip to decide the winner, why don't both offenses get a chance to extend the game? The Broncos scored a touchdown on the opening play of overtime versus the Steelers. The Steelers should have had one drive to attempt to match that score (which would not have been an easy feat), or there's no reason to change the sudden death manner of overtime. (I'm sure the networks would've loved to keep that game on the air a little bit longer).

Personally, I'd rather overtime return to the sudden death nature. I'm not to keen on coinflips deciding who gets first possesion. The XFL had an interesting idea, and I think the game would be better if the NFL implemented some kind of "skill" match-up instead of a coinflip to decide who gets first possession.

You team should lose anyways if they give up an 80 yard touchdown on the first play.

@harry-buffalo said:

Regardless the rules shouldn't take 2 minutes to explain each time. Did anyone else here the crowd booing the new rules when the ref was trying to explain.

The teams should know the rules and they shouldn't need explained in the first place.

1. Sudden Death

2. Only Touchdowns no field goals count.

3. No timeouts for any teams.

@cdl15 said:

Actually the playoff overtime rules are perfect and should be implemented into the regular season.

The new rules protect against the cheap field goal win where if someone scores a touchdown the game is over, not to venture to far from the old sudden death rules-quite the perfect touch. This is why the NFL is boss. Any other opinion is just sour grapes

My view is that I don't care which set of rules are applied....I just do NOT believe they should be different for the Playoffs than they are for the regular season. Play be the same rules all year round, whatever they may be.

(But god forbid they adopt something like the college OT system...what a fucking abomination)

I agree the overtime rules aren't perfect, but they are better than they were before.

In terms of this topic, you need to get over the fact that I'm a Steelers fan, or at least look at from a Browns point of view. You could be in a play-off game that is impacted as a result of these new rules. For example you could march down the field, kick a field goal and have the other team turn around and score a TD on you. Under the regular season sudden death rules you would've won but under the postseason rules you lose.

In terms of the new rules, the game would've been more compelling to me seeing the Steelers have to score a touchdown or lose (after the Denver score). That kind of drama would've made for compelling TV on the networks. Ultimately though, my team didn't have it that day and I doubt Denver would've lost.

The new rules protect against the cheap field goal win where if someone scores a touchdown the game is over, not to venture to far from the old sudden death rules-quite the perfect touch. This is why the NFL is boss. Any other opinion is just sour grapes

@king-ghoolie-lives said:

Well written and points succinctly made. I couldn't agree more. The Steelers got screwed by rules that were meant to get out of overtime as quickly as possible, and NOT to be fair.

If the NFL wanted to get out of overtime as quickly as possible then the rules wouldn't have been changed in the 1st place (I would explain to you the old rules but you ignore facts so I won't waste my time).

But you won't ever be taken seriously when you claim to be a Browns fan and yet insist that the Steelers were "screwed by the rules" when giving up an 80 yard touchdown! Go join a Pittspuke forum. You know you want to..

@harry-buffalo said:

Regardless the rules shouldn't take 2 minutes to explain each time. Did anyone else here the crowd booing the new rules when the ref was trying to explain.

I agree and have a simple solution. "Both teams will possess the ball at least once - following which the team having or obtaining a lead, is declared the winner".

So a safety or defensive turnover/touchdown on the first drive is automatically a "two possesssion" game winner. The only difference is that right now, an opening drive touchdown ends the game (which in my opinion, it shouldn't) and the rules are way too long to explain.

Zombo said:

Look to the upper left hand corner of the page...

"Browns Board!"

Who gives a shit what you think?

Zombo

+1 Zombo! Priceless...