lol at OT being perfect where a coinflip basically can decide who wins the game.


Yeah, I think the rules are probably fine for the regular season because you don't want teams playing too much, but obviously the rules are unacceptable for the postseason. Whether you want to allow both teams to get a possession or make it so the team leading at the end of OT wins, doesn't really matter to me. I'd probably actually be in favor for the latter as some are saying.

I wouldn't call any system where there are huge equity shifts based on the results of a coinflip perfect.

Lol at saying the game is given to the team that wins the coin flip. So the coin flip winner must win 95%+ of OT games?

Explain how there is a huge equity shift when scoring happens on far less than 50 percent of drives in the NFL

The team that won the coin toss was 6-6-2 this year. Huge equity shift IMO.

If I'm remembering correctly, the last 3 playoff games that went to OT were all won on the first drive by the team winning the coin toss. But nah, winning the coin toss doesn't play a big part.

Edit: 4 out of the last 5

Ya but 12 out of the last 13 SB champions wore white. Why aren't we talking about how unfair the Jersey color rules are???

You're using a sample size of 5 to drive your argument?

How many playoff OT games have there been since this rule was implemented? I'd love to use a much much larger sample size. Unfortunately, it doesn't exist.

Touchback starting at the 25 does swing the Equities a bit. Not massive tho.

I'm pretty anti another 15 minute quarter. But I do know the sudden death football gave me what I consider the greatest moment in the sport:



Colts beating the Giants on the road with the GOAT in maybe the single greatest game ever played by any player(or top 2, Unitas holds the top 2 greatest championship game performances IMO). Dude just won "The Greatest Game Ever Played" and is walking off the field with his head down. Basically like "alright...did my job, time to go home."

****ing Unitas...wonder what he would have done in this era of football.

yeah, I think the new NFL rules do do a pretty good of evening the equity of the coin toss. there was a game where BB actually decided to kick in OT and folks ran the #'s and it was...close (though it's pretty complex)

still, for a playoff game, it's a bit of a wonky way to end the game. sudden death is tough.

Patriots fans,

Take a step back. Not everything is a shot at your beloved team that never gets any respect. It's a dumb rule. It was a dumb rule Sunday. It was a dumb rule last year in the Packers/Cardinals game. It was a dumb rule in the Packers/Seahawks game. It was a dumb rule in the Steelers/Broncos game. It's always been dumb(though slightly less than the game ending when the first drive ends in a fg). You can safely admit it's a dumb rule without taking anything away from their win. I was ecstatic when the Cardinals won last year, but the game felt incomplete because Rodgers got left standing on the sideline, never getting back on the field after the miraculous/improbable comeback.

Football isn't basketball, or soccer, or hockey, where the offense and defense are on the field at the same time. Do you also feel if there's a leadoff homerun in the top of the 10th, the game should be over? No, because that would be ridiculous. Both teams should have the chance to posses the ball. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

Yeah, it is rather brutal. I don't know if the playoffs should have an automatic rebuttal. I still think regular season OT should be sudden death, my personal opinion of overtime in the regular season is it needs to end ASAP. But I know that is a point of view many disagree with. 60 minutes is more than enough damage on the body.

What I do know for a fact is that high school(some states start on the 10 yard line for their OTs) and college is by far the worst answer to the overtime question.

Receiving team should just start at their own 15 no kickoff IMO. The starting field position is what makes the coin toss important. Not the fact that one team might not be able to possess the ball.
Like if you had to start at your own 5 you'd always defer if you won the toss.

Secret bid for starting field position, closest bid to your own endzone gets it.

^Now that is an idea I can get behind!

Would be hilarious to see some of these awful coaches bids too

this does beg the question of - why do you think there should be OT at all? Just end the game after 60 minutes. Isn't giving a Tie to both teams the fairest thing you can do? Certainly more 'fair' than some high variance solution that is specifically designed to end the game quickly (for good reason, I agree with that)

I'm 100% fine with a tie. The conversation was about OT so the assumption is there must be one. I would welcome the game ending at 60 minutes and moving on.

For what it's worth, I have taken nothing in this discussion about OT as a slight against New England.

I just don't think the current OT rule is inherently unfair.

I agree with the concept that each team should be allowed an offensive possession in OT regardless of the result of the initial possession. At least in the playoffs, I don't really care about the regular season.

I think the trailing team deserves a possession in the playoffs. Coin flip might not effect too much equity but it isn't nothing either.

Even going from 50% to 60% in a championship game is too much.

Give the other team a possession if they concede a TD on the first drive of OT, but to win the gotta score 8

So you think one team having 4 downs vs 3 is fair?