|
That doesn't change the fact that the Chiefs couldn't stop Brady on third and long and yet the Rams were able to shut down Brees on his opening drive. Not that many over time games have ended with the team actually getting the td on their first shot. Now it's a problem because Brady is too automatic in pressure situations, Kansas' D was too soft, and people would like to believe that Mahomes would have been able to get a TD rather than a field goal, or nothing, if they won the toss But we'll never know 
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 01:30 |
|
|
I like current overtime rules.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
sweet thursday posted:That doesn't change the fact that the Chiefs couldn't stop Brady on third and long and yet the Rams were able to shut down Brees on his opening drive. Not that many over time games have ended with the team actually getting the td on their first shot. Now it's a problem because Brady is too automatic in pressure situations, Kansas' D was too soft, and people would like to believe that Mahomes would have been able to get a TD rather than a field goal, or nothing, if they won the toss Yes, we'll never know because the overtime rules are poo poo. I'm glad we agree 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Play posted:A coin toss isn't fair because it has nothing to do with football skill, obviously. OT is a football game, not a coin toss. And no two teams are exactly equal to each other; one will surpass the other if you play for any amount of time. For the SECOND period, if neither team can put themselves up, you can move on to sudden death. It's a very small change, easily made This argument for a second OT period that is sudden death makes no sense. Like, you think 60 minutes isn't enough time before sudden death, but somehow 75 is? All you're doing is increasing the chance of injury.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
There is no just solution because forcing a tied game to have a winner is inherently unjust. People don't like college OT because it's fairer, they like it because it's more exciting. Another way to put it is that the "fairness" is that if KC wanted to avoid having the game come to a coin toss, they probably should have outscored NE in regulation. Feels Villeneuve fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
remove the ball in overtime and see who steps up
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:Another way to put it is that the "fairness" is that if KC wanted to avoid having the game come to a coin toss, they probably should have outscored NE in regulation. You can easily flip this on it's head though and say that if NE wanted to avoid having the game come to a coin toss, they probably should have outscored KC in regulation, so why do they get the advantage of ending the game before KC's offense can step foot on the field? Only difference here is KC didn't win a coin toss...
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:48
|
|
|
Gutting it out in the 5th quarter, with nary a hogsskin in sight
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
weird Asian candy posted:You can easily flip this on it's head though and say that if NE wanted to avoid having the game come to a coin toss, they probably should have outscored KC in regulation, so why do they get the advantage of ending the game before KC's offense can step foot on the field? Only difference here is KC didn't win a coin toss... I've always thought there should be no coin toss and the visitor should get the ball first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:I've always thought there should be no coin toss and the visitor should get the ball first. The main problem with making the coin toss deterministic is that one team has an incentive to let a late tied game go to OT. Of course the other team has an incentive to not let this happen but it's still kind of something that could lead to gamesmanship. People would probably start to complain if the away team frequently stopped trying to score on a late possession or started to run out the clock because that's boring and people want to see hail marys Feels Villeneuve fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Jan 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:I've always thought there should be no coin toss and the visitor should get the ball first. Yeah, I think the two main issues I have with OT are the coin toss and the fact that one team can close it out before the other team. Especially considering after 60 minutes neither team could close out the other which is why they are in this situation in the first place. The coin toss is fine to start the game since both teams ultimately benefit from it (one team gets ball first each half) but only one possession is guaranteed in OT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
The argument of an entire OT period with no sudden death is the dumbest poo poo ever. Just play 20 minute quarters then or 18 minutes or whatever the gently caress and it's the same exact thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
Tiny Tubesteak Tom posted:The argument of an entire OT period with no sudden death is the dumbest poo poo ever. Just play 20 minute quarters then or 18 minutes or whatever the gently caress and it's the same exact thing. I'm all for sudden death. Just after both teams get a crack on offense. So basically the current OT rules, but with the guaranteed possession for the team who loses the toss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
It's stupidly gimmicky but I like the existing OT rules except you must go for two point conversions. I think the CFL actually does this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:15
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:It's stupidly gimmicky but I like the existing OT rules except you must go for two point conversions. I think the CFL actually does this. That's actually a pretty creative way to cut down on ties
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:It's stupidly gimmicky but I like the existing OT rules except you must go for two point conversions. I think the CFL actually does this. I'm struggling to think of a scenario where this makes any difference with the current NFL overtime rules. The way things are now, any touchdown ends the game immediately.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:It's stupidly gimmicky but I like the existing OT rules except you must go for two point conversions. I think the CFL actually does this. *remembers back to SB51* No. No I don't like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
my favorite gimmick ot was the xfl doing college OT but you could also win by scoring in fewer plays than the other team
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
General Dog posted:I'm struggling to think of a scenario where this makes any difference with the current NFL overtime rules. The way things are now, any touchdown ends the game immediately. Yeah sorry I mean combining this with the often suggested "both teams must touch the ball" rule
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
Ban all overtime as an abomination. If a playoff game ends in a tie, then the opponent of the would-be winner of a tied game advances to the next round automatically. If a situation like Sunday occurs, then the Super Bowl is canceled and replaced by a national day of thanksgiving in celebration that the Patriots did not advance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Keep OT as is. But add 1 hour more in commercial breaks to the telecast and ask fans if they really want to sit through more truck ads
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 22:04
|
|
|
the current OT rules have more to do with TV schedules than football
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
Feels Villeneuve posted:The main problem with making the coin toss deterministic is that one team has an incentive to let a late tied game go to OT. Of course the other team has an incentive to not let this happen but it's still kind of something that could lead to gamesmanship. People would probably start to complain if the away team frequently stopped trying to score on a late possession or started to run out the clock because that's boring and people want to see hail marys Counterpoint: you would at least have one party (home team) that would be aggressive at the end of games to avoid giving the football to the visitor in OT. As it is right now, more often than not, both milquetoast coaches are happy to sit back and play for OT in the 4th quarter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 23:21
|
|
|
5th Quarter, sudden death, but make it a quarter change rather than a half change. If a team scores with 20 seconds left to tie it I would think that the team that was leading up to that point should have the advantage and keep possession of the ball through the end of regulation, at the point on the field that they had it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Play posted:That's exactly the problem, though? That coin flip decided the game. For right-thinking people that is an insult The coin flip didn't decide the game. The Patriots didn't automatically score once they won the toss otherwise the Saints would have won too. If the coin flip decided the game we wouldn't have this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAgG9XcrDFY
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
imo - REGULAR SEASON: no OT. ties ties ties POSTING SEASON: 10 minute periods until someone is winning at the end of one. no timeouts, no coach challenges, no 2 minute warning.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
Darth Brooks posted:The coin flip didn't decide the game. The Patriots didn't automatically score once they won the toss otherwise the Saints would have won too. sure it didn't decide the game, but winning the OT coin flip is arguably the most important "play" in whichever game it occurs in (including PI non-calls) actually, has anyone modeled the expected points added/win probability added of the OT coin flip?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
its not really arguable at all its flatly untrue unless you are working off the assumption that all drives in OT automatically lead to tds which is what everyone seems to be doing. idk what the best place to find them is anymore but according to this https://live.numberfire.com/nfl/7187 the pats go ahead td was worth nearly 70% win probability, the entirety of their OT offensive drive was worth ~45%. so making the absurd assumption that coin flip= game winning td its still not anywhere near the most important play even in this game
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Darth Brooks posted:The coin flip didn't decide the game. The Patriots didn't automatically score once they won the toss otherwise the Saints would have won too. nobody on earth thought the pats were gonna lose once they got the toss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
Ghost Dog posted:its not really arguable at all its flatly untrue unless you are working off the assumption that all drives in OT automatically lead to tds which is what everyone seems to be doing. I don't particularly care that it's unfair (the same way I don't particularly care that the non-call in the Saints game was unfair), if they leave OT how it is I'm fine with it. some things in sports are just unfair. but it does have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of the game - especially since the teams themselves have no control over it. people who are arguing that aren't making it up
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
indigi posted:I don't particularly care that it's unfair (the same way I don't particularly care that the non-call in the Saints game was unfair), if they leave OT how it is I'm fine with it. some things in sports are just unfair. but it does have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of the game - especially since the teams themselves have no control over it. people who are arguing that aren't making it up i mean in the instance of this game under the assumption of a coin flip win = td it was worth less than or about equal to all the other biggest plays in the 4th quarter. the actual highest leverage plays that happened in OT were the 3rd down conversions. and again the assumption that coin flip = td is absurdly generous to that position. the inverse would be just saying its worth the possession and field position from the kickoff which uhhh  Biggest Play Of The Game indeed
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
Ghost Dog posted:i mean in the instance of this game under the assumption of a coin flip win = td it was worth less than or about equal to all the other biggest plays in the 4th quarter. the actual highest leverage plays that happened in OT were the 3rd down conversions. afaict that WPA/EPA is calculated the same way it is for regulation time which doesn't operate under the assumption that a TD ends the game and a FG probably ends the game. but I do agree that assuming winning the coinflip guarantees a win is absurd. it just makes it more likely
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:02
|
|
|
indigi posted:afaict that WPA/EPA is calculated the same way it is for regulation time which doesn't operate under the assumption that a TD ends the game and a FG probably ends the game. but I do agree that assuming winning the coinflip guarantees a win is absurd. it just makes it more likely what im saying is if you just use the win probability of the game winning drive as the coin flip event, that gets you the win probability of a coin flip that decides a game(for this one). so the coin flip that decided this game would be ~45% win probability for the patriots. The go ahead td was way more than that. and the inverse, if you assume the coin flip is exactly what it says, a kickoff reception and possession its worth the equivalent of the chiefs punt in the 2nd quarter. neither ones correct but i think it answers your question about win probability and how high leverage the coin flip is? its probably rarely the biggest play in the game even if you allow for some incredibly generous terms(based on 20 seconds of reading a chart for one game anyway get owned im never doing anymore)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
Ghost Dog posted:its probably rarely the biggest play in the game that's fair
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
If the coin toss is fair and good because "neither team could separate itself in regulation," or whatever idiot logic y'all are using, then winning the opening coin toss should award points 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:20
|
|
|
Andy Reid absolutely should have taken a timeout when the Patriots got inside the goal line and his defense was getting creamed. It was clear the Patriots were going to run it right in and score and even Romo said they should have called timeout. I believe that if the Patriots had been held to a field goal they would have lost.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
I just don't see a good argument against letting both teams possess the ball in overtime, personally, especially when it comes to a playoff game. Take all the coin toss arguments out of it, let both offenses and defenses get one opportunity, if they're still tied after then sudden death
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:01
|
|
|
well, to be autistically fair, there's not even an existing mechanism in the rules that guarantees both teams possession in regulation. it's exceedingly unlikely, but not impossible, for a team to have a drive that burns 30 minutes off the clock, recover an onside kick at the half, and run another 30 minute drive (obviously there'd have to be a ton of penalties, but still). you're not ever assured of a possession unless your defense can get you the ball back, so logically, that should remain the case in overtime
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
That's fine. If a team manages to possess the ball for the full 15 minutes of OT before scoring the go-ahead TD or FG, they deserve to have sole possession in OT. OTOH, if they drive and score a TD in a few minutes like the Patriots did, it seems silly not to kick-off to let the other offense have the ball for at least one possession.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 01:30 |
|
|
indigi posted:well, to be autistically fair, there's not even an existing mechanism in the rules that guarantees both teams possession in regulation. it's exceedingly unlikely, but not impossible, for a team to have a drive that burns 30 minutes off the clock, recover an onside kick at the half, and run another 30 minute drive (obviously there'd have to be a ton of penalties, but still). you're not ever assured of a possession unless your defense can get you the ball back, so logically, that should remain the case in overtime 1) gently caress off with the autistic comment 2) nothing you just described automatically ends the game if a touchdown occurs, and is as such not actually addressing the point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:20
|
|