[samanthalueus]

I think that last night's finish (one possession, drive into FG range, score) highlights some of the issues with overtime in the NFL.

I do NOT advocate the 'everybody gets a chance' version from college. That's just idiocy.

I also don't want to say 'TD or bust'. Because that could go on a long, long time.

I don't like ties.

So I'd like to see a '5 point' rule in effect. First team to score 5 or more points wins.

Why 5? Because I want 2 FGs to count. I want a TD to be the goal. But I can concede that a safety and a FG should do it too.

5 points. It could be only one possession. It could take two. But it pushes overtime away from being a 'special teams' zone and back into being football.

[SinyugiN]

isn't it the defense's job to get the ball back to the offense?

[8Zgkdeee]

Since you have let the Genie out of the bottle, I really like the College way of doing it. The only thing I might change for he Pros is to move it back to the 45 so the easy field goal is harder to get after 3 and out , and maybe make them go for 2 pts on the conversion as well.
The 5 pts idea is interesting though.

[blankostaroe]

why not just play an extra quarter and whoever has the lead after wins or in case of a tie then go to sudden death.

[connandoilee]

isn't it the defense's job to get the ball back to the offense?

It is. But I dislike the FG as the way to end the game. A decent KO return, and 30 yards... and you are in a winnable position under the current rules. That seems cheap.

If you want to use FGs, you need two of them to win.

(I'm equally happy with saying that OT requires a TD. But the points option allows for more variety.)

[priceyicey]

why not just play an extra quarter and whoever has the lead after wins or in case of a tie then go to sudden death.

Too much abuse on the player's bodies. I want the game to end as quickly as a team can do so - but just not with short drive & FG.

[Arratherimi]

It is. But I dislike the FG as the way to end the game. A decent KO return, and 30 yards... and you are in a winnable position under the current rules. That seems cheap.

If you want to use FGs, you need two of them to win.

(I'm equally happy with saying that OT requires a TD. But the points option allows for more variety.)

And isn't your kickoff teams duty to pin the other team back if possible?

and if other team can drive and get FG's at will, why did it take an extra OT to get that FG?

and what if their is wind and a team elects to take the wind?

[lh88gFzI]

This always gets brought up when a high profile game goes into OT and the team that wins the toss wins by kicking a FG on the first drive in OT.

I DO think they should alter the rules, but I DON'T want to anything close to what they have in college. I don't know that I had heard the suggestion of requiring X amount of points until I heard them discussing a "6 point rule" on Mike and Mike this morning. Essentially the same as what dom suggested but without the safety wrinkle.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Stovegeothnon]

Too much abuse on the player's bodies. I want the game to end as quickly as a team can do so - but just not with short drive & FG.

there is talk about adding an extra game to the season but they cant do an extra quarter?

[didrexx]

the college system is the best.

[kristloken]

if it's so easy to get a FG why dont teams do it every drive, why does first drive of OT make it so much easier to get a FG?

[cwgwowcom]

if it's so easy to get a FG why dont teams do it every drive, why does first drive of OT make it so much easier to get a FG?

Urgency?

[SappyAppy]

there is talk about adding an extra game to the season but they cant do an extra quarter?

Games would take too long, say it's a 1 O'clock game. It would take a half an hour just to get to the 4 O'clock game.

[ZX3URrBH]

And isn't your kickoff teams duty to pin the other team back if possible?

and if other team can drive and get FG's at will, why did it take an extra OT to get that FG?

and what if their is wind and a team elects to take the wind?

Yes, who cares, and who cares.

Even if your KO team sticks them at the 20... 40 yards puts you on the 40. that's a 55 yard FG, which is an unlikely shot. If you are on 4th down, and it's the sudden death format ... you may try for the FG (i.e. go for the win). In the other format, you punt and hope to pin them deep, thus getting the ball back with an advantageous field.

Old format, you miss the FG from the 40, your opponent has a short field. And they can go what, 30 yards for a decent FG percentage. OR have to drive 60 yards for a TD.

I'd rather see football, not FG kicking.

[soitlyobserty]

This always gets brought up when a high profile game goes into OT and the team that wins the toss wins by kicking a FG on the first drive in OT.

I DO think they should alter the rules, but I DON'T want to anything close to what they have in college. I don't know that I had heard the suggestion of requiring X amount of points until I heard them discussing a "6 point rule" on Mike and Mike this morning. Essentially the same as what dom suggested but without the safety wrinkle.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

I also caught the Mike & Mike, which started this chain of thought. They had 6 as the magic number, but I like the inclusion of a safety - otherwise it's identical.

[Lerpenoaneway]

Games would take too long, say it's a 1 O'clock game. It would take a half an hour just to get to the 4 O'clock game.

true but they could always just make the overtime shorter from 15 to like 10 or less

[Irravepem]

honestly, I don't think there's a problem with the current format.

I think it might be something like 30% of the teams that win the toss take it the length of the field for the FG and win. Alright, that seems a bit favorable, but I believer overall they only end up winning sligthly above 50% of the time.

It seems easy for the coin toss winners to march down the field and kick the FG when they do, but if a team downs the ball goes three and out the other team should be ending up with some terrific field position.

It may be slightly slanted, but there was already 60 minutes for one team to win it outright.

[Kneedycrype]

I like it the way it is. I honestly wouldn't want to see it changed. I like sudden death periods in sports...that element of every play being incredibly important is awesome.

[Andromino]

the college system is the best.

I love it.

honestly, I don't think there's a problem with the current format.

I think it might be something like 30% of the teams that win the toss take it the length of the field for the FG and win. Alright, that seems a bit favorable, but I believer overall they only end up winning sligthly above 50% of the time.

It seems easy for the coin toss winners to march down the field and kick the FG when they do, but if a team downs the ball goes three and out the other team should be ending up with some terrific field position.

It may be slightly slanted, but there was already 60 minutes for one team to win it outright.

I only have a slight problem with it. I think both teams should be given a possession. So if the team gets the ball and drives into FG range, they need to keep going for 7 or at least attempt the fg on 4th down. Then the other team should get the ball to see what they can do. Its just like extra innings in baseball. Both teams should at least get a chance.

[Uzezqelj]

honestly, I don't think there's a problem with the current format.

I think it might be something like 30% of the teams that win the toss take it the length of the field for the FG and win. Alright, that seems a bit favorable, but I believer overall they only end up winning sligthly above 50% of the time.

It seems easy for the coin toss winners to march down the field and kick the FG when they do, but if a team downs the ball goes three and out the other team should be ending up with some terrific field position.

It may be slightly slanted, but there was already 60 minutes for one team to win it outright.

I agree. I'm happy as is, I believe team wins toss only wins at slightly better then 50%....so...