Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Overtime Change

The rules change for playoff and Super Bowl overtimes went from proposal to law today as the owners voted 28-4 to adopt the Competition Committee's recommendation. And apparently they thought enough of it that they'll discuss it further at the May owner's meeting for purposes of employing it for the regular season, too.

You'll remember the committee came up with a format that will end the game after the first possession only in the event of a touchdown. If the first team scores a field goal, the opponent then gets a chance. If the opponent ties with a field goal, the game goes into true sudden death.

Only the Bills, Vikings, Ravens, and Bengals voted no, a big switch from last week when it was thought the measure didn't have the 24 votes to pass. The Giants, who engaged in the league's first overtime game in 1958 against the Colts, favored from the start the first overtime overhaul since that game.

Competition Committee chairman Rich McKay said they kept the rules restricted to the postseason because of the ramifications.

"Part of the reason we have different rules is we have different consequences," McKay said. "The consequences in the postseason are, go home if you don't win. In the regular season, we have 15 other games."



  1. Ernie,

    Please ask Mr. McKay how a playoff game has different ramifications than a Week 16 or Week 17 game will the team needs to win to keep its playoff chances alive. Is that not the same win or go home consequences?

    I don't mind that they changed the rules, but change it for the whole season. Don't tell me a team trying to make the playoffs is not an important game. Or you could say a Week 5 game where the winner could get the head-to-head tiebreaker is just as crucial. Remember when baseball instituted limited instant replay, but only for the playoffs. Why? Do it for the regular season, it's just as important.

    I'm also not crazy about this rule change. It just seems to be more complicating than need be.

  2. Much more complicated than needed. While I personally like the old system, the only change I could be in favor of is playing another full quarter. Maybe next the first team to score a td and get a two point conversion or kick two field goals will wwin where the coaches have to chug a beer to determine who gets the ball first.

  3. This is a joke!!! Poor little Timmy,Bobby or Mikey lost the toss and can't get the ball first. Boo Hoo!!!! Let's just play games like my 5 year old where no one keeps score and everyone wins!!!! Football has three phases; offense, defense and special teams. If you lose the toss than play good special teams and defense then get the ball back in good field position. Why all this hatred of losing by a field goal? If field goals are such a loathsome way to score than why not do away with them altogether? If they are part of the game then quit whining about losing by one in O.T. You can't hit the WR's. You can't hit the QB's and now their isn't a true sudden death overtime in the playoffs. The WNBA is looking better all the time!!!

  4. Ernie, given what happened in their playoff game and its impact on bringing about this rule change, why would the Vikings be one of the four teams that voted against it?