the Overtime rule - pros and cons

Donate To GopherHole
short ornery norwegian

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
19,908
Reaction score
13,661
Points
113
Like a lot of people, I just learned on Saturday that the rules for Overtime had been changed. (mandatory 2-point conversions starting with the 3rd OT.)

And now, just for the h*ll of it, I want to see the Gophers get into a 3-OT game just to see how they would handle it.

FWIW, I am not a big fan of the "start on the 25-yd line" overtime rule. I would rather see a pro-style OT with a time limit, and if no one scores, the game ends in a tie.

Going to 2-point conversions starting with the 3rd OT is like going to penalty kicks in soccer or the shootout in hockey. IMHO, if you're going to play overtime, play under the same rules that are used in regulation.

Anyway, what do people think about the OT rule? And what would the Gophers run in that situation?
 




short ornery norwegian said:
Like a lot of people, I just learned on Saturday that the rules for Overtime had been changed. (mandatory 2-point conversions starting with the 3rd OT.)

And now, just for the h*ll of it, I want to see the Gophers get into a 3-OT game just to see how they would handle it.

FWIW, I am not a big fan of the "start on the 25-yd line" overtime rule. I would rather see a pro-style OT with a time limit, and if no one scores, the game ends in a tie.

Going to 2-point conversions starting with the 3rd OT is like going to penalty kicks in soccer or the shootout in hockey. IMHO, if you're going to play overtime, play under the same rules that are used in regulation.

Anyway, what do people think about the OT rule? And what would the Gophers run in that situation?
Click to expand...
Odds of calling a timeout?..............
 


They grossly overreacted to the TAMU multiple overtime game a few years back. The new format stinks. I don’t have a problem with forcing teams to try a 2pt conversion in OT after a TD to try and limit the length of overtime, but going strictly to alternating 2pt conversions is like a shootout in hockey. Dumb.
 


I like the old way, I’m fine with forcing them to go for two in the second OT, I’m not a fan of the going for two “shoot out” style after that. Those long OT games are rare, just a totally unnecessary overhaul.
 




I like the fairness of the college OT rule. I dislike the 2 point shoot out, which can favor a teams style.

What I’d like to see is the first OT start at the 40, which is out of most teams field goal range, and the move each subsequent OT up 5 yards, which will make each overtime slightly easier to score in.
 


I much prefer the college version to the NFL's. The two-point conversion is stupid, though. Force them to go for two after a TD instead.
 

I actually like it. It’s better than the hockey or soccer style shootout, because it somewhat resembles what actually happens during the game. If I had to change it I’d say starting in the 3rd OT you alternate possessions from the 10 with no field goals allowed and must go for 2. It’s hard to come up with a perfect solution. Games are already pretty long so it makes sense that they don’t want to let them go too long
 



GophersInIowa said:
I don’t like it. I say start at the 10 yard line starting in the 3rd OT. No FGs allowed, have to go for 2.
Click to expand...
I like this much better than this two point conversion crap that is remindful of a hockey shootout.

overall I like college OT much better than NFL but this two point conversion alternating stuff is dumb and detracts from the game in my opinion. I hope they change it back or better yet…

first possession from the 50 yard line with field goals allowed

second possession from the 25 with field goal allowed

third possession on from the 10 with no field goals allowed and two point conversions required.
 

Schnauzer said:
I like this much better than this two point conversion crap that is remindful of a hockey shootout.

overall I like college OT much better than NFL but this two point conversion alternating stuff is dumb and detracts from the game in my opinion. I hope they change it back or better yet…

first possession from the 50 yard line with field goals allowed

second possession from the 25 with field goal allowed

third possession on from the 10 with no field goals allowed and two point conversions required.
Click to expand...
Also, trying to score from the 3-yard line is tougher than it might look. The defense can just clog the endzone with linebackers and DBs.
 

How about sort of adopting B1G hockey OT rules...say 7 on 7 and play 5 minute sudden death.
 

I think the new OT rule is due to several things:

1) reduce potential injuries by;
2) reducing the number of plays, and
3) over-inflating statistics garnered by all those plays.

I’m not against the new rules. Yes, I hate soccer penalties and I hate the hockey shootout.

To be honest, the fact that Indiana was 4 of 9 and Pedophile U was 3 of 9 tells me that maybe the rule is pretty good. The only change I would make is to get rid of the end zone switches in every OT. Takes way too much time.
 

I'd like to see overtime stay with college OT rules but change to starting on the 50 (or thereabouts). Starting on the 25 disproportionately hurts spread offenses by shorting the amount of room the defense needs to defend. I like overtimes to as accurately reflect the actual game and I don't think the 25 does that. Additionally they can keep the 2 pt conversion thing, but I don't think it will be as necessary because less teams will both be able to score if we start farther out.
 

The 2 point conversion thing is asinine and I hope they realized that from this debacle
 

The overtime rule should be as is, except after one overtime still tied, then overtime 2 if either scores, must go for 2 point conversion - no 1 pt. conversion. If each team scores 8 pts. then overtime is same as #2.
 

GophersInIowa said:
I don’t like it. I say start at the 10 yard line starting in the 3rd OT. No FGs allowed, have to go for 2.
Click to expand...
I was actually thinking along those same lines. Shorten the distance and remove the kicking game. The 2 point conversion thing was actually pretty dull to watch.
 

Schnauzer said:
I like this much better than this two point conversion crap that is remindful of a hockey shootout.

overall I like college OT much better than NFL but this two point conversion alternating stuff is dumb and detracts from the game in my opinion. I hope they change it back or better yet…

first possession from the 50 yard line with field goals allowed

second possession from the 25 with field goal allowed

third possession on from the 10 with no field goals allowed and two point conversions required.
Click to expand...
That’s even better
 


highwayman said:
I think the new OT rule is due to several things:

1) reduce potential injuries by;
2) reducing the number of plays, and
3) over-inflating statistics garnered by all those plays.

I’m not against the new rules. Yes, I hate soccer penalties and I hate the hockey shootout.

To be honest, the fact that Indiana was 4 of 9 and Pedophile U was 3 of 9 tells me that maybe the rule is pretty good. The only change I would make is to get rid of the end zone switches in every OT. Takes way too much time.
Click to expand...
Its due to the nearly 5 hour Texas A&M and LSU game from 2018 and to reduce injuries.
 

Highwayman- #3 resonates most with me. It was absurd when games that ended 17-17 in regulation turned out to have final scores in the 40s. In these cases, the kind of game it actually was is totally obscured, plus all those touchdowns scored on short fields count in the school record books. To me, just about any new format is better than the one formerly in place.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Like a lot of people, I just learned on Saturday that the rules for Overtime had been changed. (mandatory 2-point conversions starting with the 3rd OT.)

And now, just for the h*ll of it, I want to see the Gophers get into a 3-OT game just to see how they would handle it.

FWIW, I am not a big fan of the "start on the 25-yd line" overtime rule. I would rather see a pro-style OT with a time limit, and if no one scores, the game ends in a tie.

Going to 2-point conversions starting with the 3rd OT is like going to penalty kicks in soccer or the shootout in hockey. IMHO, if you're going to play overtime, play under the same rules that are used in regulation.

Anyway, what do people think about the OT rule? And what would the Gophers run in that situation?
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with ties - they were often victories for the underdogs. The 25 yard thing was foolish but not nearly as ridiculous as the 2-point conversion. Kicking off to each team once might be an option. Or maybe accept ties except in playoff games.
 

A segment from a recent Saturday Tradition post. They raise some good points...

New overtime rules​

The idea when the NCAA changed its overtime rules was to avoid outcomes like the 74-72, 7-overtime marathon between LSU and Texas A&M. Turning the thing into a 2-point conversion contest starting with the third overtime would shorten the proceedings.

Or so they told us.

With both Illinois and Penn State repeatedly unable to punch it in from 3 yards, Saturday’s game dragged to a record 9 overtimes before the Illini finally pulled off the 20-18 upset.

Buy or sell: Sell.

Much like soccer tournaments being settled on penalty kicks, this stinks.

Give me 10 minutes of real football.

Not sudden death, just extra time, so the coin toss isn’t the end-all, be-all. If the game is still tied, guess what? It’s a tie. Ties were good enough for college football for 125 years, and they’re good enough now. In the postseason, you could still decide games with the traditional college overtime if it’s still tied after 10 minutes.

The thought of a national championship being decided on 2-point tries should be distressing to any fan.
 

Once it gets past two OT periods, they should not be calling it an "additional" OT period each time.

It's literally an extra play, for each side.


That's penalty kicks.

They don't call each PK as an extra overtime period. It would be silly to do so. Well, just as silly to call giving each team one additional play, as an OT period.



Overall, I do like it better of being just an extra period of football. But then do you do a full period, risking extra injuries, or do you make it sudden death and unfairly given an advantage to the team winning the coin flip?

Nothing is perfect, and some team will get shafted either way and fans will complain incessantly.
 

I actually think the new NFL rule is the closest to real football and so it's my favorite. I would do 1 quarter with the new NFL rule and then call it a tie.
 

I'm fine with going back to the fist 100+ years of college football and allowing ties for non playoff games. I'm also fine with letting the new rules play out before criticizing. I don't know this for sure (and am too lazy to look it up), but I'm guessing the actual number of plays run in 9 OTs was still less than some OTs in the past.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom