Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Since69  
#1 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:22:04 PM(UTC)
Since69

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 11/2/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 83
Applause Received: 81

I hate seeing any team lose an overtime game without ever getting the chance to touch the ball in the extra period - moreso when it happens to our beloved Packers. Ridiculous that two teams play each other to a standstill for 60 minutes only to have the game decided by a coin toss. Without getting too college-like, I think I can make overtime a little more fair.

Currently existing overtime rules would still apply, but after one team scores, the other team gets one (and only one) possession to try and win. They can't tie - say, by responding to a field goal with one of their own - they have to win.

Assume that Team A is the first to score in overtime:
- If Team A settled for a field goal, Team B can win with a touchdown.
- If Team A scored a touchdown and kicked an extra point, then Team B would need a TD of their own and a successful 2-point conversion.
- If Team A scored a TD and converted a 2-pointer, the game would end immediately, because there's no chance that Team B could score more points with only one possession.

How much more crucial did offensive overtime decisions just get? How much more interesting (and fair) did overtime itself just get?

Whaddya think?
UserPostedImage
Sponsor
Offline longtimefan  
#2 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:27:37 PM(UTC)
longtimefan

Rank: Pro Bowl

Joined: 11/30/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 21

your idea is good, but you still have the issue of team B not being able to try to come back with your last option of A with a Td and 2 pointer

that is not different then what we have now, a coin toss is the fate of Team B
Offline McPack  
#3 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:54:03 PM(UTC)
McPack

Rank: 7th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/9/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 1

I'd prefer just about anything over what we have now...a college style overtime, a 5 minute quarter, a jousting match between the coaches. Both teams deserve an equal shot. It shouldn't be decided by the luck of the coin toss.
blank
Offline El3ment12  
#4 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:54:27 PM(UTC)
El3ment12

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/16/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 29
Applause Received: 24

I say make it like college. Its retarded how the packers had no chance on offense. Think About it. If they get a return to about the 30, then all they have to do is go about 40 yards. Thats it, then they win. Real fair eh?..
Offline flep  
#5 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 4:14:55 PM(UTC)
flep

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United Kingdom
Joined: 8/14/2008(UTC)
Location: UK

Applause Given: 54
Applause Received: 60

Sorry to put a dampener on this but it's the rules.

If we had won the toss, driven down field and scored would this thread exist.?

We couldn't have cared less for Tennessee.

We had the chance to win in last years NFC Championship and lost despite having the ball first.

We played a great game last night and but for 2 - 3 dropped interceptions the game would have been out and site and won before the 4th quarter.
Formed Merseyside Nighthawks. British Champions 1992. Packer fan for 30 years

UserPostedImage


I feel very wrong now!!!!!!!!!
Offline Since69  
#6 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 4:59:35 PM(UTC)
Since69

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 11/2/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 83
Applause Received: 81

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Sorry to put a dampener on this but it's the rules.

If we had won the toss, driven down field and scored would this thread exist.?

We couldn't have cared less for Tennessee.


No. Of course not. :D

But I think the current system could be inproved by adding a little more competition to the game.

And BTW, I hate the college system - taking turns on a short field over and over for as long as necessary. 21-21 after 4 quarters and someone winds up winning 73-70. Besides, the networks would hate games that dragged on that long. My way avoids that, mostly.
UserPostedImage
Offline bigfog  
#7 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 5:06:58 PM(UTC)
bigfog

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)


I'm all for adopting the NCAA's version of overtime. It's fair, it's exciting and dammit - people like it!
"I wouldn't root for the Minnesota Vikings to win a chess match against Nazi Germany."
Offline flep  
#8 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 5:11:28 PM(UTC)
flep

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United Kingdom
Joined: 8/14/2008(UTC)
Location: UK

Applause Given: 54
Applause Received: 60

The only other way is to do it like soccer.

In a cup competion (like the World Cup), knock out games where winner goes though, has an extra time period of 30 minutes (2 periods of 15 minutes each) if the score is tied (drawn) after the initial period of 90 minutes. All 30 minutes is played regardless of whether a team scores or not. For instance if the game finished 1 - 1 and team A scores after 5 minutes of extra time the game would still continue. If team B scores it is then 2 - 2 and the game continues. If however team B does not score team A wins at the end of extra time.

They experimented in having a "Golden Goal" i.e first team to score wins, but for some reason in soccer it was a bit of a downer suddenly ending the game when a team scord so this idea was dropped after a few seasons.

So what I am saying is play the whole 15 minutes and whoever is leading at the end of the 15 is the winner. It would probably be a lot more strategic.

To be honest though I think it isn't broke as it is now so don't fix it.
Formed Merseyside Nighthawks. British Champions 1992. Packer fan for 30 years

UserPostedImage


I feel very wrong now!!!!!!!!!
Offline bigfog  
#9 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 5:57:26 PM(UTC)
bigfog

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)


Expanding on Since 69's idea - you could have an overtime that was basically a 10 minute quarter. It wouldn't end when someone scored, only when time was up.

Allow FGs, but for touchdowns, eliminate the PAT and require that teams go for two.

At least there's a fair chance that both teams would get the ball. Still might have ties, but at least both teams get a shot.
"I wouldn't root for the Minnesota Vikings to win a chess match against Nazi Germany."
Offline TengoJuego  
#10 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 6:01:21 PM(UTC)
TengoJuego

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2010

United States
Joined: 8/16/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 6
Applause Received: 1

I just want the college OT rules, BUT a little different, I want a kickoff, that team getting their one possession, if they score(doesn't matter how) then the other team gets their chance to best that. And if neither score, it goes back and forth until one team scores.
Offline agopackgo4  
#11 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 6:36:37 PM(UTC)
agopackgo4

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 3

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Sorry to put a dampener on this but it's the rules.

If we had won the toss, driven down field and scored would this thread exist.?

We couldn't have cared less for Tennessee.

We had the chance to win in last years NFC Championship and lost despite having the ball first.

We played a great game last night and but for 2 - 3 dropped interceptions the game would have been out and site and won before the 4th quarter.


It would exist on a Titans forum
Offline bozz_2006  
#12 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:37:51 PM(UTC)
bozz_2006

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 7/15/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 19
Applause Received: 12

Rock. Paper. Scissors. That would play right into our team's strengths too. I've heard whispers that John Kuhn is the most feared rock, paper, scissors competitor in the entire league. He's fierce.
UserPostedImage
Offline blueleopard  
#13 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:49:05 PM(UTC)
blueleopard

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/22/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 69

They should've called Tails.

Plain and simple.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Offline bozz_2006  
#14 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:50:54 PM(UTC)
bozz_2006

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 7/15/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 19
Applause Received: 12

tails never fails. what were they thinking?
UserPostedImage
Offline gbpfan  
#15 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:56:29 PM(UTC)
gbpfan

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)
Location: milwaukee

Applause Received: 3

i think both teams should have a chance but it is what it is :ramboface:
blank
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

17h / Random Babble / nyrpack

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

17h / Around The NFL / nyrpack

17h / Around The NFL / nyrpack

17h / Around The NFL / nyrpack

17h / Around The NFL / nyrpack

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / StarrMax1

1-Sep / Random Babble / dfosterf

30-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Gaycandybacon

30-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann


Tweeter

Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.