I Forgot About This. No More Sudden Death In Overtime For The Playoffs

[Stinger]

So long, sudden death: Playoffs offer new overtime approach

Atlanta Falcons coach Mike Smith is glad his top-seeded NFC team got a first-round playoff bye -- and not for the usual reasons of players getting healthy, getting more time to game plan, etc.

The added few days allow Smith, and every other team with a bye, to prepare for new overtime rules that were implemented this offseason but not put into effect until the playoffs. The eight teams involved in this weekend's wild-card games have to cram in order to be ready for the chance they get to overtime.

"This can influence decision making, especially how you play the last couple minutes of a ball game, in terms of playing for the tie or win in regulation," Smith said. "There are a lot of situations that you have to coach differently in overtime."

Beginning Saturday, sudden-death as we know it, is history -- until next regular season.

Unlike regular-season overtime rules that have been in place for years, both teams could have the chance to score in overtime, even if the first team with the ball kicks a field goal. Normally, the team to score first, regardless of how, wins. Not necessarily in the postseason.

If a field goal is made by the team in the first possession in overtime, the other team gains possession. If that team scores a touchdown, game over. If it kicks a field goal to tie, then the next team to score wins. The only way the game ends on the first possession is if that team scores a touchdown or if the defense forces a safety or returns a turnover for a score.

The changes didn't sit well with coaches, especially since the first time they could encounter them could be with a Super Bowl berth on the line. Teams now have to add another layer of preparation to their practices, in the film room and on the field because of the variety of uncharted scenarios that could present themselves.

The possibilities have had coaches trying to sort out every circumstance possible -- and there are plenty. For example ...
The kicking game

» If a kickoff is booted deep into the end zone, a player could be coached to take the touchback rather than try and bring it out and risk a fumble or a penalty that could give them awful field position and result in a punt close to or from the end zone. Both could give the opposition ideal field position.

» If the team has to punt on its first possession, does the return team double team the gunners? By having additional bodies blocking near where the ball could land, it could increase the risk of the ball touching a player on the return team. If that were to happen, the punting team would regain possession in good field position and possibly win with a field goal since the turnover is considered a possession.

Look for teams to stack the box with eight or nine defenders to force max protection and reduce traffic coming off the edges near the return man, a league source said.
On defense

» Players could be coached that if they intercept the ball in the end zone on the first possession to take the touchback. Should they return it and fumble in the process, it could give the opposing team possession in field goal range. The fumble of an interception would mean that each team has had a possession and now a field goal wins the game.
On offense

» Teams who get the ball first could be more aggressive trying to score touchdowns (one of the reasons the rule change was applied) so the other team won't get the ball back.

» If you trail by a field goal and are getting the ball with a chance to tie or win, every possession is a four-down possession, so play-calling on both sides of the ball could be different.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/story/0...approach-to-ot


Mark Humphrey / Associated Press
The Saints' victory in the NFC Championship last season was just one of three playoff games that ended with a field goal on the opening possession of overtime. The winners of two of those games went on to claim the Super Bowl title.

OT playoff games won with FG on first possession:

2009 NFC Championship
Saints 31, Vikings 28

2002 AFC Divisional playoff
Titans 34, Steelers 31

2001 AFC Divisional playoff
Patriots 16, Raiders 13

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Starting at the 25 doesn't force you to play much defense.

I would contend that it forces you to play stellar defense.

Also, I agree with Rainman. With this new rule you should absolutely defer everytime.

[KChiefs1]

I'd onside kick it if I lost the coin toss.

[KChiefs1]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

If you were playing a Marty-esque coached team, would you onside knowing there is a good likelihood he will just try 2 yards and a cloud of dust and automatically settle for the FG, giving you the ball back where you can go for the win?

EXACTLY!

It's worth the chance of recovery in my opinion. Even if the other team gets it on the 40 yd line just hold them to a FG & all you need is a FG to tie or a TD to win.

I can see Haley doing this....

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

I'd onside kick it if I lost the coin toss.

Interesting but what if they defer, do they attempt the onside?

[philfree]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Interesting but what if they defer, do they attempt the onside?

Now that's tricky. Defer to lull them into a false sense and then onside kick! LOL


PhilFree

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

But don't kick to Devin Hester.

Cribbs, more than once. Lol
Posted via Mobile Device

[Dante84]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Starting at the 25 doesn't force you to play much defense.

'kay. Start at the 40.

[Over-Head]

Just keep playen for another 15mins, (at a time if need be) highest score wins, just like in baseball.
Make these premadonna millionaires earn their SB paycheques

[KCSupersized]

Originally Posted by Over-Head

Just keep playen for another 15mins

I agree with this.

[HBKChiefs]

I'm cool with the new rule and think it should be in place for regular season play as well. Winning a coin toss and driving 30-40 yards down the field to kick a game winning field goal is anti-climatic and really is not a fair conclusion in my opinion. The chance of this happening in football should not exist, regardless of how often/rare it has actually happened in the past.

I can live with each team getting an offensive possession in OT. The whole onside kick thing is interesting though and might be changed to not allow onside kicks the first two possessions if a controversy happens over it.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Totally stupid comparison in much different scenarios. Basketball is a short-field game where you can score in one second. Baseball is already designed to give each team a chance on offense. Football is football. **** it, then, maybe they should eliminate turnovers, huh, 'cause it's not fair that the other team doesn't get the ball on offense as much. Each side DOES "have a chance": to score, or to stop them. It's complicating a situation that doesn't need to be complicated. Aww, poor coaches and teams, complaining because "all" the other team has to do is get within FG range. Last time I checked, FG range means you need to get AT LEAST to the opponent's 35-yard line (to make it a 52-yard try). It's not the winning teams' fault that your kicker sucks balls and/or your kickoff coverage does as well.

I don't know how anyone can defend the current OT rules. You can maneuver anyone you want, but the fact is that offenses dominate scoring. On a very rare occasion, a defense will make a key turnover in OT that leads to a game-winning score. Even if an offense falls short. They can bring the ball to the 50 yard line, **** up, and punt the ball to pin the other team within the 10 yard line. Nothing about the current OT system makes sense. If the game is a tie game, bullshit on the idea that they should have won the game in regulation. Neither team got the job done, so neither team should have an advantage.

What the new OT system brings is an element of strategy and guts. The coin toss is now about strategy. And no longer will a team lay up on the 30 yard line. Instead, they'll have to decide whether to play for a field goal that might not win the game or play for a TD that guarantees a win.

Right now, 60% of coin toss winners win. And about 70% were decided by a field goal. Overtimes should be decided by strategy and aggressive play, not by coin tosses and laying up for field goals.

[DRU]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

but, the Colts, who also didn't make one stop, deserve to win?

They did make one stop. They forced a Priest Holmes fumble. Still breaks my heart that Holmes is the one who gave the Colts an extra possession in a game where we lost by 7 and nobody punted.

[Rudy tossed tigger's salad]

It would suck to lose because you kicked a fg and then gave up a TD after the opponent converted on 4th down conversions outside of fg range.

Then again....I guess that's how regulation works.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

I think both teams have to have possession of the ball.

might be covered already but both teams don't get a possession and the title of the thread is misleading

sudden death is still in play

If the 1st team gets the ball and scores a touchdown then they win ... period.

It's only a fieldgoal that gives the other team a possession.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by DRU

They did make one stop. They forced a Priest Holmes fumble. Still breaks my heart that Holmes is the one who gave the Colts an extra possession in a game where we lost by 7 and nobody punted.

I was saying, hypothetically, if it went into OT at 38-38 (meaning the Holmes fumble never happened) and the team that won the toss scored first, neither team would have made a stop the entire game, so you can't really say one team deserved to lose because they couldn't make a stop.