A few weeks ago, the NFL Rules Committee decided not to change its overtime policy. This disappointed me, because I don't like the coin-flip determining who gets the ball, because all too often it seems like the team who receives the kick ends up winning after a short drive and field goal.On the other hand, the college game doesn't have the best solution either. Yes, each team gets equal opportunities, but from 35 yards out, it's not difficult to get at least a field goal, and the 'you must go for two after touchdowns after the 2nd OT' rule seems a bit contrived, and Pop Warner to me. Gun to my head, I prefer the college rules because, again, at least both teams get a shot.
I guess the point of all this ramblings is this: What would be your ideal OT situation if you could make it up? Or do you prefer one of the existing methods as is?
If it were up to me, I'd install something of an NBA-type overtime. One 10 minute extra session, with possession being determined by a coin flip, just like the beginning of the game. If the game is tied at the end of the period, it ends in a tie. There are some down sides to this, I admit: Football is a physical game, and playing 10 extra minutes is asking a lot of players and can expose them to more risk of injury. Also, the point of OT is to break the tie, and after 70 minutes of playing, it would seems pretty empty to walk away with a tie.
At the same time, that what happens occasionally nowadays, with games ending after 15 extra minutes if no one scores. However, I see this as a good remedy, because field possession is still a factor-which it isn't in college-along with special teams. Also, each team should get at least one possession, but there isn't a threat of the game going on forever and ever, like it is in college.
Maybe it's not the best way, but let's be honest, Rog Goddell won't take the advice of this blog anyway, so who cares? Anyway, let me know what you think, and we can have our happy little ideal scenario in this corner of the internets.
