will the new playoff rule be in effect (1 Viewer)

[dehaven123]

new playoff rule goes into effect this post-season for 1st time.

cant win w/ a field goal on 1st possession of OT.

i wont spell out the whole rule...

what's the impact on strategy?

will it actually be a factor?

no SB has ever been ever been an OT game.

1st was in '58, most recent in '09, with 25 overall in history.

thoughts?

edit:

meant to read more as a different question:

with the new playoff rule in effect, will it come into play this wkend?

if so, would a team consider kicking versus receiving since a 1st possession FG doesn't automatically win it?

 

[jon_mx]

Interesting. I would elect to kick under these rules.

 

[Bayhawks]

Interesting. I would elect to kick under these rules.

No-I think if the team with 1st possession scores a TD, the games over, so allowing the other team to have the ball 1st could still cause you to lose without ever touching the ball.

 

[Sarnoff]

I'm pretty sure it's in effect for every playoff game this year.

Your first post says that it is.

So why the question?

 

[jon_mx]

Interesting. I would elect to kick under these rules.

No-I think if the team with 1st possession scores a TD, the games over, so allowing the other team to have the ball 1st could still cause you to lose without ever touching the ball.

I know, but it is a lot easier to hold them to a FG.

 

[Bayhawks]

Interesting. I would elect to kick under these rules.

No-I think if the team with 1st possession scores a TD, the games over, so allowing the other team to have the ball 1st could still cause you to lose without ever touching the ball.

I know, but it is a lot easier to hold them to a FG.

That's true, but if you win the toss, you could be giving away your only chance at the ball.

 

[jon_mx]

Interesting. I would elect to kick under these rules.

No-I think if the team with 1st possession scores a TD, the games over, so allowing the other team to have the ball 1st could still cause you to lose without ever touching the ball.

I know, but it is a lot easier to hold them to a FG.

That's true, but if you win the toss, you could be giving away your only chance at the ball.

Yes, but you have to pick the way that gives you the best chance to win. Unless the other team has been scoring TD's at will on your defense, I would take my chances on holding them to a FG or less. I would rather get the ball knowing exactly what I need to do to win the game.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Tebow will win with a TD on the second possession of overtime

Tebows 15 Steelers 12 (OT)

-QG

 

[Terpman22]

Its going to happen this weekend. Both teams will score FG's to send it to sudden death...that would be great

 

[dehaven123]

I'm pretty sure it's in effect for every playoff game this year. Your first post says that it is. So why the question?

sorry. i didn't communicate it correctly.was meant to read something like, w/ the new playoff rule in effect, will it come into play?if so, how might it change playoff coaching strategy?would a team kick to the opposing team potentially versus receiving?

 

[dehaven123]

Interesting. I would elect to kick under these rules.

that's the possibility that i think is worth discussion.how many games would actually be won by the 1st team receiving if they had to score a TD?not really sure there is any way to tell...

 

[Joe Summer]

It's not a new rule.

 

[dehaven123]

It's not a new rule.

has it been in effect during a regular season or playoff gm?

 

[robertd52]

It's not a new rule.

has it been in effect during a regular season or playoff gm?

It was in effect last playoffs too, we just had no otsAnd easiest way to describe rule is that it's "the first to 6" wins.As for kicking or receiving, I'd say still take the ball. Look at it this way, if you kick, they get 3, you get ball and get to the 20 but it's .4th and 8, are you saying you would go for it? You don't need to...get your 3, hold them, then go get 3 more. You take the ball and play the game like a somewhat normal game.

 

[dehaven123]

It's not a new rule.

has it been in effect during a regular season or playoff gm?

It was in effect last playoffs too, we just had no otsAnd easiest way to describe rule is that it's "the first to 6" wins.As for kicking or receiving, I'd say still take the ball. Look at it this way, if you kick, they get 3, you get ball and get to the 20 but it's .4th and 8, are you saying you would go for it? You don't need to...get your 3, hold them, then go get 3 more. You take the ball and play the game like a somewhat normal game.

i dont think i knew that.

 

[robertd52]

It's not a new rule.

has it been in effect during a regular season or playoff gm?

It was in effect last playoffs too, we just had no otsAnd easiest way to describe rule is that it's "the first to 6" wins.As for kicking or receiving, I'd say still take the ball. Look at it this way, if you kick, they get 3, you get ball and get to the 20 but it's .4th and 8, are you saying you would go for it? You don't need to...get your 3, hold them, then go get 3 more. You take the ball and play the game like a somewhat normal game.

I'm wrong, it's not first to 6. If first team gets fg and second team doesn't at least match that on their very next drive then game is over. Sorta lame...

 

[PolishNorbi]

It's not a new rule.

has it been in effect during a regular season or playoff gm?

It was in effect last playoffs too, we just had no otsAnd easiest way to describe rule is that it's "the first to 6" wins.As for kicking or receiving, I'd say still take the ball. Look at it this way, if you kick, they get 3, you get ball and get to the 20 but it's .4th and 8, are you saying you would go for it? You don't need to...get your 3, hold them, then go get 3 more. You take the ball and play the game like a somewhat normal game.

I'm wrong, it's not first to 6. If first team gets fg and second team doesn't at least match that on their very next drive then game is over. Sorta lame...

At the same time, 6 points guarentees you win.

 

[robertd52]

Possible teams would elect to receive and just go 4 down territory the whole length of field? If you get the td you win, game over. If you turn it over on downs you hold for a fg on opposing teams drive, then next drive you are back in full 4th down territory again but this time you can settle for a fg if need be to keep game alive.....

I almost feel like that isn't a terrible strategy, and I also feel like its absolutely NOT what they intended by this system.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

Possible teams would elect to receive and just go 4 down territory the whole length of field? If you get the td you win, game over. If you turn it over on downs you hold for a fg on opposing teams drive, then next drive you are back in full 4th down territory again but this time you can settle for a fg if need be to keep game alive.....I almost feel like that isn't a terrible strategy, and I also feel like its absolutely NOT what they intended by this system.

the 2nd team wins if they kick the fg and the 1st team didnt score. all the rule does is make sure that both teams get at least 1 possession if the 1st score is a fg. just about every espn show at some point last week went over the rules pretty thoroughly.

 

[robertd52]

Possible teams would elect to receive and just go 4 down territory the whole length of field? If you get the td you win, game over. If you turn it over on downs you hold for a fg on opposing teams drive, then next drive you are back in full 4th down territory again but this time you can settle for a fg if need be to keep game alive.....I almost feel like that isn't a terrible strategy, and I also feel like its absolutely NOT what they intended by this system.

the 2nd team wins if they kick the fg and the 1st team didnt score. all the rule does is make sure that both teams get at least 1 possession if the 1st score is a fg. just about every espn show at some point last week went over the rules pretty thoroughly.

Anth yes, I overlooked that part.Hopefully we at least see one ot game this year...

 

[Sea Duck]

Possible teams would elect to receive and just go 4 down territory the whole length of field? If you get the td you win, game over. If you turn it over on downs you hold for a fg on opposing teams drive, then next drive you are back in full 4th down territory again but this time you can settle for a fg if need be to keep game alive.....I almost feel like that isn't a terrible strategy, and I also feel like its absolutely NOT what they intended by this system.

the 2nd team wins if they kick the fg and the 1st team didnt score. all the rule does is make sure that both teams get at least 1 possession if the 1st score is a fg. just about every espn show at some point last week went over the rules pretty thoroughly.

Actually, the rule only says that both teams get an "opportunity to possess" the ball -- so if a team kicks a field goal and then recovers an onside kick, the game is over.

 

[dehaven123]

pitt vs. denver, OT.

let the case study begin!

 

[ratbast]

 

[dehaven123]

pitt vs. denver, OT.let the case study begin!

good gm.Resultsenver wins toss, chooses to receive.1st possession TD by Denver for the win.

 

[SugarNuts]

Tebow will win with a TD on the second possession of overtime Tebows 15 Steelers 12 (OT)-QG

Whoa...

 

[PhD]

So, looking at the scenario that just played out -

If the NFL's concern was to give each team a chance at the ball in OT, then why did they put in the part of winning with a TD in the first drive? I mean, it is either a potentially game-winning advantage to win the coinflip or it is not. If if is, then this part of the rule sort of gets in the way of their attempt to make it fair; and if it is not then there was no need to revamp the old system.

 

[thayman]

So, looking at the scenario that just played out - If the NFL's concern was to give each team a chance at the ball in OT, then why did they put in the part of winning with a TD in the first drive? I mean, it is either a potentially game-winning advantage to win the coinflip or it is not. If if is, then this part of the rule sort of gets in the way of their attempt to make it fair; and if it is not then there was no need to revamp the old system.

Because it is more exciting for you to watch a long bomb for a TD to end the game, rather than a FG with 12 minutes left on the clock to end the game.

 

[Fensalk]

I always said for years a better format would be a shortened OT quarter. I say 7.5 minutes. Bob Costas recently came around to my line of thinking by calling for a 10 minute OT period. Just play it like normal football.

 

[Fensalk]

So, looking at the scenario that just played out - If the NFL's concern was to give each team a chance at the ball in OT, then why did they put in the part of winning with a TD in the first drive? I mean, it is either a potentially game-winning advantage to win the coinflip or it is not. If if is, then this part of the rule sort of gets in the way of their attempt to make it fair; and if it is not then there was no need to revamp the old system.

The reason is because the thing they were trying to "fix" was an OT where the first team gets the ball, gets a few first downs, and then kicks it, game over. People don't complain nearly as much about allowing the other team all the way into the end zone.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Tebow will win with a TD on the second possession of overtime Tebows 15 Steelers 12 (OT)-QG

Whoa...

LOL, kinda close. Didn't realize God would have the Broncos win the toss instead of the Steelers -QG