Rules committee will discuss these proposals during the last week in February...
https://apnews.com/899e21e16fc34c58b9b1c9fa4bb1e5d6
Quote:Among the more radical ideas set to be discussed is going to a 2-point-conversion shootout after teams have played two full OT possessions.
Quote:There is no support to allow games to end in ties, which were part of college football for decades.
Quote:Shaw said he has received dozens of ideas about how to tweak overtime. The most common have to do with placement of the ball. With offenses operating more efficiently than ever, moving the starting line back 10 or 15 yards could make scoring more difficult. The rules committee will also consider eliminating extra point tries, forcing teams to go for 2 from the very first possession.
Quote:Shaw said eliminating all place kicking in overtime will also be discussed.
(01-29-2019 05:43 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ]Rules committee will discuss these proposals during the last week in February...
https://apnews.com/899e21e16fc34c58b9b1c9fa4bb1e5d6
Quote:Among the more radical ideas set to be discussed is going to a 2-point-conversion shootout after teams have played two full OT possessions.
Quote:There is no support to allow games to end in ties, which were part of college football for decades.
Quote:Shaw said he has received dozens of ideas about how to tweak overtime. The most common have to do with placement of the ball. With offenses operating more efficiently than ever, moving the starting line back 10 or 15 yards could make scoring more difficult. The rules committee will also consider eliminating extra point tries, forcing teams to go for 2 from the very first possession.
Quote:Shaw said eliminating all place kicking in overtime will also be discussed.
Eliminating all place kicking is a stupid idea. That could lead to more OTs as most OTs end with a team turning it over and the other team kicking a FG to win. If no one can kick field goals those endings can not happen.
What they need to do is move back the PATs in OT similar to the NFL and after two OTs only two point conversions. Also start at the 50 yard line
As the article states, on average only 6 games a year got to a 2nd OT or more.
Why really bother?
I guess this is an attempt to show concern over player safety.
Why bother?
Television.
They’ll say it’s about safety, but, really, there has to be a way the speed up the end of these long drawn out contests when they get to these situations.
Move the starting point back. The 25 yd line is too close.
I've argued two things for years.
1. The team playing defense first cannot attempt a placekick unless the team playing offense first tries a FG. A coach going first almost always kicks on fourth down because if he goes for it the opponent is starting with an opportunity to kick a 42 yarder and will have nothing worse than that unless they lose yardage. If you change the rule and team 1 kicks, then team 2 is going to try for a TD but will settle for a FG on fourth down but if team one goes for it on fourth and fails they can only be beaten with a TD so there is more incentive to go on fourth down if you are on offense first.
2. Every OT period that results in a score, the ball should be placed five yards deeper than it was in the previous period.
(01-29-2019 07:07 PM)Renandpat Wrote: [ -> ]As the article states, on average only 6 games a year got to a 2nd OT or more.
Why really bother?
I guess this is an attempt to show concern over player safety.
The first suggestion is a player safety idea. The others, not so much. Some of them are just about making OT "better" or more fair.
Making all PAT conversions 2 point attempts is an idea about eliminating the advantage of being on offense second in the first OT.
Moving the starting line for offensive possessions back to the 50 would have a similar effect, because it would eliminate the scenario where the first team fails to score and the second team can kick a FG without even trying to make a first down. The flip side is that this would make multiple OT games more likely. It's easy to imagine a game that drags on into several OT periods with two tired offenses that don't move the ball far enough for a short FG attempt and two kickers that don't make long FG attempts.
As for eliminating place kicking -- why not go even farther and eliminate both place kicking and two point conversions in OT? Keep the starting line of scrimmage at the 25. Each team scores either 6 or 0 on its possession, that's it.
(01-29-2019 07:20 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: [ -> ]Why bother?
Television.
They’ll say it’s about safety, but, really, there has to be a way the speed up the end of these long drawn out contests when they get to these situations.
And yet, I bet that LSU/A&M game got great ratings at the end.
Make it a 2 point conversion with the 2nd OT. Changing the starting point could creat more OTs. The 30 yard line is a 47 yard FG, no sure thing.
(01-29-2019 07:33 PM)Big Frog II Wrote: [ -> ]Move the starting point back. The 25 yd line is too close.
I agree with this. A team should not be given the football already in field goal range.
Thanks for the post Wedge. Very enlightening.
(01-29-2019 07:46 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (01-29-2019 07:07 PM)Renandpat Wrote: [ -> ]As the article states, on average only 6 games a year got to a 2nd OT or more.
Why really bother?
I guess this is an attempt to show concern over player safety.
The first suggestion is a player safety idea. The others, not so much. Some of them are just about making OT "better" or more fair.
Making all PAT conversions 2 point attempts is an idea about eliminating the advantage of being on offense second in the first OT.
Moving the starting line for offensive possessions back to the 50 would have a similar effect, because it would eliminate the scenario where the first team fails to score and the second team can kick a FG without even trying to make a first down. The flip side is that this would make multiple OT games more likely. It's easy to imagine a game that drags on into several OT periods with two tired offenses that don't move the ball far enough for a short FG attempt and two kickers that don't make long FG attempts.
As for eliminating place kicking -- why not go even farther and eliminate both place kicking and two point conversions in OT? Keep the starting line of scrimmage at the 25. Each team scores either 6 or 0 on its possession, that's it.
Or change the line to gain.
Right now you start at the 25 and the line to gain is the 15. Second OT start at the 25 and the line to gain is the 10 and so on until it gets to the goalline.
(01-29-2019 07:56 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]Bring back the tie.
Fully endorse even though there is no chance of it.
(01-29-2019 07:54 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: [ -> ] (01-29-2019 07:33 PM)Big Frog II Wrote: [ -> ]Move the starting point back. The 25 yd line is too close.
I agree with this. A team should not be given the football already in field goal range.
Thanks for the post Wedge. Very enlightening.
Ball on the 50 is fine and still adds drama right off the bat that you are right outside of scoring range.
But it will require at least a first down to have any shot at a long FG and 3 first downs to get into the red zone.
I feel like I'm the only person that prefers NFL overtime.
To me CFB overtime is basically a minigame. Condensed field, no clock management, and no big deal to go for it on 4th.
I'd be fine with requiring 2 point conversion attempts after the first OT period and moving the start line back to where you at least have to move the ball forward some instead of just trying to move the ball to the center of the field to kick the winning FG.
Taking placekicking out altogether is not a good idea. Special teams are an important 1/3rd of the game and should be treated as such.
Absolutely no on going back to tie games.
Heard an interesting proposal on the radio today...
Instead of trying to rig OT to give an equal shot to both teams one way or the other, just begin the period as though it were a 5th quarter. In other words, begin with the ball placed wherever it was when the 4th quarter ended and the same team maintains possession. Same down and distance, everything. At that point it becomes sudden death.
I don't know if that's the answer, but it was different.
Do away with 2 point conversions being mandatory. Start at the 25. The PAT must be kicked from the 25 as well. Move the ball -- AND THE PAT -- back 10 yards for each additional OT period after the 1st. If both kickers miss, you don't move back any further. And it will force OT to end after about 4 OT, and it would take two NFL kickers to get that far. It won't be as efficient as forcing 2PT conversions right away, but it will be a brilliant spectacle for TV. Those ice the kicker TV commercials would be SO lucrative. Imagine the stress on the kicker having to make a 45 yd PAT late in a grueling 3OT game. It isn't the most efficient. But it's a nice medium between entertainment and forcing a timely end.
(01-29-2019 07:33 PM)Big Frog II Wrote: [ -> ]Move the starting point back. The 25 yd line is too close.
Way too close. Make 'em earn field goal range.
Start possession at the 40 - Must go for 2 after 1st OT - Game ends after 3rd OT.
I'm fine with a tie after 3 OTs.
Just go with Sudden death. You had a chance to win it in the first 60 minutes. First to score in OT wins.