http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d816ff6eb&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true NEW YORK -- NFL owners will vote next week whether to allow each team a possession in overtime in the playoffs if the team that wins the coin toss kicks a field goal on the first series. Previously, the game would end whenever either side scores, as happened in the NFC Championship Game in January, with the New Orleans Saints beating the Minnesota Vikings on Garrett Hartley's kick. But NFL competition committee chairman Rich McKay says a trend has developed showing too strong an advantage for teams winning the coin toss to start overtime. La Canfora: Some big talking points The most intriguing items on the competition committee's agenda at next week's ownership meetings involve player safety/concussions and overtime changes, Jason La Canfora writes. More ... If the team that falls behind by three points on the first series also kicks a field goal, then the game would continue under current sudden-death rules. The proposal is only for the postseason. "Statistically, it is pretty clear there has been a change," McKay said. "When sudden death was put in for 1974, it clearly worked very well and was a good system. It brought excitement and effectively broke ties. From '74-'93 you had a 50-50 (breakdown) in who would win between those who won toss and who lost the toss. "Changes occurred over time, and the numbers have changed to 59.8 percent winning the coin toss and winning the game. The team that loses the coin toss wins 38.5 percent. We are trying to put in a system that emphasizes more skill and strategy as opposed to the randomness of the coin flip." McKay credited the advancements in field-goal accuracy and skills of return teams for the hefty switch in statistics. The competition committee found that since 1994, when the kickoff was moved back 5 yards to the 30, teams winning the OT coin toss won 34.4 percent of the games on the first series. They kicked field goals 26.2 percent of those times, an increase from 17.9 percent in 15 years. "I would say this is something that's been on our radar for a number of years and been talked about a lot," McKay said. "In the last four or five years, we have not proposed anything because we thought if there weren't enough votes (among the 32 owners), we should not propose it. This year, the statistics are so compelling we need to get the discussion going." Vote: NFL Draft MVPs As part of the NFL Draft's 75th anniversary, you have a chance to decide the greatest choices of all time. Rest assured there will be plenty of discussion; 24 votes are needed to adopt the change. The players union strongly has supported the current overtime setup because it fears another system could lead to more injuries. McKay said the competition committee has "not spent a lot of time with them" on this proposal, but it will make the players association aware of the recommendation. Vikings kicker Ryan Longwell never had a chance to try to win that game in New Orleans, under the current rule. But Longwell said Tuesday that he wasn't lobbying for a change. "Personally, I like it the way it is," Longwell said in a text message. "If you get the ball, go score. If you don't get the ball, stop 'em." Questions have been raised whether altering overtime is something that must be collectively bargained with the union, but the NFL says it would simply be a rule change the league can unilaterally enact. Another recommendation to the owners, who will hold their meetings in Orlando, Fla., beginning Sunday, centers on expanding protection for defenseless players, most notably receivers. McKay said a recent rule change helped, but there are cases where receivers already have made a catch and still are defenseless when they are hit in the head area. The proposal will offer those players protection from hits to the head until after the catch is made and the receiver has an opportunity to protect himself.
I say change it. Sudden Death makes sense for sports like soccer, but in the NFL it's just not right.
The rule is fine as is. If it were to change, I would like for the game to just continue. The first play of overtime is the same down and distance as when the whistle blew.
I wouldn't be opposed to OT changes in the regular season. I would hate it, but I would be more willing to accept it over games that end in a tie. Changes the rules in OT is a different story. This obviously wasn't a problem in the Packers/Cards game last season. The defense made a play in OT and won the game. It's the defenses job to stop the opposing team from scoring AT ALL TIMES during the course of the game. So why are they giving defenses wiggle room to slack off? Wasn't this a team sport? Besides, this is the Playoffs. Aren't players/teams supposed to play/take it to the next level?
I heard some statistic that said the team that wins the toss in playoff OT games is 13-15. They have a fucking losing record. Why is it as soon as Burt's team losses the game they want change? The Viqueens had 6 turnovers. They have 1 less and they win in regulation. If you gonna change it make it universal, reg season and playoffs.
They showed the stats on NFL Channel last night before 94 and the changing of the kickoff spot winning team won 26% of the time on 1st drive after they changed it it went up to 48%. They should never have changed that and then I wouldn't have a problem with OT rules. I think it should be an extra quarter what ever the score is after that is final. Lower halftime to 10 mins and take out some commerical breaks add advertising to uniforms or more visible displays like baseball throughout the stadium.
This is stupid. Why wouldn't they change it for the regular season as well? As we've seen time an again, there are many late regular season games that essentially turn out to be playoff games anyway. We're going to hear A LOT of complaints next season.
NFL owners approve changes to overtime for playoff games NFL.com Wire Reports The NFL has changed its overtime rules for playoff games. Starting next season, if a team wins the coin toss and then kicks a field goal, the other team gets the ball. If the game is still tied after that, play will continue under the current sudden-death rules. Should the team winning the toss immediately score a touchdown, then the game is over. Team owners voted 28-4 on Tuesday in favor of the proposal at the NFL Annual Meeting in Orlando, Fla. The new rule applies only for postseason games. "We felt like this year's proposal, which we call 'modified sudden death,' was really an opportunity to make what we think is a pretty good rule -- sudden death even better," Atlanta Falcons president and NFL competition committee co-chair Rich McKay said. "We felt like statistically it needed to be changed, that the (old way) wasn't producing the 'fairest result,' if you will, based on the effect of field-goal accuracy and distance and the drive start." NFL Network's Jason La Canfora reports that the four teams to vote against the changes were the Baltimore Ravens, Buffalo Bills, Cincinnati Bengals and Minnesota Vikings.
The reason it isn't being applied during the regular season is that it makes the games longer and each additional few minutes of play increases the number of injured players. No one wants to see more players hurt and who really cares about regular season games anyway? In the long run a few more ties in regular season mean what exactly? I'd be just as happy to have the game end as a tie in regular season and ditch the whole overtime deal.
I wonder how many teams that find themselves in an overtime playoff game will play for the TD right away or hope for the best with their defense coming on the field after a completed FG.
I have a hard time believing any team would risk not scoring any points and allow the opponent to win it with just a FG rather than kick the FG and force the opponent to have to beat them with a TD or at worst tie it with a FG and get the ball back. just doesn't seem to have an upside to not kicking the FG. I'd rather a team have to score a TD to beat me than just have to score a FG.
I agree. Regular season games are nowhere near as important as playoff games. If a team wins the coin toss and wins a regular season game, the other team can bitch and complain but ultimately play again next week. But if that happens in the playoffs like it did to the Vikings last year, it effectively ends there season. I not only think they made the best decision for the teams(better playoff chances) and players(not increasing regular season workload), but more importantly improved the product(for us fans to experience more dramatic OT playoff games). The NFL continues to show why they are the best league in the world.
