Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Since69  
#1 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:22:04 PM(UTC)
I hate seeing any team lose an overtime game without ever getting the chance to touch the ball in the extra period - moreso when it happens to our beloved Packers. Ridiculous that two teams play each other to a standstill for 60 minutes only to have the game decided by a coin toss. Without getting too college-like, I think I can make overtime a little more fair.

Currently existing overtime rules would still apply, but after one team scores, the other team gets one (and only one) possession to try and win. They can't tie - say, by responding to a field goal with one of their own - they have to win.

Assume that Team A is the first to score in overtime:
- If Team A settled for a field goal, Team B can win with a touchdown.
- If Team A scored a touchdown and kicked an extra point, then Team B would need a TD of their own and a successful 2-point conversion.
- If Team A scored a TD and converted a 2-pointer, the game would end immediately, because there's no chance that Team B could score more points with only one possession.

How much more crucial did offensive overtime decisions just get? How much more interesting (and fair) did overtime itself just get?

Whaddya think?
longtimefan  
#2 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:27:37 PM(UTC)
your idea is good, but you still have the issue of team B not being able to try to come back with your last option of A with a Td and 2 pointer

that is not different then what we have now, a coin toss is the fate of Team B
McPack  
#3 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:54:03 PM(UTC)
I'd prefer just about anything over what we have now...a college style overtime, a 5 minute quarter, a jousting match between the coaches. Both teams deserve an equal shot. It shouldn't be decided by the luck of the coin toss.
El3ment12  
#4 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 3:54:27 PM(UTC)
I say make it like college. Its retarded how the packers had no chance on offense. Think About it. If they get a return to about the 30, then all they have to do is go about 40 yards. Thats it, then they win. Real fair eh?..
flep  
#5 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 4:14:55 PM(UTC)
Sorry to put a dampener on this but it's the rules.

If we had won the toss, driven down field and scored would this thread exist.?

We couldn't have cared less for Tennessee.

We had the chance to win in last years NFC Championship and lost despite having the ball first.

We played a great game last night and but for 2 - 3 dropped interceptions the game would have been out and site and won before the 4th quarter.
Since69  
#6 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 4:59:35 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Sorry to put a dampener on this but it's the rules.

If we had won the toss, driven down field and scored would this thread exist.?

We couldn't have cared less for Tennessee.


No. Of course not. :D

But I think the current system could be inproved by adding a little more competition to the game.

And BTW, I hate the college system - taking turns on a short field over and over for as long as necessary. 21-21 after 4 quarters and someone winds up winning 73-70. Besides, the networks would hate games that dragged on that long. My way avoids that, mostly.
bigfog  
#7 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 5:06:58 PM(UTC)
I'm all for adopting the NCAA's version of overtime. It's fair, it's exciting and dammit - people like it!
flep  
#8 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 5:11:28 PM(UTC)
The only other way is to do it like soccer.

In a cup competion (like the World Cup), knock out games where winner goes though, has an extra time period of 30 minutes (2 periods of 15 minutes each) if the score is tied (drawn) after the initial period of 90 minutes. All 30 minutes is played regardless of whether a team scores or not. For instance if the game finished 1 - 1 and team A scores after 5 minutes of extra time the game would still continue. If team B scores it is then 2 - 2 and the game continues. If however team B does not score team A wins at the end of extra time.

They experimented in having a "Golden Goal" i.e first team to score wins, but for some reason in soccer it was a bit of a downer suddenly ending the game when a team scord so this idea was dropped after a few seasons.

So what I am saying is play the whole 15 minutes and whoever is leading at the end of the 15 is the winner. It would probably be a lot more strategic.

To be honest though I think it isn't broke as it is now so don't fix it.
bigfog  
#9 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 5:57:26 PM(UTC)
Expanding on Since 69's idea - you could have an overtime that was basically a 10 minute quarter. It wouldn't end when someone scored, only when time was up.

Allow FGs, but for touchdowns, eliminate the PAT and require that teams go for two.

At least there's a fair chance that both teams would get the ball. Still might have ties, but at least both teams get a shot.
TengoJuego  
#10 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 6:01:21 PM(UTC)
I just want the college OT rules, BUT a little different, I want a kickoff, that team getting their one possession, if they score(doesn't matter how) then the other team gets their chance to best that. And if neither score, it goes back and forth until one team scores.
agopackgo4  
#11 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 6:36:37 PM(UTC)
" said: Go to Quoted Post
Sorry to put a dampener on this but it's the rules.

If we had won the toss, driven down field and scored would this thread exist.?

We couldn't have cared less for Tennessee.

We had the chance to win in last years NFC Championship and lost despite having the ball first.

We played a great game last night and but for 2 - 3 dropped interceptions the game would have been out and site and won before the 4th quarter.


It would exist on a Titans forum
bozz_2006  
#12 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:37:51 PM(UTC)
Rock. Paper. Scissors. That would play right into our team's strengths too. I've heard whispers that John Kuhn is the most feared rock, paper, scissors competitor in the entire league. He's fierce.
blueleopard  
#13 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:49:05 PM(UTC)
They should've called Tails.

Plain and simple.
bozz_2006  
#14 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:50:54 PM(UTC)
tails never fails. what were they thinking?
gbpfan  
#15 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 7:56:29 PM(UTC)
i think both teams should have a chance but it is what it is :ramboface:
bozz_2006  
#16 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 8:00:29 PM(UTC)
both teams have a chance with rock paper scissors.
Since69  
#17 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 8:20:44 PM(UTC)
I understand that Scissors can beat Paper, and I get how Rock can beat Scissors, but there's no way in hell Paper can beat Rock! Is Paper supposed to magically "wrap around" Rock, rendering it immobile and ineffective? Why the hell couldn't Paper do this to Scissors?

And screw Scissors; why can't Paper do this to people? Why aren't sheets of notebook paper constantly suffocating students as they attempt to take notes in class?

I'll tell you why - because paper can't beat anything!

When I play Rock/Paper/Scissors, I always choose Rock. Then when somebody claims to have beaten me with their Paper, I can punch them in the face with my already-clenched fist and say, "Oh, I'm sorry. I thought your Paper would protect you, you shithead."
Zero2Cool  
#18 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 8:51:34 PM(UTC)
I am still, pissed.
bozz_2006  
#19 Posted : Monday, November 3, 2008 9:10:47 PM(UTC)
hahaha. "shithead!"
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
TheKanataThrilla (34m) : I guess I should have did a refresh when I walked away from the computer.
TheKanataThrilla (34m) : Peters is 25 with one year left on his contract at just over $3M
Zero2Cool (1h) : Mel Kiper sticks with Marcus Davenport to GB in 2nd mock
Zero2Cool (3h) : As for Marcus Peters, how old is he an what's his contract years left?
Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers got tired of Sitton's antics.
Zero2Cool (3h) : Sitton was released not because of play or salary, but personality. He will not be re-signed.
TheKanataThrilla (3h) : If we are planning on possibly cutting Cobb I can see the 2nd round pick. A second round pick for Peters is a pretty good deal.
Smokey (4h) : I'd offer Cobb + a 3rd round pick + a 6th round pick in 2019 for the CB Peters from KC.
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : I guess that is a highter round pick
TheKanataThrilla (5h) : Suggestion was a 2nd round pick. I would want a lower round pick. I think that is too much. A 3rd or 4th seems about right.
Smokey (5h) : Cobb and WHAT PICK ?
TheKanataThrilla (6h) : A suggestion I saw was a trade of Cobb and a Pick for Peters. I think that would be a great move.
Smokey (9h) : Sitton was drafted be GB in 2008, not a young man at this point, but still is a "bear" of a man.
Cheesey (16h) : Sitton? Maybe if the price is right.
Cheesey (16h) : I doubt the Packers would try to resign Sutton. But who knows? If the price is right?
Zero2Cool (19h) : Bears declining option on Josh Sitton. He'll be Free Agent.
Zero2Cool (19h) : Chiefs CB Marcus Peters trade rumors -- come to Packers!
Smokey (20-Feb) : Join us in Packershome and be part of the discussion today .
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Elizabeeth ... good bye
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Saturday, August 19, 2017
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : That's dedicated spammng!
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : For some reason, I had to flush my DNS cache to access this site from my laptop today.
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : I prefer toads to frogs, Smokey, thank you very much.
Rockmolder (19-Feb) : My girlfriends says thanks, Rourke.
Smokey (19-Feb) : Nonstopdrivel that you most likely say to all the frogs you meet .
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : Rockmolder's avatar is so fucking sexy.
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : never seen the interview before. tough to listen to. can't believe it was 7 years ago
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : just watched a nick Collins tribute on yourube. the end featured an interview with nick reflecting on his injury
buckeyepackfan (17-Feb) : Saints De'Vante Harris nothing but a POS!!!!! Look up his tweetes on Florida killings!!
Nonstopdrivel (17-Feb) : They're laying new gas line near my house. The trucks are all from a company in Madison.
Smokey (14-Feb) : 2018 Hall o Fame Game/Aug.2,2018/Ravens vs Bears
Zero2Cool (13-Feb) : Based off 2017 records, Packers have toughest schedule for 2018
Smokey (13-Feb) : Wow, tough new 2018 Packer Schedule !
Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : I don't know anything about him though. He good? Bad?
Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : Free Agent CB David Amerson ... bring him in!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
3m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

30m / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Pack93z

1h / Random Babble / Pack93z

6h / Random Babble / Smokey

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

16-Feb / Around The NFL / Cheesey

15-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

14-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

13-Feb / Football Familiarity / Smokey

12-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines