Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:07 pm
Only 7 of 11 had actually won the game with a TD.
Even still, it highly favors the receiving team as they get the additional extra chance at the extra possession if both Ds "do their job". It's pretty imbalanced.
And hey, end of the day, sometimes games have weird rule quirks, but this one is decided by a coin toss with no apparent strategic give or take. There's no good apparent reason to decide the edge that way.
I can't remember if I posted my full idea earlier or not but here is what I think is a pretty balanced idea.
This idea will
1. Respect clock management strategy
2. Remove any influence of a ceremonial coin toss
3. Respect the idea that its each team's job to play D
4. Limit impacts of possession edge.
Step 1. Remove coin toss from the game completely including beginning of game. Home team will decide to kick, receive, or direction. The team who kicks off regulation would also kick off for OT. Now teams do generally prefer to receive the second half kick. This requires them to accept a trade off for what is a clear preference. And as home team chooses, the team who earned it through record gets the edge on playoff games.
(Note you could end it here and I'd be somewhat satisfied just by removing a fucking coin flip for having a possible edge granted. But I have some further ideas)
Step 2. Determine the median "first to TD" time over OT history. Let's say this is 4:30 minutes. Add 1 minute. 5:30 minutes will become the length of the OT period. Each team gets 3 TO and a 2 minute clock stopage.
Now, what are the rules for OT? It's a full timed period. If the game is tied at the end of regulation, then the team who kicked off OT will possess first for the 2OT. 2OT is an untimed, sudden death period. First to score wins (FG or TD) in 2OT.
So what is the goal of all this?
1. Excitement! We recreate the best/tensest moments of football, a winding down clock with a close game in which one team is trying to score and not give their opponent too much time to respond.
2. Strategy! The coin toss has none. We create multiple strategic choices a team must weigh when deciding possession, all predetermined at the outset of the game. Who's gonna talk about OT rules when they can micromanage their head coaches strategic decisions!
3. Respect of possession balance. While football isn't strictly a possession based game like baseball, it partially is. Every regulation game ends with no more than a 1 possession edge. In both Chiefs games they had an opportunity to end the game with a 2 possession edge. I can respect D is part of the game, but any gain in possession edge should be gained by strategic/clock management, not a coin flip. KC getting the final reg possession to tie and then immediately getting the ball back? No logic to that. Just our weird obedience to a coin. We also add in a couple of concept of a OT half, like we do in regulation with possession flipping. Adds to the strategic decision. You can opt to take the ball first in OT so you can set the pace, but if you fail to gain the lead, now you are on the shit end of sudden death.
4. Clock management. The goal of the initial team to possess in OT is straight forward. Score without giving your opponent too much time to respond. This is how NFL end of games always work, yet we really remove any necessity for that in OT. What a missed opportunity. And if you take too long because you're too greedy, you could run out of time, and then give the other team the ball back with sudden death on the line in 2OT.
5. Brevity. While some have proposed playing a full OT period that does have the downside of unnecessarily extending games. The short OT period with sudden death after should keep things quick still, all whole creating exciting play on the field (fwiw I'd also just end regular season games in a tie at end of regulation).
Possible quirks/gimmicks to add:
A. If the initial team to possess in OT attempts a FG, a predetermined amount of time is added to the clock. This does go against the respect clock management ideal, but would be great for excitement. If KC sits on the clock and milks a FG, we set up a 30 second do or die drive for the other team. Not totally sold on this idea, but do like the idea of disincentivising teams to play for a OT FG (something most hated about the old OT rules)
B. A spin on part A. But just allow the defending team a one and done sudden death drive if the first team to possess kicks a FG on the first possession. If team 2 scores a TD, they win. If they kick a FG, it goes back to the other team again who now gains the sudden death possession edge.
C. Potentially do away with the automatic OT possession swap. Just play for continuation. This could have some negative clock management impacts at end of games, but not totally. Example. Let's say you run out of time with the ball at the 50 in regulation. You do get a fresh 5 minute clock to restart. Great field position with ample time to score. But you'll likely be handing the other team the ball back with plenty time to respond with a score themselves in OT. So you're still incentivized to score at end of regulation. I guess you'd still force a switch at 2OT. Does away with some of the possession balancing features though. So I could see this decision either way.
But overall, with these rules the first team to possess.
1. Earned the right to possess first based on their strategic decision in electing to receive first in regulation.
2. Still has a chance to basically end OT in a single possession. They just have to manage the clock appropriately to ensure little to no chance for the defending team to respond. Shifts the focus from "just play D" to also include "just manage the clock" to the offensive team.
Everybody was screaming about changing the rules as 10 of 11 coin flip winners won the game, but as always, the media was be completely disingenuous with this stat. 
