please don't let it end

[Van]

Van - There's a reason your plan sucks, it doesn't promote winning, it promotes further ties.

No, it doesn't. There are no ties in college football. What my idea promotes is more exciting finishes to football games. It also promotes greater balance, and a truer test of each team, since both units will have to perform in O.T. No game will ever be decided by a coin toss and subsequent single big play.

College overtime blows, games tied at 17 end up 42-38 finals. Exciting?

Yes, they are. They sure as hell beat seeing one team trudge down the field, only to play for field goal position, while the other team's big name offensive stars sit idle. Seeing teams have to try for TDs, then a mandatory two-point play attempt in the third O.T., that's a fuckuva lot more exciting than the somnolent garbage the NFL has now for their O.T.

[Van]

The coin toss isn't the problem. The problem is the fact that a team can lose without the other team's defense ever being tested in O.T. That's just nonsense. Both teams should play under equal jeopardy, and as it's constructed now, they don't. No matter how NFL honks wish to spin it, the team who gets the ball first stands a fairly significant chance of being the only team who will get the ball. Statistics also show that the team who wins the coin toss will choose to get the ball first...every single time. What does that tell you? Further, those same statistics will also show that the team who gets the ball first wins more than they lose. This is true, every single season.

The NFL is entertainment. When the Niners play the Giants, I don't merely want to see Phil Simms and Eric Wright perform in O.T. I also want to see Joe Montana and Lawrence Taylor.

[Joe in PB]

Van, in other words you wish football was played on a 50 yard field. Too much defense and trudging down the field.....

Seeing teams have to try for TDs, then a mandatory two-point play attempt in the third O.T

Exactly, 3 OTs? Not the best way to determine a winner.

[Van]

Van, in other words you wish football was played on a 50 yard field. Too much defense and trudging down the field.....

Those definitely are other words, because they're certainly not my words. My words simply state that both the offense and defense of each team must get tested during O.T. Seeing an O.T. end before Joe Montana and Lawrence Taylor even got to take part in it is just plain, stupidly wrong.

Seeing teams have to try for TDs, then a mandatory two-point play attempt in the third O.T

Exactly, 3 OTs? Not the best way to determine a winner.

Yes, it is the best way to determine a winner...if need be. If it takes three possessions per team to decide it, then it should take three possessions per team to decide it. Obviously, most of the time it doesn't. Most college football O.T.s don't go into Triple O.T., but those that do are wildly memorable games.

[smackaholic]

there were a few calls the refs blew. the roughing the passer on a dude that had #4 completely wrapped up before he got rid of the ball was extremely week. there were a couple of PI calls that were equally weak. the catch call was right. dude had it under control...barely. it was so close that the replay would have a hard time over ruling it either way.

bottom line is...

THE FUKKIN' 'AINTS ARE GOING TO THE SB!!!!!!!!

GEAUX 'AINTS!!!!!!!!!!

[JMak]

Van, both offense and defense had been tested...over the course of the previous 60 minutes. I aint buying your shit that the OT needs to be changed. The defense must step up if it's team is supposed to win. And your comment about a coin toss and a big play winning the game...are you proposing that big plays be penalized or otherwise called back so as not to pressure the other team's defense too much?? Maybe intro a new flag that turns big plays into do-overs during OT 'cuz God forbid a defense giving up a big play...

[DamnTheCowboys]

Jim, the point is that only the NFL doesn't require both units from each team to perform in O.T.

Actually, there are more than just two phases in football. There's something called special teams, which college football eliminates with their overtime policy. You play one way for 60 minutes and then all of the sudden you completely change everything, eliminate kickoffs and kick returns, and play a game of backyard catch the high fly. I don't care how "exciting" it is. It's gimmicky.

If the NFL DOES change its overtime rules, the last thing they need to do is take a page from the only sport in the universe that lets computers decide its national champion.

They need to do it one of two ways....shorten the overtime to a ten minute period and whoever is winning at the end wins. If it's still tied, go sudden death 5:00, same rules as before. OR, make it 15 minutes, first team to six points win. A defense can't possibly bitch if they let a team drive down the field for a touchdown. If you're good, force them to punt. If you're pretty good, man up and hold them to a field goal. This is the NFL.

[trev]

The best team did win. N.O. wore the Vikings down and beat up Favre bad. How is that not winning a game?

[Van]

Van, both offense and defense had been tested...over the course of the previous 60 minutes.

So? The game isn't over yet. Both units need to continue to be tested equally for the entire game. Period.

I aint buying your shit that the OT needs to be changed.

So? It should be, yet neither you nor I have any say-so in the matter.

The defense must step up if it's team is supposed to win.

So how come the Saints' defense wasn't asked to step up? Why was only the Vikings' D put to the test?

It's fucking ludicrous.

And your comment about a coin toss and a big play winning the game...are you proposing that big plays be penalized or otherwise called back so as not to pressure the other team's defense too much??

No, and that's a pretty stupid fucking stretch, based on what I said. I clearly said that I want both teams to have a chance at the ball, so that one big play doesn't end the game, without the other team being allowed to respond with their own big play.

Both units need to be tested, the entire game.

Maybe intro a new flag that turns big plays into do-overs during OT 'cuz God forbid a defense giving up a big play...

God forbid a team overcoming a big play with one of their own, once they get the ball. Oh, wait. Only one team got the ball, so the game is over. Brilliant.

[Van]

DTC, I have zero problem with any idea which includes all three phases of both teams being tested equally. I don't mind retaining kickoffs and punts during O.T. That's fine. That's great. All for it.

[JMak]

Van, why is an offense entitled to respond when it's defense gives up a big play? Answer - they aint. Why? Because it's a team game. The teams are tested. One team failed to prevent the other from scoring during a designated OT. Such time is denoted as over time because it's no longer regular playing time. Shit, based on your comments why not just play another 60 minutes?

[Sirfindafold]

I doubt he paid for it.

[Van]

Van, why is an offense entitled to respond when it's defense gives up a big play?

Because that's how it works during regulation play, dumbshit. The game didn't end when the Vikings came out on their opening possession with a scoring drive. No, they then needed to kick off to the Saints, who were able to put their own offense on the field and answer with their own scoring drive.

That's how it works in football. They do that back and forth, for a prescribed time. Tell me you knew?

Changing that formula for O.T. is just stupid.

Answer - they aint.

Answer - they, umm, is, or are.

Why? Because it's a team game.

Right. That's why both teams have to use their defensive teams too, not just their offensive teams. They even both have to use their special teams. So, why throw all that out for O.T.? Why allow the Saints' D to not even have to make a stop? The Vikings' D were asked to.

The teams are tested. One team failed to prevent the other from scoring during a designated OT. Such time is denoted as over time because it's no longer regular playing time. Shit, based on your comments why not just play another 60 minutes?

I wouldn't mind an extra period, played exactly as the rest of the game is played. It could even be shortened to twelve minutes. I'd have no problem with that at all.

Your constant Chicken Little exaggerations of everything I say are noted, though.

[JMak]

Why change the format after regular playing time has expired? Gee, I don't know, maybe because the regular playing time has been exhausted? Go figure...

Why change the time of the extra period of play if you're going to whine about the rules changing at the end of the game? Why not play another full game? I mean, that's how it's done during regulation, no?

Seems that you want to whine about the rules changing after the expiration of regulation but then happily suggest ... Gasp ... Changing the rules....

Minnesota had their chance to stop the Saints. In fact, Minnestoa had their shot to win and blew it. I'm not sure why we should be changing the rules...

[Van]

Except that it's boring, and the college system is far more exciting.

[Van]

I often do.

[Bucmonkey]

Gotta disagree with Van on this one, if it aint broke dont fix it. NFL tops my sports list, but CFB is a cloose second, and as DtC said, I too consider CTB's OT system gimmicky. I heard on sportstalk today that there have been 13 OT NFL playoff games and the team that has won the flip has a 7-6 advantage. I am too lazy to look it up, but in the regular season, OT games are won by the coin-flip-winning team something like 52-53% of the time. Hardly an advantage. Leave it as is.

[Diogenes]

Except that it's boring, and the college system is far more exciting.

Exactly. We should probably start having the individual teams decide who they will and won't play. And then maybe we could get some sports writers together at the end of the season and just vote on who's the best team- skip these boring playoffs altogether.

[Van]

the college system is far more exciting.

No, it isn't. It's completely artificial.

So is sex with Cytheria, and it's still way more exciting than boring ass sex like the NFL's O.T.

And yes, it is way more exciting. Seeing teams trying for TDs and going for two is more exciting than seeing teams angling for one FG.

[Van]

Except that it's boring, and the college system is far more exciting.

Exactly. We should probably start having the individual teams decide who they will and won't play. And then maybe we could get some sports writers together at the end of the season and just vote on who's the best team- skip these boring playoffs altogether.

I'm only talking about O.T. I definitely favor the way the NFL runs things, in terms of competition and the method they use to crown their champion.

[Diogenes]

Except that it's boring, and the college system is far more exciting.

Exactly. We should probably start having the individual teams decide who they will and won't play. And then maybe we could get some sports writers together at the end of the season and just vote on who's the best team- skip these boring playoffs altogether.

I'm only talking about O.T.

Of course you are. No way you would try to defend the pathetic joke that is CFB in something that obvious.

The fact is the NFL is a quantum leap superior to the amateur hour you prefer. Their players, both offense and defense are professionals. And there is no comparison.

[Van]

Any other stupidly obvious observations you care to make there?

Look! Dio is getting on his soapbox to say that NFL players - both offensive and defensive- are paid professionals, and much better than their college counterparts!

Did you seriously just submit that stupid post? What's next? Night is darker than day, and you're going to loudly and angrily bray it from the hilltops?

[Van]

The system college football uses to select their champion is a joke. How they go about scheduling their games is a joke. The way they conduct their O.T. is far superior to the NFL's funeral procession version.

Attempting to refute an argument about the superiority of the college game's O.T. by stating that NFL players are better than their college counterparts was a horrifically obtuse non sequitur. One thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other, and nobody would ever even begin to question whether pro players are better than amateurs.

[Diogenes]

Any other stupidly obvious observations you care to make there?

Look! Dio is getting on his soapbox to say that NFL players - both offensive and defensive- are paid professionals, and much better than their college counterparts!

Did you seriously just submit that stupid post? What's next? Night is darker than day, and you're going to loudly and angrily bray it from the hilltops?

It seems the obvious goes right over your head.

The college game is inferior specifically because it is designed for parity. The reason they require the OT rules they do and the scheduling and playoff methods they have is because they are less about having the best team at the top at the end of the day than they are about giving the fan bases of the mediocre and overrated something to watch.

[Diogenes]

The reason they require the OT rules they do and the scheduling and playoff methods they have is because they are less about having the best team at the top at the end of the day than they are about giving the fan bases of the mediocre and overrated something to watch.

And that "something to watch" is.....which is the better team in that particular game.

Thanks, Captain Obvious. But I could actually care less whether Rhode Island is better than Buffalo. And I'm pretty sure I already know the outcome of Marshall/Ohio State.

That's just day one.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Let's talk about 1st and 10 from the NO 33 with 1:06 left to play. Coming out of NO's calling their final TO.

Run the ball up the middle once. Run the ball up the middle twice.

Now you have 3rd and 10 from the NO 33 with 19 seconds left.

That's it? Sure, Favre should have not have thrown that last ball. Sure, he could have tucked and run and called his last TO.

However... I think Brad Childress totally choked this game away by playing it so fucking close to the vest instead of trying to advance the ball. It seemed like he was fine with attempting a 50 yard FG with no time left and then going to OT if need be. Just awful play calling. You have 1:06 left, 2 TO's in your pocket, the Saints are on their heels and you call 2 fucking runs up the gut? That's your plan?

Pathetic.

You left out their real undoing -- the 5-yard penalty for having 12 men in the huddle. That is what took them out of FG range (and a FG was all they needed). It forced them into a passing situation, just to try to make up the yardage.

Agreed that they got too conservative at the point you mentioned, but at least they still have a chance to win the game in regulation at that juncture. It's the penalty that really killed that chance, though.

Here's a novel idea: Both teams should have to play offense and defense in O.T. That's how it works during regulation play, so why change it for O.T.?

Turning that argument on its heels ever so slightly . . .

As pertains to college OT, here's a novel idea: both teams should have to be concerned with field position, the game clock and special teams play. That's how it works for regulation play, so why change it for OT?

As for how to do OT, my suggestion is relatively simple: keep the NFL rule, but with a minor twist. Sudden death isn't invoked until one team has scored at least six points in the OT period. If you have to play defense first, you know you'll get at least one crack at the ball so long as you keep your opponents out of the end zone. And if you kick a FG on your opening drive, you have a chance to win the game outright on your next drive so long as you keep your opponents out of the end zone.

If a TD is necessary to win the game in OT (on the opening drive, anyway), you'll see a lot more wide-open play-calling in OT than is currently the case. Meanwhile, a team that has to go on defense first but keeps its opponents out of the end zone gets at least one shot at winning the game.

The only potential drawback I see is the possibility of more tie games as a result of such a rule change. Then again, the NFL OT rule clearly was never designed to eliminate all possibility of a game ending in a tie.

Btw, fwiw, according to Fox teams winning the coin toss in OT were 7-6 in OT games this regular season. Winning the coin toss is an advantage, of course, but it's not quite the insurmountable advantage you make it out to be.

[Diogenes]

As pertains to college OT, here's a novel idea: both teams should have to be concerned with field position, the game clock and special teams play. That's how it works for regulation play, so why change it for OT?

Because they are more interested in parity (read mediocrity) than quality.

[Terry in Crapchester]

If you think college football is about parity, then you don't pay a whole lot of attention to college football. Check out opening week schedule for the SEC teams next season, then get back to me about parity in college football.

Oh, and the real reason college football's OT rules suck is that they differ too much from the way the game is regularly played. That type of OT is fine for high school football, but not at a higher level. Essentially, it's football's equivalent of a shootout.

[Diogenes]

If you think college football is about parity, then you don't pay a whole lot of attention to college football. Check out opening week schedule for the SEC teams next season, then get back to me about parity in college football.

LSU vs. North Carolina
Arkansas State at Auburn
Jacksonville State at Ole Miss
Miami (Ohio) at Florida
San Jose State at Alabama
UT-Martin at Tennessee

Not exactly a battle of the titans.

[Mr T]

And I'm pretty sure I already know the outcome of Marshall/Ohio State.

Of course because the underdog never wins

Sin,
App State

If it is so damn easy picking CFB, why dont you kick our asses next year in the pick'em?

[Mr T]

LSU vs. North Carolina

Should be a pretty good game

[Diogenes]

And I'm pretty sure I already know the outcome of Marshall/Ohio State.

Of course because the underdog never wins

Sin,
App State

Okay, I'll give you Marshall. Even money.

[Goober McTuber]

I loved it when they went to the Viking locker room and Favre was channeling American Idol:

“Balls on the ground! Balls on the ground! Balls on the ground! Balls on the ground!”

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Both systems suck, imo, but my analysis would come down to this -

College O.T. is flawed, but dramatic.
NFL O.T. is flawed and undramatic.

College is the winner since it at least has 1 out of 2.

[Sirfindafold]

I loved it when Goober went to the Viking locker room and was channeling American Idol:

“Balls on my chin! Balls on my chin! Balls on my chin! Balls on my chin!”

fixed.

[JMak]

Sudden death equals drama and far more of it compared to just placing the ball on the 35 and watching two teams go back and forth. That should be obvious.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

:?

[Joe in PB]

As for how to do OT, my suggestion is relatively simple: keep the NFL rule, but with a minor twist. Sudden death isn't invoked until one team has scored at least six points in the OT period

So what is the difference if the team that receives the ball first scores a TD? Game over. Why not just stop the opposing team from scoring at all? What this idea does is minimize special teams. A team can win by a FG in regulation, but can't in OT? Another idea that once again changes the rules in OT. Why not get rid of FGs all together?

I'm not sure what is wrong with having to play defense and not permit any scoring by your opponent to win'. It is a team game, not to mention defense and special teams are two thirds of it. We once again come to the fact that no OT rule will make everyone happy.

The only potential drawback I see is the possibility of more tie games as a result of such a rule change.

Certainly the possibility of games ending in ties would go up under such a rule change, which isn't a good thing. After all, the whole point of playing the game is to determine a winner.

[Goober McTuber]

fixed.

Your old man is what should have been fixed.

[Goober McTuber]

That hardly qualifies as IKYABWAI, you brainless fucktard. Ask KFC Paul to explain it to you.