Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
IR Rule Change
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sschind" data-source="post: 724669" data-attributes="member: 10247"><p>I agree except with the current system each team is not assured of at least one offensive possession. I would be fine with your idea if they scrapped the current system of a TD wins and a FG means the other team gets a chance and I think that's what you mean as well.</p><p></p><p>For me it comes down to the fact that someone will get the ball first in OT and I don't think it matters that much as long as each team gets 1 offensive possession if they need it. Each teams offense has a chance to score and each teams defense has a chance to stop the opponent. If both offenses score you can't say that one team's defense, which may be their strength, didn't have a chance. If neither teams score it's the same way. If still tied after 1 offensive possession each then its sudden death. I don't see the advantage of continuing to make sure each team has an equal number of chances after that. Doing so would actually lessen the importance of the offense or defense since you are saying OK, if you couldn't get the job done once we will keep giving you chances until you get it right or they screw up.</p><p></p><p>As a turn on your idea I would say just the opposite. The team with possession at the end of regulation kicks off in OT or goes on defense first if you want to eliminate the KO and just start at a predetermined point. This would prevent teams from running out the clock with the ball. You have to do something with the ball. You have to at least try for the entire 60 minutes of regulation or the other team gets first chance in OT. You got the ball on your 25, its 3rd and 20 with 5 seconds left you can't just take a knee and start at the same spot with a fresh set of downs in OT. Maybe you try a hail Mary. If its successful you win the game. If its picked off the other team now has possession at the end of regulation and they have to kick off to you in OT. Maybe you punt on 3rd down so the other team has possession. Defenses would be calling timeouts trying to trap the offense into having possession. Offenses would be trying to intentionally turn the ball over with all the risks that entails, to make sure the other team has possession . You would see more long FG attempts, not from the 25 obviously but maybe from your side of the field for sure, because a miss means the defense now has possession and would have to kick off.</p><p></p><p>Alternatively the home team gets the choice or the visiting team that way each coach knows who gets the choice in OT and they can plan the end of the game accordingly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I like it except that I would start with the fans. Coaches are too important and difficult to replace.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are right on the need for the clock to run as a winner has to be declared regardless of how long they play but I disagree with your idea that each team gets an equal number of possessions as I said above.</p><p></p><p>One thing I do not want is to see different rules for regular season OT and playoff OT other than the fact that in the playoffs you have to keep playing until someone wins. The thing is if its that important in the playoffs, and I know it is essential, why is it different in the regular season. If its OK to have a tie after 5 quarters in the regular season why isn't it OK to have a tie after 4, and if its not OK to have a tie after 4 why is it OK to have one after 5.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your first paragraph will eliminate any deferment as the visiting team will always take the ball first if the home team gets the choice in the second half. No coach is going to kick off to start the game then have the other team be able to choose to receive to start the second half. That is giving away a possession. They could eliminate that by simply saying the visiting team (or home team if they like) gets to choose to receive the ball at the start of the game or the start of the second half. To eliminate the coin toss I would be OK with this.</p><p></p><p>As for your second paragraph I don't like different rules for whether or not they scored on the last play and I don't care for the simple continuation. As long as you have said a regulation football game will consist of 4 15 minute quarters there has to be some sort of break after those 60 minutes or what is the point of having it. I also think the urgency of the 59th minute of play should be at least as important as the 29th minute. If you went with a simple continuation like between the quarters you would have to do away with the 2 minute warning (IMO anyway) and there would be no sense of urgency to try to score. You don't see teams running the hurry up at the end of the odd quarters just because they are running out of time like they do at the end of the half or the end of the game and the team with the ball with 1 minute left will not have a sense of urgency if they can just keep playing. There would be a lot fewer last minute comebacks and if teams knew there was no chance they would have to give up the ball or significant field position to start OT they would be a lot more conservative.</p><p></p><p>My proposal.</p><p></p><p>Regular season: A tie is a tie after 4 quarters. No OT.</p><p></p><p>Playoffs: Home team gets to choose if they want to get the ball first in OT or go on defense first (part of the home team advantage) If they want the ball they receive and run an offensive series which consists of at least 1 snap of the ball. If they turn the ball over on that first snap too bad, that's your 1 offensive series you are guaranteed. If they turn the ball over on the KO that doesn't count as an offensive series and they get another chance if the visiting team scores. If the visiting team recovers an onside kick it doesn't count as an offensive series for the home team and they get another chance if the visiting team scores. If the visiting team scores a defensive TD on the home team's first offensive possession, even if it is on the first snap, the game is over even though their offense never had a series unless they really want to kick off and try to stop the other team so their offense gets a chance. If the home team scores in any way on their first offensive series they kick off and the same rules apply to the visiting team. If the visiting team fails to score an equal number of points or more the home team wins. If they score more they win if they score the same they kick off and it then becomes the first team to score wins.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sschind, post: 724669, member: 10247"] I agree except with the current system each team is not assured of at least one offensive possession. I would be fine with your idea if they scrapped the current system of a TD wins and a FG means the other team gets a chance and I think that's what you mean as well. For me it comes down to the fact that someone will get the ball first in OT and I don't think it matters that much as long as each team gets 1 offensive possession if they need it. Each teams offense has a chance to score and each teams defense has a chance to stop the opponent. If both offenses score you can't say that one team's defense, which may be their strength, didn't have a chance. If neither teams score it's the same way. If still tied after 1 offensive possession each then its sudden death. I don't see the advantage of continuing to make sure each team has an equal number of chances after that. Doing so would actually lessen the importance of the offense or defense since you are saying OK, if you couldn't get the job done once we will keep giving you chances until you get it right or they screw up. As a turn on your idea I would say just the opposite. The team with possession at the end of regulation kicks off in OT or goes on defense first if you want to eliminate the KO and just start at a predetermined point. This would prevent teams from running out the clock with the ball. You have to do something with the ball. You have to at least try for the entire 60 minutes of regulation or the other team gets first chance in OT. You got the ball on your 25, its 3rd and 20 with 5 seconds left you can't just take a knee and start at the same spot with a fresh set of downs in OT. Maybe you try a hail Mary. If its successful you win the game. If its picked off the other team now has possession at the end of regulation and they have to kick off to you in OT. Maybe you punt on 3rd down so the other team has possession. Defenses would be calling timeouts trying to trap the offense into having possession. Offenses would be trying to intentionally turn the ball over with all the risks that entails, to make sure the other team has possession . You would see more long FG attempts, not from the 25 obviously but maybe from your side of the field for sure, because a miss means the defense now has possession and would have to kick off. Alternatively the home team gets the choice or the visiting team that way each coach knows who gets the choice in OT and they can plan the end of the game accordingly. I like it except that I would start with the fans. Coaches are too important and difficult to replace. You are right on the need for the clock to run as a winner has to be declared regardless of how long they play but I disagree with your idea that each team gets an equal number of possessions as I said above. One thing I do not want is to see different rules for regular season OT and playoff OT other than the fact that in the playoffs you have to keep playing until someone wins. The thing is if its that important in the playoffs, and I know it is essential, why is it different in the regular season. If its OK to have a tie after 5 quarters in the regular season why isn't it OK to have a tie after 4, and if its not OK to have a tie after 4 why is it OK to have one after 5. Your first paragraph will eliminate any deferment as the visiting team will always take the ball first if the home team gets the choice in the second half. No coach is going to kick off to start the game then have the other team be able to choose to receive to start the second half. That is giving away a possession. They could eliminate that by simply saying the visiting team (or home team if they like) gets to choose to receive the ball at the start of the game or the start of the second half. To eliminate the coin toss I would be OK with this. As for your second paragraph I don't like different rules for whether or not they scored on the last play and I don't care for the simple continuation. As long as you have said a regulation football game will consist of 4 15 minute quarters there has to be some sort of break after those 60 minutes or what is the point of having it. I also think the urgency of the 59th minute of play should be at least as important as the 29th minute. If you went with a simple continuation like between the quarters you would have to do away with the 2 minute warning (IMO anyway) and there would be no sense of urgency to try to score. You don't see teams running the hurry up at the end of the odd quarters just because they are running out of time like they do at the end of the half or the end of the game and the team with the ball with 1 minute left will not have a sense of urgency if they can just keep playing. There would be a lot fewer last minute comebacks and if teams knew there was no chance they would have to give up the ball or significant field position to start OT they would be a lot more conservative. My proposal. Regular season: A tie is a tie after 4 quarters. No OT. Playoffs: Home team gets to choose if they want to get the ball first in OT or go on defense first (part of the home team advantage) If they want the ball they receive and run an offensive series which consists of at least 1 snap of the ball. If they turn the ball over on that first snap too bad, that's your 1 offensive series you are guaranteed. If they turn the ball over on the KO that doesn't count as an offensive series and they get another chance if the visiting team scores. If the visiting team recovers an onside kick it doesn't count as an offensive series for the home team and they get another chance if the visiting team scores. If the visiting team scores a defensive TD on the home team's first offensive possession, even if it is on the first snap, the game is over even though their offense never had a series unless they really want to kick off and try to stop the other team so their offense gets a chance. If the home team scores in any way on their first offensive series they kick off and the same rules apply to the visiting team. If the visiting team fails to score an equal number of points or more the home team wins. If they score more they win if they score the same they kick off and it then becomes the first team to score wins. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
DoURant
sschind
gopkrs
Latest posts
NFC North Predictions
Latest: OldSchool101
6 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2022 Draft Romeo Doubs #132
Latest: DoURant
18 minutes ago
Draft Talk
NFC North Draft Review (2025)
Latest: Calebs Revenge
18 minutes ago
Draft Talk
Packers Push to Ban the **** Push
Latest: El Guapo
32 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Starting 5 - CB
Latest: El Guapo
35 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
IR Rule Change
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
