What new overtime rules

The NFL implemented new overtime rules to replace the Sudden Death rules in effect until recently.

One objective is to give the team that loses the coin toss a bigger hcance fo getting its hands on the ball. The other is to have games decided by more htan three points, or so it would seem. I mean, scoring a TD is the one sure way of winning the game. Either you receive the ball, score a TD and win, or you get the ball after the receiving team scores a field goal, yuo score a TD and win.

So why have most, if not all (I haven't kept count), OT games this season been decided by 3 points?

Discuss.

There are a number of answers to that:

1.) If you force a fumble, interception, punt or Turnover on Downs, then your overal strategy has not changed at all. You want to play aggressively to get into Field Goal range, and then you want to play conservatively once you are in FG range to try to get your kicker a shorter try or possibly score a TD. In any event, it's just per the usual if the first team doesn't score.

2.) If neither the first team to get the ball nor the second team to get the ball score on their respective first possessions, again, it's just OT per the usual in which you essentially play to try to get yourself in FG range because you are back to sudden death.

3.) In this sense, the only possession that is really relevant to the rule change, obviously, is the first possession. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but if we assume that a team is no more or less likely to get a TD on the drive than they otherwise would be, it's very simply just going to be well under 50%.

In fact, if this site is to be trusted:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats

Denver leads the league with .295 offensive TD's per drive as of last week. They really should have league totals on there, but to give you an idea, there are only eight teams above .250 assuming I didn't miss any.

There you have it, then, a team is less than 25% likely to have a TD score on any given drive and the next team to possess the ball is playing for FG's.

NFL coaches are crazy conservative. They think settling for 50 yard field goals is a good idea. That thinking causes lots of field goals, and 3 point overtime margins of victory.

I don't think the NFL cares at all about the final score in an overtime game. The objective is to give both teams a better chance to possess the ball in overtime and to make sure if the team who receives the overtime kickoff receives a "definitive" win. With the increased accuracy and range of kickers, many teams only need to advance the ball 30 or so yards to have a reasonable chance of a successful field goal. I've identified a few reasons why nearly all NFL overtime games are still decided by three points.

First, it's difficult to score any touchdown in the NFL and even more so off of a kick off. Teams receiving the ball first in overtime and almost always going to start the drive inside their own 30.

Second, there is almost never a touchdown in NFL overtime after the second team receives the ball. For the second team a field goal wins so there is no point in going for a touchdown.

Third, coaches are very conservative on the first possession once they enter field goal range. They feel (wrongly imo) that they are better served to call conservative plays and kick the field goal than risk a turnover going for a touchdown.

Quote: 1arrowheaddr

Second, there is almost never a touchdown in NFL overtime after the second team receives the ball. For the second team a field goal wins so there is no point in going for a touchdown.

A field goal wins it for the second team only if the first team failed to score at all. If the first team scores an FG, and the second teams does as well, then the game remains tied and sudden death rules go in effect.

Depends how confident you are on your defence. But if you are 2nd and 10 at the opponent 30 yard line, not doing anything to turnover the ball and get the FG (in either situation) would be advisable. Having your Centre miss the hard count and snap on 4th and Inches would be a bad idea as well.

But as 1arrowheaddr says, if only 25% of drives end in a TD in normal time, FG ruling the roost isn't surprising, and the rule change is really all about not letting one drive/one FG be the deal in Over Time.

Here are the possibilities for an OT game:

1. The team that gets the ball first scores a TD; they win by six.

2. The team that gets the ball first fumbles or throws an interception, which is returned for a TD; the second team wins by six.

3. The team that gets the ball first does not score; now, whoever scores first, wins. Chances are that a team will get the ball within field goal range, then set up for a game-winning field goal.

4. The team that gets the ball first scores a FG; the other team then does not score, and the first team wins by three.

5. Same as (3), but the second team scores a TD; under NFL rules, the extra point is not attempted (the only time an "unnecessary" extra point is attempted is if a TD is scored on the last play of the fourth quarter), so the second team wins by three.

6. Same as (3), but the second team scores a FG; the game continues, and the next team that scores wins - and for the same reasons as in (2), this is most likely to be a FG.

7. Either nobody scores in 15 minutes, or the teams each make a FG on their first possessions and there is no more scoring, in which case the game ends in a tie. (In postseason play, the game would continue as if the first quarter had ended.)

In most cases, the margin of victory is three points.

A safety by either team will end the game immediately.

I wish they would go with the college OT rules. Those seem the fairest. It seems really similar to the way soccer games work

Quote: SlangNRox

I wish they would go with the college OT rules. Those seem the fairest. It seems really similar to the way soccer games work

I agree completely. I would put the ball at the 50 and if it's still tied after two possessions for each team the game would be a tie.

Under sudden death rules, it makes sense to drive for the field goal. Most teams did exactly that. Overtime TDs were few and mostly a result of luck or a mistake by the other team (interceptions, fumbles, bad coverage, etc)

Under the new rules, it makes more sense for the receiving team to drive for a touch down.

The differences are major. For an FG all you need is the opponents 30 or so. If you're on the other team's 35, say, with a first down, you'll run a couple of times down the center and hope for a few more yards. That's enough. Driving for a TD under the same scenario, you' dtry something else. a rbeakout run, short passes, long passes, trick plays, etc. Anything to keep the chains moving.

I just don't see receiving teams doing that. Most still play as by the sudden death rules.

Quote: 1arrowheaddr

I would put the ball at the 50 and if it's still tied after two possessions for each team the game would be a tie.

IIRC, something like this was the NCAA overtime rule (for Division 2 and 3 playoffs, and some high schools did this as well) in the 1970s. I think it went like this:
1. The ball started on the 50; a coin toss determined who got the ball first.
2. The teams would alternate offensive plays until either one team scored (and won) or each team ran 4 plays.
3. As an exception to #2, if a team fumbled or had a pass intercepted while on offense, the team lost its remaining plays. I think that if the defense had the ball on the offense's side of the field at that point, the team on defense won; otherwise, the ball was placed on the 50.
4. When the teams had used up all of their plays, the position of the ball relative to the 50 determined the winner. I think the game also ended immediately if the offense advanced the ball past the 50 and the defense had no more plays.

I have never been able to get the complete details on how this worked. By the 1980s, high schools had switched to something similar to the NCAA's current method (except that each team started from the 10 rather than the 25, and, in the earliest years, there were no extra points after touchdowns).

As for the current NFL rule, I would have preferred the rule be that a team cannot kick a field goal on its first possession (or at least, not until the other team had run at least one offensive play from scrimmage). I am not really a fan of the current NCAA rule, as it gives the team going second an advantage; if the first team doesn't score, the second team knows it only needs a field goal to win.