Overtime changes contemplated

[phatcat]

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-making-changes-current-overtime-format-173418999.html

Here's a novel idea - let the effing game end in a tie after 2 OTs. We aren't going to catch herpes if someone doesnt "win". In fact, I maintain that the "threat" of a tie will cause teams to gamble more, such as going for it on fourth down instead of a tying field goal.

Ties were ok for 100 years. Let em back in

End of curmudgeon rant.

 

[pawildcat]

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-making-changes-current-overtime-format-173418999.html

Here's a novel idea - let the effing game end in a tie after 2 OTs. We aren't going to catch herpes if someone doesnt "win". In fact, I maintain that the "threat" of a tie will cause teams to gamble more, such as going for it on fourth down instead of a tying field goal.

Ties were ok for 100 years. Let em back in

End of curmudgeon rant.

I don't think a limit would be a bad idea, although I don't have a big problem with the current system. I'm not a big fan of the proposals that would take kicking completely out of it. "Football" without kicking — interesting.

 

[hdhntr1]

I don't think a limit would be a bad idea, although I don't have a big problem with the current system. I'm not a big fan of the proposals that would take kicking completely out of it. "Football" without kicking — interesting.

My change might be to move the ball out to the 35-40 rather than the 25 where a team would have to do something to even get a FG. I think that might limit the number of OTs (or it might cause more empty possessions) I like that both teams get an equal chance. Much better than the NFL system. But starting on the 25 could use some adjustment

 

[rwhitney014]

Looks like the NCAA noticed that Northwestern kept winning in overtime and decided it was nigh time to change the rules.

 

[NJCat]

Looks like the NCAA noticed that Northwestern kept winning in overtime and decided it was nigh time to change the rules.

Bingo!!

 

[FanatiCat]

My change might be to move the ball out to the 35-40 rather than the 25 where a team would have to do something to even get a FG. I think that might limit the number of OTs (or it might cause more empty possessions) I like that both teams get an equal chance. Much better than the NFL system. But starting on the 25 could use some adjustment

Drives starting at the 35-40 may just make OT longer and less exciting (less quick scoring), I don’t think there is an appetite for that.

I say limit it to 3 OT.
FG or TD With PAT are OK in 1-2 OT.

Problem with eliminating FG is that you might end up with actually more ties. If both teams can’t score a TD in 1OT then you have a tie.

 

[Jonny2TheP]

Looks like the NCAA noticed that Northwestern kept winning in overtime and decided it was nigh time to change the rules.

What is really incredible about our great success in overtime over the last couple of years has been that we have had some major kicking issues whether it be due to inconsistency or injury. Not having a good kicking game is a big detriment when a game goes to OT in college football. Yet, we've been able to overcome that every time.

 

[stpaulcat]

My change might be to move the ball out to the 35-40 rather than the 25 where a team would have to do something to even get a FG. I think that might limit the number of OTs (or it might cause more empty possessions) I like that both teams get an equal chance. Much better than the NFL system. But starting on the 25 could use some adjustment

The 32 sounds about right.

 

[willycat]

Drives starting at the 35-40 may just make OT longer and less exciting (less quick scoring), I don’t think there is an appetite for that.

I say limit it to 3 OT.
FG or TD With PAT are OK in 1-2 OT.

Problem with eliminating FG is that you might end up with actually more ties. If both teams can’t score a TD in 1OT then you have a tie.

No problem changing it to 2 OT's. Think I remember some OT"s going into 6 or even more overtimes. That's absurd. Having guys play that much in a single day is just asking for injuries. remember that one of the most talked about games was a tie between ND and Mich. St.?

 

[SciCat]

The 32 sounds about right.

Nahhh. Let’s get a debate going. You know, like a Big Endians vs Little Endians. Start from the 20 or start from the 20 at the other end of the field.

 

[DarthCat]

No problem changing it to 2 OT's. Think I remember some OT"s going into 6 or even more overtimes. That's absurd. Having guys play that much in a single day is just asking for injuries. remember that one of the most talked about games was a tie between ND and Mich. St.?

Who got injured in overtime?

 

[FanatiCat]

No problem changing it to 2 OT's. Think I remember some OT"s going into 6 or even more overtimes. That's absurd. Having guys play that much in a single day is just asking for injuries. remember that one of the most talked about games was a tie between ND and Mich. St.?

The A&M LSU game this year was 6 or 7 OT. I was up pretty late watching that one. After 2 OTs the defenses were so gassed they couldn’t stop anything. I was thinking it had to take a toll on the next week, it’s like they played at least 3/4 of another football game worth of plays.

 

[DarthCat]

No problem changing it to 2 OT's. Think I remember some OT"s going into 6 or even more overtimes. That's absurd. Having guys play that much in a single day is just asking for injuries. remember that one of the most talked about games was a tie between ND and Mich. St.?

Yeah, this is exactly what a sport with a declining attendance problem needs. More ties!

Fans love em. Just look at the surging NCAA soccer attendance.

I know after three and a half hour game, another couple of hours traveling to and from the stadium and likely hundreds of dollars paid, nothing is as satisfying as a hearty tie.

 

[Alaskawildkat]

Just caught a TV rebroadcast of a 5 overtime game between The University of Hawaii and San Jose State. The players were so exhausted as the overtime progressed that both teams were dropping catches and missing chip shot field goals.

Given that it was being broadcast on a Hawaii sports channel I had a pretty good idea of who would eventually end up making one less mistake.

Curious what the record is for number of overtime’s in an NCAA game. FWIW in the subject game neither team made a touchdown after the first overtime.

Edited to add - I see there have been at least three 7 overtime games in college football to set the record. The most recent was between Buffalo and Western Michigan Preceded by one between Arkansas and Kentucky in 2003. Arkansas was also one of the teams in the first 7 overtime college football game back in 2001.

 

[NUCat320]

One possession. Offense wins if it scores a touchdown. Defense wins if they get a stop. Teams bid on where they’re willing to start, in increments of five.

Most frequently, you’ll have a high-powered offense starting at ~their own 30.

In the Big 12, you’ll have to allow for single-yard increments after they commit to 95.

As a bonus, you put the head coaches on the field to bid, rather than the captains.

 

[NU Houston]

Curious what the record is for number of overtime’s in an NCAA game. FWIW in the subject game neither team made a touchdown after the first overtime.

Edited to add - I see there have been at least three 7 overtime games in college football to set the record. The most recent was between Buffalo and Western Michigan Preceded by one between Arkansas and Kentucky in 2003. Arkansas was also one of the teams in the first 5 overtime college football game back in 2001.

There have been five 7 OT games. The most recent was this past November, when Texas A&M beat LSU 74-72. That game was somethin', as my grandmother used to say.

 

[NUCat320]

Place the ball at the 10 yard line.
Both teams alternate possessions — going in the same direction.

If the first offense drives 90 yards, they win.
If the first offense gets it 70 yards, the next team takes it from the 20.

No punting.
Any loss of yardage on 4th down benefits the defense on the changeover. (If a team faces 4th and 15 from the 25 and gets sacked for a ten yard loss, the subsequent possession begins at the 15, not the 35.)

Limits game length and gives teams equal opportunity.

Instead of a fixed starting point, you could still include the bid concept. Good to see chest thumping and home crowd riling.

 

[TheC]

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football-making-changes-current-overtime-format-173418999.html

Here's a novel idea - let the effing game end in a tie after 2 OTs. We aren't going to catch herpes if someone doesnt "win". In fact, I maintain that the "threat" of a tie will cause teams to gamble more, such as going for it on fourth down instead of a tying field goal.

Ties were ok for 100 years. Let em back in

End of curmudgeon rant.

Considering the prevalence of Herpes in the population (~ 60%), I'd say there is a pretty good chance you'll catch herpes either way.

 

[Fitz51]

Start with 4th and goal with the ball on the 1....the team's *own* 1!

 

[willycat]

Who got injured in overtime?

If you don't think it's asking for injuries if 19. 20 and 21 year old kids to play the equilvant of two games in one day, then I'm sure there is nothing further we can discuss. Ties were just fine for 100 or so years and even the NFL accepts it as a tie after a couple of possessions and those a lot older guys and highly paid. Finally longer the game is played , more injuries will occur. seems logical, right?

 

[wicker]

The ball is put at the 25 because under the original OT proposal there was a fear there'd be no scoring and defenses would get tired in lengthy, scoreless possessions.

I'm OK with ties. There are ways to avoid them.

 

[willycat]

A lack of concussion protocol was just fine for over 100 years. Should we go back to that too?

If length of the game is the driving factor for injuries, why not shorten each quarter by 3 minutes? 12 minutes less a game, 144 for the season? That’s more than two whole game’s worth of injury potential avoided.

Since we’re on that path, why not go back to the nine or fewer game schedules that were just fine for decades? You can cut injury percentages by double digits with that move.

But I digress.

In our most overtime laden season of 2017, the overtimes lasted a TOTAL of 38 plays. That’s two one period OTs and a 3 OT. That’s a LOT of OT, but the total amount of playing time in number of plays was about that of a single quarter of football. Maybe a little more, but nowhere near to a usual single half.

If limiting playing time to avoid additional injuries was the concern, teams would NOT be trying to add a 13th entire game to their schedules, positioning for conference championship games or talking about EXPANDING the CFP to add more teams and even more games. If playing time leading to injuries is a driving factor, attacking OT isn’t going to make a dent, when whole games are being added and teams and leagues are campaigning for more.

More games = more injuries but also more money for the institutions and million dollar coaches. The players/ workers get zip, other then life altering injuries. While we're at it, how about go back to leather helmets?

 

[hdhntr1]

One possession. Offense wins if it scores a touchdown. Defense wins if they get a stop. Teams bid on where they’re willing to start, in increments of five.

Most frequently, you’ll have a high-powered offense starting at ~their own 30.

In the Big 12, you’ll have to allow for single-yard increments after they commit to 95.

As a bonus, you put the head coaches on the field to bid, rather than the captains.

I really do not care for the pro rules and feel the college ones are better. But I would like to see the ball moved back to start as teams with a good kicker have a FG from the get go.

 

[willycat]

I really do not care for the pro rules and feel the college ones are better. But I would like to see the ball moved back to start as teams with a good kicker have a FG from the get go.

Ties were fine for hundreds of years.

 

[rwhitney014]

Ties were fine for hundreds of years.

Ah, yes, I too remember the great Aesop fable about the Tie Between The Gladiator and The Lion.

 

[Alvious]

I say each team starts 1st and goal from the 10. If still tied after 2 OTs, the game ends in a tie, except for CFP games. This way each team only takes 8 more snaps at maximum, barring penalties.

 

[Noah121]

If ties are allowed, overtime should not be played at all.

That's a pet peeve that I have about college soccer and college hockey: they play overtime periods but still allow ties. The World Cup of soccer gets it right by allowing ties and forgoing overtime in group-stage matchups.

 

[pawildcat]

Polio too!

Polio was fine?

 

[DarthCat]

Polio was fine?

Okay, prolly not. Point being that just because something existed for a long time it doesn’t mean it was ‘fine’ or a desired state.

 

[pawildcat]

Okay, prolly not. Point being that just because something existed for a long time it doesn’t mean it was ‘fine’ or a desired state.

I get your point, but just thought polio was stretching it quite a bit. That was still around when I was a kid, and it was certainly no picnic.

 

[Alaskawildkat]

Just caught a TV rebroadcast of a 5 overtime game between The University of Hawaii and San Jose State. The players were so exhausted as the overtime progressed that both teams were dropping catches and missing chip shot field goals.

Given that it was being broadcast on a Hawaii sports channel I had a pretty good idea of who would eventually end up making one less mistake.

Curious what the record is for number of overtime’s in an NCAA game. FWIW in the subject game neither team made a touchdown after the first overtime.

Edited to add - I see there have been at least three 7 overtime games in college football to set the record. The most recent was between Buffalo and Western Michigan Preceded by one between Arkansas and Kentucky in 2003. Arkansas was also one of the teams in the first 7 overtime college football game back in 2001.

There have been five 7 OT games. The most recent was this past November, when Texas A&M beat LSU 74-72. That game was somethin', as my grandmother used to say.

Thanks for the updated info. My Google Search first referenced two, and then three 7 overtime college football games. Interesting that there have now been five and yet not one of those five made it to eight?

Is there some rule or reason that is in play that has led it to capping off at 7?

 

[pawildcat]

My apologies.

No need for you to do so. As I'm all too aware, things posted online don't always have the effect you'd planned.

 

[Deeringfish]

A lack of concussion protocol was just fine for over 100 years. Should we go back to that too?

If length of the game is the driving factor for injuries, why not shorten each quarter by 3 minutes? 12 minutes less a game, 144 for the season? That’s more than two whole game’s worth of injury potential avoided.

Since we’re on that path, why not go back to the nine or fewer game schedules that were just fine for decades? You can cut injury percentages by double digits with that move.

But I digress.

In our most overtime laden season of 2017, the overtimes lasted a TOTAL of 38 plays. That’s two one period OTs and a 3 OT. That’s a LOT of OT, but the total amount of playing time in number of plays was about that of a single quarter of football. Maybe a little more, but nowhere near to a usual single half.

If limiting playing time to avoid additional injuries was the concern, teams would NOT be trying to add a 13th entire game to their schedules, positioning for conference championship games or talking about EXPANDING the CFP to add more teams and even more games. If playing time leading to injuries is a driving factor, attacking OT isn’t going to make a dent, when whole games are being added and teams and leagues are campaigning for more.

Doesn't the likely hood of injury go up exponentially as players become more tired? If that is true then longer games risk more injury per play than extra games.

 

[Bwm57]

Leave it the way it is.

 

[StreamCat]

Who got injured in overtime?

My gluteus maximus was strained from overuse.

 

[DarthCat]

Doesn't the likely hood of injury go up exponentially as players become more tired? If that is true then longer games risk more injury per play than extra games.

Says who? Where?

Please show me anything that shows the prevalence of injuries increasing later in games or overtime, and that such injuries are tied in anyway to exhaustion.

Frankly, I’d think as adrenaline wears down and players get more tired and are moving more slowly, hits are less severe, cuts are less sharp and the the shearing and collision forces that contribute to most football injuries are lessened. But I have as little evidence to support that as you do your argument for shortening or eliminating OT to prevent injuries.

 

[eastbaycat99]

There is a lot to think about in those proposals:

It has been clear that the team winning the toss has an advantage, which makes eliminating kicks interesting. If you do that, though, you penalize a team whose strength is placekicking ( think Cats when Budzien was on the team). To totally complicate things, how about no field goals, but extra point attempts are snapped from the 25?

 

[Fitz51]

Between replay and overtime issues in college and pro football, I can understand why we as a people don't have any time to fix real problems.

 

[rwhitney014]

There is a lot to think about in those proposals:

It has been clear that the team winning the toss has an advantage, which makes eliminating kicks interesting. If you do that, though, you penalize a team whose strength is placekicking ( think Cats when Budzien was on the team). To totally complicate things, how about no field goals, but extra point attempts are snapped from the 25?

Here's an idea:

Play on both sides of the field. Each offense starts on the opposite 25. First team to score a TD wins. No more coin toss. QED.

 

[eastbaycat99]

Here's an idea:

Play on both sides of the field. Each offense starts on the opposite 25. First team to score a TD wins. No more coin toss. QED.

Do they collide at the 50?