OVERTIME RULE

[Moose]

I probably should have posted this in the NFL category, and I apologize to the administrators if I messed up, but since this 'supposedly' new rule affected our Sunday evening game I thought I'd post here first. Okay, the old overtime rules were changed to make it a NEW overtime rule, but in fact it's still the exact same as the OLD overtime rule other than it now has an 'asterick' ( * ) or bullit by it which they think makes it a NEW rule, or old rule made better ! Confused ? Yea. NFL is just like the government, anything they touch they can completely screw up ( for lack of a better phrase I was thinking). The NFL thought they made something better to shut up all the fans that have been bitching for years about he overtime rule, and of course..heaven forbid they make it like the college rule that seems so simple and with no problems. So, here comes the overtime Sunday night, coin toss ( oh, and congrats to the refs for actually being able to recognize the difference between a head and a ass and also being able to actually hear what the players are calling ), and then kick off.........a fast dash to the end zone ( 18 seconds-- which was faster than the amount of time it took for all the players on the sidelines to find their seat on the benches and coaches to put back on the headphones), and the game was OVER !! Isn't that pretty much how the old rule was ? I know, there's something in the rule about FG's and crap like that....but wasn't the whole idea of the rule change was to make it where BOTH teams had a chance to be on OFFENSE and DEFENSE ?? What the hell is fair about this new rule ? Wouldn't it be a better taste in the other opponents mouth if at least they had a chance to get the ball and try to score a TD....if they didn't then they lose. Makes sense to me, and I know I would have felt somewhat better to see if Ben could've drove down the field and answered with 6 pts.. If we didn't ....then we lost. But at least it would have been on the shoulders of the whole team.....and not just 1 or 2 players who missed their coverage assignment. Again, the azzinine NFL tried to accomplish something worthwhile , when in fact they just showed their idiotic, moron, government type thinking and spent money changing something that didn't change anything. Oh yea, it's the OLD rule made NEW when it's really just a NEW rule of the OLD rule version.... I got you confused ? LOL We'll have to get the names of these 'rule' makers in the NFL....I bet we see them on the politcal ballets. MORONS !!

[st33lersguy]

The new overtime rules suck, I like the old rules much better. It is sweet irony that the first "non-sudden death" overtime game in NFL history was exactly and was the quickest overtime in postseason history

[GBMelBlount]

The new overtime rule is terrible.

Touchdowns should only end the game if it is on the second play from scrimmage (or later).

[BigNastyDefense]

I still think that a TD shouldn't end the game in OT, that both teams should get a chance.

HOWEVER, the Steelers shit the bed big time not only in the single play of overtime, but the entire game for the most part.

[Moose]

I still think that a TD shouldn't end the game in OT, that both teams should get a chance.

HOWEVER, the Steelers shit the bed big time not only in the single play of overtime, but the entire game for the most part.

I agree 100% !! I think both teams should be able to play at least 1 series on offense and defense. And I agree also that the Steeler's had quite a few chances to take the game but squander all away. Damnit.

[ALLD]

The way the NFL and media sold the new rule to the public was based on BRETT FAVRE. If he had a chance to touch the ball again blah blah blah.

I went to the bathroom just before kickoff in OT and heard a bunch of screaming 5 minutes later. I figured with the new rule the way it had been explained over the last year and all the reasons why and what ifs, that even if the Broncos scored the Steelers would get another chance on offense.

Double face plant and epic failure by the NFL to complicate everything with another major screw up. The Steelers still lost, but I am confused by it all, that is why I have not watched any sports since.

[st33lersguy]

I like the old playoff rules. If the team that loses the coin toss wants to get the ball maybe the defense and kickoff coverage team should do their jobs and prevent the other offense from scoring. What makes this rule worse is that it only applies to the playoffs, not the regular season.

[SMR]

This is why I like college football better.

[oneforthetoe]

The new overtime rule is terrible.

Touchdowns should only end the game if it is on the second play from scrimmage (or later).

And only if you are below 5000 feet.

[steelreserve]

The way the NFL and media sold the new rule to the public was based on BRETT FAVRE. If he had a chance to touch the ball again blah blah

It was the Peyton Manning rule, not the Brett Favre rule. Colts-Chargers game in the first round of the playoffs a couple years ago. The story is basically the same, except it was, ”waaah, if only Manning had the ball, isn't FAIR, it would've been exciting and he didn't have a chance. Boo-hoo!”

Wonder how much outcry there would've been if Manning had gotten the ball first and scored, and the 8-8 Chargers didn't have a chance with the ball? (hint: none.) Still one of the lamest examples of favoritism in rulemaking ever.

Not that it mattered in our game. We screwed the pooch in overtime as well as regulation. I mean really fucked the dog.

[fansince'76]

It was the Peyton Manning rule, not the Brett Favre rule. Colts-Chargers game in the first round of the playoffs a couple years ago. The story is basically the same, except it was, ”waaah, if only Manning had the ball, isn't FAIR, it would've been exciting and he didn't have a chance. Boo-hoo!”

Wonder how much outcry there would've been if Manning had gotten the ball first and scored, and the 8-8 Chargers didn't have a chance with the ball? (hint: none.)

Exactly. I particularly remember Peter King, who had been deep-throating Manning for years up to that point, raising a big stink about it at the time.

[O'Malley]

Reset game clock to 10 minutes and play a ten minute overtime!!! Simple to the point and actually desides a winner...

[smokin3000gt]

I probably should have posted this in the NFL category, and I apologize to the administrators if I messed up, but since this 'supposedly' new rule affected our Sunday evening game I thought I'd post here first. Okay, the old overtime rules were changed to make it a NEW overtime rule, but in fact it's still the exact same as the OLD overtime rule other than it now has an 'asterick' ( * ) or bullit by it which they think makes it a NEW rule, or old rule made better ! Confused ? Yea. NFL is just like the government, anything they touch they can completely screw up ( for lack of a better phrase I was thinking). The NFL thought they made something better to shut up all the fans that have been bitching for years about he overtime rule, and of course..heaven forbid they make it like the college rule that seems so simple and with no problems. So, here comes the overtime Sunday night, coin toss ( oh, and congrats to the refs for actually being able to recognize the difference between a head and a ass and also being able to actually hear what the players are calling ), and then kick off.........a fast dash to the end zone ( 18 seconds-- which was faster than the amount of time it took for all the players on the sidelines to find their seat on the benches and coaches to put back on the headphones), and the game was OVER !! Isn't that pretty much how the old rule was ? I know, there's something in the rule about FG's and crap like that....but wasn't the whole idea of the rule change was to make it where BOTH teams had a chance to be on OFFENSE and DEFENSE ?? What the hell is fair about this new rule ? Wouldn't it be a better taste in the other opponents mouth if at least they had a chance to get the ball and try to score a TD....if they didn't then they lose. Makes sense to me, and I know I would have felt somewhat better to see if Ben could've drove down the field and answered with 6 pts.. If we didn't ....then we lost. But at least it would have been on the shoulders of the whole team.....and not just 1 or 2 players who missed their coverage assignment. Again, the azzinine NFL tried to accomplish something worthwhile , when in fact they just showed their idiotic, moron, government type thinking and spent money changing something that didn't change anything. Oh yea, it's the OLD rule made NEW when it's really just a NEW rule of the OLD rule version.... I got you confused ? LOL We'll have to get the names of these 'rule' makers in the NFL....I bet we see them on the politcal ballets. MORONS !!

Moose I got nothin' but love for ya man, but how about a few line breaks here and there?

[smokin3000gt]

It was the Peyton Manning rule, not the Brett Favre rule. Colts-Chargers game in the first round of the playoffs a couple years ago. The story is basically the same, except it was, ”waaah, if only Manning had the ball, isn't FAIR, it would've been exciting and he didn't have a chance. Boo-hoo!”

Wonder how much outcry there would've been if Manning had gotten the ball first and scored, and the 8-8 Chargers didn't have a chance with the ball? (hint: none.) Still one of the lamest examples of favoritism in rulemaking ever.

Not that it mattered in our game. We screwed the pooch in overtime as well as regulation. I mean really fucked the dog.

Yes but it wasn't until the Vikings lost to the Saints in the NFC championship (after one HELL of a football game) by a field goal. It's too bad the rule wasn't enacted then because both teams were playing balls out and it was a damn shame that it ended the way it did. Not because Favre didn't win, but because it was weak the way it ended.

[st33lersguy]

It was the Peyton Manning rule, not the Brett Favre rule. Colts-Chargers game in the first round of the playoffs a couple years ago. The story is basically the same, except it was, ”waaah, if only Manning had the ball, isn't FAIR, it would've been exciting and he didn't have a chance. Boo-hoo!”

Wonder how much outcry there would've been if Manning had gotten the ball first and scored, and the 8-8 Chargers didn't have a chance with the ball? (hint: none.) Still one of the lamest examples of favoritism in rulemaking ever.

Not that it mattered in our game. We screwed the pooch in overtime as well as regulation. I mean really fucked the dog.

The irony is that under the new rules, Manning still would have never seen the football

[Moose]

Moose I got nothin' but love for ya man, but how about a few line breaks here and there?

LMAO- Sorry 'smokin3000', it's just when the alcohol hits, and I'm rantin' and ravin' it's hard to slow these fingers up ! LOL---but I'll try, thanks.

And O'Malley - I do like the 10 min. idea. I think I'd go for that.

[GodfatherofSoul]

It's stupid. I have no clue why they made it so complicated. Give each team a guaranteed position; simple as that. There's hardly any difference between old and new rules besides they ban the field goal OT win.

[O'Malley]

LMAO- Sorry 'smokin3000', it's just when the alcohol hits, and I'm rantin' and ravin' it's hard to slow these fingers up ! LOL---but I'll try, thanks.

And O'Malley - I do like the 10 min. idea. I think I'd go for that.

This is what I htink they should do.. It would be more exciting.

[86WARD]

New rule sucks. Old rule is better. Either way, steelers still get fucjed by Tebow.

[Craic]

I'm not sure what's so complicated.

A field goal doesn't end OT on first possession.


Much ado about nothing. It's the old rule, made a bit more fair. Of course, it happened during the years that Goodell was commissioner so by definition, it is the most horrible, destructive thing to football since the rule changes stopped the "flying wedge" in 1906 and made it a game for pansies (After all, only 18 people died that year and 149 serious injuries occurred).

[tube517]

Sudden death was exciting. It never was broken. Aww, poor Peyton couldn't get a chance. Aww, poor Wrangler couldn't retire without a ring. Whatever. This is grade school crap. I don't care who the commish is, just stop messing w/the game.

[86WARD]

Sudden death was exciting. It never was broken. Aww, poor Peyton couldn't get a chance. Aww, poor Wrangler couldn't retire without a ring. Whatever. This is grade school crap. I don't care who the commish is, just stop messing w/the game.

So true. It was never broken. Play defense. It's an important part of the game.

[ALLD]

If Sushi could win it for us with his leg in OT, then so be it.

[The WH]

or they could have just tried the long field goal in the one place in the US where making long field goals isn't uncommon.....

[Godfather]

So true. It was never broken. Play defense. It's an important part of the game.

Defense is illegal now, so the rule change is necessary.

[The WH]

Defense is illegal now, so the rule change is necessary.

train of thought when reading this
wah wah wah, call the wahmbulance - well...he kind of has a point - no, he's not so wrong there, really. - true, oh so true.

[steelreserve]

What I want to know is, what will people say about this rule when some team gets the ball first, drives down the field and stalls on about the 10, then plays it safe and kicks a field goal.

Then the second team gets the ball and winds up in some absurd 4th-and-18 situation where anyone would normally punt, only they know it's do-or-die, so they go for it and make it. Then they come back to win the game.

The second team totally gets an advantage in that situation, and I guarantee it will happen sometime within the next 10 years. Everybody will be bitching about how team #1 was robbed, unless one of the Brady-Brees-Manning-Rodgers quartet is on team #2 - then they'll just gush about what a terrific QB s/he is.

Actually, I hope this happens in a couple days as the Broncos beat the Patriots by the final score of 7-3. Then the rule will be back to the old version faster than you can say "Brady is gay."