Super Bowl OT Rules- Your Take?

What would you change about the OT rule

  • Leave as is

    Votes: 8 14.3%
  • i don't give a flip, I DON'T CARE!

    Votes: 12 21.4%
  • Both teams should have the same opportunity

    Votes: 31 55.4%
  • Eliminate OT, a tie is good enough

    Votes: 5 8.9%

  • Total voters
    56
I'm pretty sure (without looking it up) that those are the same overtime rules they use for all NFL games. They're not special for the Super Bowl.
 
They've had thd these OT rules in the NFL for a few years now. Every team knows them.

Both teams do get a chance, but the team that doesn't get the ball first has to earn it's chance by not giving up a touchdown.
 
I'm pretty sure (without looking it up) that those are the same overtime rules they use for all NFL games. They're not special for the Super Bowl.
I think the only difference is regular season games can end in a tie even with overtime, while playoff games and the Super Bowl keep going until there is a winner.
 
They've had thd these OT rules in the NFL for a few years now. Every team knows them.

Both teams do get a chance, but the team that doesn't get the ball first has to earn it's chance by not giving up a touchdown.

Sure it's a chance, but not exactly an equal chance, is it? That's like saying I get a gun and you get a knife, you have a "chance" as long as I don't kill you first, lol. The NCAA rules are fair, keep the game moving, and keep forcing the teams to try for more points with each successive OT round.
 
Sucked for Atlanta. Turned out great for New England. Atlanta was my team so I think it sucked. Unless they won which I would have said its fair. So basically, it is what it is! We lost fair and square. Now ill just go drink
 
The falcons should've stopped them. They would've had enough time to kick a FG before regulation ended if they didn't blow their timeouts.
 
Sure it's a chance, but not exactly an equal chance, is it? That's like saying I get a gun and you get a knife, you have a "chance" as long as I don't kill you first, lol. The NCAA rules are fair, keep the game moving, and keep forcing the teams to try for more points with each successive OT round.

The previous sudden-death NFL OT rules resulted in the team that recieved the ball first winning the game something like 80% of the time.

I'm not sure about the percentages now. If it's close to 50% then I think they've got it figured out, and I think it's somewhere around 54%. I've been trying to find more definitive stats.
 
Last edited:
The falcons should've stopped them. They would've had enough time to kick a FG before regulation ended if they didn't blow their timeouts.
A sack and a penalty took them out of FG range and a chance at an 11 point lead.

A couple of handoffs and a kick would have sealed it.
 
The previous sudden-death NFL OT rules resulted in the team that recieved the ball first winning the game something like 80% of the time.

I'm not sure about the percentages now. If it's close to 50% then I think they've got it figured out, and I think it's somewhere around 54%. I've been trying to find more definitive stats.
Just because the percentages have a less-terrible disparity between them doesn't necessarily imply that each team has an equal chance, imo. I don't understand why they can't let each team have a shot, no matter who scores first.

Baseball - extra innings, each team gets a shot
Basketball - OT time, each team gets several shots
Hockey/Soccer - shootout, each team gets equal shots
Tennis - extra games, each player gets a shot
Football - first team scores a touchdown, automatic win.
 
If they are tied after four quarters they should then get one appointed player from each team and see who can snort the longest line of coke at midfield without cardiac arrest. The winner takes all. I would pay to see that.
 
Sure it's a chance, but not exactly an equal chance, is it? That's like saying I get a gun and you get a knife, you have a "chance" as long as I don't kill you first, lol. The NCAA rules are fair, keep the game moving, and keep forcing the teams to try for more points with each successive OT round.
Just because the percentages have a less-terrible disparity between them doesn't necessarily imply that each team has an equal chance, imo. I don't understand why they can't let each team have a shot, no matter who scores first.

Baseball - extra innings, each team gets a shot
Basketball - OT time, each team gets several shots
Hockey/Soccer - shootout, each team gets equal shots
Tennis - extra games, each player gets a shot
Football - first team scores a touchdown, automatic win.

Dunno why NFL doesn't change it, it's been in place for about 5 years?

Maybe they want to reward a team for being more agressive in going for a touchdown to end the game vs a field goal and giving the other team a chance? Kind of a way to keep the sudden death aspect of the previous OT rules in play.

Probably comes down to ratings, and ending the game more quickly. I think there were a couple of ties this season.
 
Probably because it would be indirectly agreeing that the NCAA got the answer right, lol. The NCAA method is more of a progressive sudden death. It just takes 2-round to get to forcing you to score a TD and go for 2-pt conversion.
 
The NFL could give a flying rubber dog pile what people think about the rules or the game. They just suckered in a couple hundred million people to watch 3 hours of commercials while showing less than 30 minutes of game being played. They raked in hundreds of millions of dollars for this game. The sooner it can end the better for them so they can take their money and run.
 
I think they should leave it as is. It's a good compromise, if you lose the toss and can't stop the other team from scoring a touchdown, game over. If you lose the toss and stop the other team from a touch down, you get a chance to score and it becomes a regular game. Allowing each team a chance really solves nothing because if both teams score a touchdown, then the coin winner scores another they win. So you are in the same scenario as when you started.
 
Really the only way to negate the coin toss win advantage would be to play a full quarter, but I don't think that would have helped the Falcons, they looked spent and done.
 
I bet that after this year, Goodell will be looking to change that rule. Afterall, if it benefited the Pats, it must be wrong.

Did you catch the little dig Kraft got in after receiving the trophy from Goodyall? Brady had a lot of class and just pretended he didn't hate Goodyall's gut.
 
Under the old rule the winner of the coin flip won approximately 60% of the time. With the new rule it's slightly higher than 50%.

I think in the regular season the road team should get the option of taking the ball in OT. The home team has the home field advantage. If the road team forces OT they should get the ball first.
 
Did you catch the little dig Kraft got in after receiving the trophy from Goodyall? Brady had a lot of class and just pretended he didn't hate Goodyall's gut.

Yep. I thought it was great. Goodell looked very uncomfortable up there. I don't blame Kraft at all for what he said. It had to be an exrtra sweet championship after all the team went through.
 
Was there a game Sunday? Every time I passed the local Fox Channel while surfing the TV, there was either a commercial or an alien flying into a stadium someplace.

Cheers
 
They just suckered in a couple hundred million people to watch 3 hours of commercials while showing less than 30 minutes of game being played.

Nobody got suckered. Millions of people got together to eat and drink and have a good time, and were rewarded with a game that was a thousand times more entertaining than the entirety of your favorite 'sport' where a bunch of dudes run around a field and fall over in mock pain anytime anyone looks at them funny. I mean holy hell, your hero Messi doesn't even look like an athlete - he looks more like the dork that gets beat up in high school on a daily basis. :p :p :p
 
The NFL could give a flying rubber dog pile what people think about the rules or the game. They just suckered in a couple hundred million people to watch 3 hours of commercials while showing less than 30 minutes of game being played. They raked in hundreds of millions of dollars for this game. The sooner it can end the better for them so they can take their money and run.

LOL. Who watched? I was busy doing other stuff. Saw about the last five minutes.
 
If Atlanta didn't want to lose in OT, they had the opportunity to not give up a 25 point lead.

I do think that each team having an opportunity to score would be good.
 
The falcons should've stopped them. They would've had enough time to kick a FG before regulation ended if they didn't blow their timeouts.

Well seems funny after the half Atlanta Defense just shut down, its not like the patriots offense did anything truly spectacular. I'm no conspiracy theorist but dang this game makes you think..Goodell must have paid a hefty bonus to Atlanta to just not show up the second half. And then since NE called the coin at the first ATL should of had the overtime call. And I bet that coin was double heads.

There you have it. :)
 
We watched the game with chapter members in the hangar at the airport. Driving home after the game it was like rush hour in Atlanta. The number of cars on the road after the game was absolutely amazing.
 
LOL. Who watched? I was busy doing other stuff. Saw about the last five minutes.
They estimate around that many watch the game but I think it is quite an inflated number. I was enjoying time with the kids while the wife watched some well deserved tv.
 
Back
Top