I want Cards/Jets, just because I like the under dogs.
If I was Rex Ryan/Mark Sanchez and made it to the Super Bowl, I would want hand written apologies from Jets fans for calling for my head during the regular season.
I want Cards/Jets, just because I like the under dogs.
To me, that would be like the NBA making their overtime sudden death, but only winnable on a three pointer. Why not just give them a shortened period? This would also give both teams at least one possession. Also, by shortening the time frame, you force both teams to step it up and work faster. Your argument that the defense should be able to step up and stop the other team is kind of negated by the fact that the game is tied. If the defense wasn't able to step up and keep the other team from tying the game, what makes you think they'd be able to do it on a two minute drill in OT?A defense should be able to step up and at least hold you to three. The only change that should be made to NFL overtime is that if you get a field goal on the opening drive the other team at least gets to touch the ball.
Mal'Akai said:How's this for a new overtime system.
A 10 min. overtime period. Coin flip for first possession. Two time-outs per team. Either once challenge or only booth reviews. Highest score wins, or if no winner, the game's a tie. What would be wrong with that?
You do realize the Jets are a New York team, right? Like New Yorkers would apologize for that?If I was Rex Ryan/Mark Sanchez and made it to the Super Bowl, I would want hand written apologies from Jets fans for calling for my head during the regular season.
That's true, but why change the value of a score just because it's overtime? What other sport does that? I mean, if a field goal as the clock runs out in regulation is good enough to win, then it's good enough to win in OT.Because its a different sport. NBA overtime is in no way comprable to NFL overtime. It is far more difficult to score in the NFL than the NBA.
That's true, but why change the value of a score just because it's overtime? What other sport does that? I mean, if a field goal as the clock runs out in regulation is good enough to win, then it's good enough to win in OT.
You're also not explaining why you disagree with my suggestion.
I'll seriously flip out if Jets made it to the SB.![]()
Um, no. I'm against the sudden death OT. In any sport. I think you and I are on the same side. Perhaps you could take a minute to read my other post.But using the whole "The defense should step up" argument. Would you like it in the NBA (I'm using the NBA because you used it as well) that if the Lakers and Cavs went to overtime that Kobe gets an easy layup and ended the game on that?
How's this for a new overtime system.
A 10 min. overtime period. Coin flip for first possession. Two time-outs per team. Either once challenge or only booth reviews. Highest score wins, or if no winner, the game's a tie. What would be wrong with that?
A defense shoud be able to step up and at least hold you to three. The only change that should be made to NFL overtime is that if you get a field goal on the opening drive the other team at least gets to touch the ball.
But using the whole "The defense should step up" argument. Would you like it in the NBA (I'm using the NBA because you used it as well) that if the Lakers and Cavs went to overtime that Kobe gets an easy layup and ended the game on that?
Currently OT is 15 minutes. Granted, most games that go into OT, end one the first possession, but they can also often run an extra 10 minutes.No. I don't think it's fair to ask NFL players to play another 10 min of football. More injuries is never good for the NFL.
Currently OT is 15 minutes. Granted, most games that go into OT, end one the first possession, but they can also often run an extra 10 minutes.
No, the only person it's "unfair" to is the team that manages to kick a field goal first. What is unfair is turning a game that is based on possessions into a whoever scores first wins. Football is not fast paced enough for sudden death. We really should come up with a way for both teams to get a possession. That would be fair. To the teams that are trying to put check in the win column.Again, forcing overtime to be 10 minutes long - no matter what happens - is a huge loss for players and thus the game. Just like adding a 17th game, it's completely unfair to the players.
There is nothing wrong with the current OT as it stands. The only adjustment is that can take away the "it's decided by a coin flip!" argument (besides the fact it's not based on fact anyway) is taking away the second coin toss.
No, the only person it's "unfair" to is the team that manages to kick a field goal first. What is unfair is turning a game that is based on possessions into a whoever scores first wins. Football is not fast paced enough for sudden death. We really should come up with a way for both teams to get a possession. That would be fair. To the teams that are trying to put check in the win column.
Hell, do it the same as college football.
Bengals.com said:Head coach Marvin Lewis said Monday he’s “very confident” the Bengals can retain free agent defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer while giving indications his staff is not going to change much in 2010.
Offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski said Monday that as far as he knows he’s going to be back in the job for the 10th season. And as Lewis heads into the last year of his deal he said he "imagines" he’ll have talks with Bengals president Mike Brown about his own status beyond 2010.