A Coin Toss = "Real Football?"

By changing the overtime rules, how the game is played after four quarters would undeniably change. Right now, if you win the coin toss, you just have to push far enough into field goal range to be able to make those three points to win the game. With the increasing distances field goal kickers are making these days, this is becoming less and less of a challenge. By changing the rules to any of the above mentioned alternatives, this strategy would no longer work. Coaches would have to think beyond that long field goal; this would make the game far more interesting and force coaches to make some tough decisions and use more strategy in order to pull off a win (like in regulation.)

This in turn keeps overtime procedure closer to the true nature of how the sport is played. A coin toss is in no way “real football.” Here’s a funny, sarcastic quote I found from NPR that really sums up how related football and a coin toss are: “In the NCFL, the National Coin Flip League, when a regulation coin-flipping contest…goes into overtime … the contestants settle the tie by engaging in a game of tackle football. Who knew?”

I want to encourage anyone who also feels the current system needs to be replaced to make their voice heard. Explain the current system to friends, neighbors, sports fans, anyone you feel should know about how crazy the NFL overtime system is. A lot of people are unaware of the rules! Join in appealing to Roger Goodell to use his influence to seriously pursue alternatives, before a Super Bowl is won on a first possession field goal!

SOURCES:

NPR Article

The Opposing Viewpoint....and Why I Believe They're Wrong

There are of course people who think the current overtime system ought to stay in place, and get angry by those “whining” for a new system. Back in 2003, Rich McKay was quoted as saying, “Ours is real football…we don’t change the rules for overtime.” There are two main arguments for keeping the current system, both of which I feel are flawed arguments.

The first argument is that the NCAA rules are no better, or don’t reflect “real” football, so the NFL overtime system should stay how it is. To recap the NCAA system, each team forgoes kickoffs and gets the ball on the opponents 25-yard line, making them already be in field goal range. Athan Atsales of the LA Times blog, arguing against changing the overtime rules, explains that in this system “the strategy of field position, one of the major cogs of the competition, is eliminated. The effectiveness of a defense that doesn’t allow long drives is eliminated. The fear of an offense making a mistake on its end of the field is eliminated.” I agree with this sentiment, in that the NCAA rules are not by any means perfect and may not be the right fit for the NFL. However, changing the NFL rules doesn’t mean you have to change them to the NCAA rules. There are a lot of good ideas for different systems, such as the ones I highlighted in my last post.

Second, many argue that if an opponent takes possession of the ball, a worthy team will be able to stop them and get the ball back to win the game. In my opinion, this logic is flawed because in all other sports, which are also games of offense and defense, both sides get an opportunity to play offense and defense. A team is as good as its offense AND its defense, and ought to be judged in its entirety.

Not being able to come to a consensus isn’t a good reason to keep the status quo either, especially when so many acknowledge faults in the current system. Saying “we don’t change our overtime rules” as if it is an unwavering truth is not right; sometimes, systems have to adapt to changing circumstances. The overtime rules have already changed once for the Jerome Bettis rule, and I have hope they will change again in light of the growing discontent with the current system.

SOURCES:

LA Times Fabulous Forum
Tribune Review News

Let's Talk Alternatives!

As the title says, it's time to talk about some overtime systems which could be considered to replace the current one. There are a multitude of ideas out there, all of which have their advocates as well as their critics. I will list some of the most popular and a few rather unique ideas--if you feel you have devised the perfect solution to the NFL overtime debacle, feel free to commend and add your own!

Some alternate overtime systems:

• Play a full 15 minute overtime quarter OR have equal possessions until one team scores and the other does not.
  Pros: it continues the game and allows the team with the highest stamina to win. Cons: potential for injuries, continued deadlock

• Give each team one possession before turning to sudden death. Pros: gives at least one equal possession opportunity Cons: turns to sudden death after one possession; therefore, team with possession first again has advantage

• Use the NCAA system with equal possessions, but in which each team receives the ball on the opponent's 25-yard line without having kickoffs. Pros: Equal possessions make it fairer and keeps it more like a normal game. No coin toss. Cons: Forgoing kickoffs and placing the ball on the opponent's 25-yard line means that "without moving an inch, a team is already in field goal range." (Time Magazine article)

• First team to score 6 points wins. Therefore, a field goal cannot win the game. Pros: The drastic improvements in where drives start and kickers' field goal conversion rates have allowed many games to be won on the first possession by a field goal. When the NFL implemented the overtime rules in 1974, kickers converted 13% of field goal attempts 50-yards or longer, vs. 52% last season. This rule eliminates the rising trend of games won by a field goal on the first possession of overtime. Cons: Game may still be determined by who wins the coin toss if a team scores a touchdown on their first possession.

• Let one team decide where the overtime kickoff will take place, and then let the other choose whether to kick or receive. Pros: No random coin toss. Cons: Still relies on a degree of chance. First team to have the football may win on their first possession.
  

• A rather bizarre option created by Packers' fan Chris Quanbeck: Auction off possession of the football based on field possession. The team that is willing to start closest to its own goal line receives possession. Use silent auction method in which each coach writes their choice, then hand it to the referee in a sealed envelope. Pros: No random coin toss. Drama and risk involved, but rewards risk with possession. Cons: Will likely never be considered because of the pressure it puts on the coaches. First possession may still win the game.

There are many other options floating around the internet and being discussed by football enthusiasts across the country. In my opinion, several of these systems are better than the current one in which a random coin toss, coupled with the rising conversions of field goals, make the overtime system increasingly outdated and ridiculous. My hope is that Mr. Goodell and the competition committee seriously consider such alternatives and commit to bringing some of them before the franchise owners for a vote within the next two years.

SOURCES:
The Fifth Down: NY Times NFL Blog
Tribune Review News
Fanhouse NFL Blog
Time Magazine
Sports Illustrated

Not a New Topic--The NFL has Been Discussing Changes for Years

As some of the comments posted before demonstrate, there is widespread acknowledgment within the NFL of the shortcomings of the current overtime system. Back in 2003, NFL franchise owners discussed the overtime rules and a possible two-possession format, but came away without a consensus on that format.

Five years later, the issue is still front and center. In January of this year, Roger Goodell delivered his annual state of the league address, in which he addressed the issue of the overtime rules and said the NFL would look into all aspects of the current rules and see if they needed to be changed. As you can see, Mr. Goodell acknowledges the statistics and growing trend of games being won on the first possession. He also shares quite a few viable alternatives he says the committee would look into.



As promised, the competition committee discussed revisions in February. However, the committee decided not to recommend changes, and thus the issue never made it to the league meetings in March. Rich McKay told the press that there was no consensus on what could replace the current system and, furthermore, there was “no strong dissatisfaction with it.” This is the same Rich McKay who would like to see the statistics change without changing the system which creates them.

Mr. Goodell, you yourself recognize and acknowledge the growing problems with the current NFL overtime system. Many others in the league agree this needs to be addressed and replaced by a more appropriate system. By taking a stand and using your influence to push for a serious change, the NFL overtime rules can be changed before more people become disillusioned with the system, and more games are won on a coin toss.

SOURCES:

Youtube Video: NFL Commish to Review Overtime Rule
The Fifth Down: NY Times NFL Blog

Wouldn't Be the First Change to NFL Overtime Procedure

I feel I need to clarify that despite that the NFL Overtime Rules have been in place for decades, there has been a change implemented before. Although it was a minor change, it demonstrates that when the NFL recognizes there is a problem, they have been willing once before to implement a fairer procedure.

During a 1998 Thanksgiving Day game between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Detroit Lions, Jerome Bettis of the Steelers called “tails” while the coin was in the air. However, referee Phil Luckett said Bettis had called “heads” and awarded possession of the ball to the Lions, who went on to score a field goal on their first possession and win the game without the Steelers ever getting the ball back. The NFL has the video of this on their site; it will not allow me to embed it in this post, but I highly recommend watching it as it is so obvious Bettis calls “tails.” Even the commentators know so.

The outrage sparked the NFL to review the incident, and subsequently change their coin toss rules so that the call of “heads” or “tails” would be called before the coin was flipped, and two referees would be present during the toss. The NFL recognized that there was a problem with the current rules and the public outcry at the unfairness, and determined a new method to make it right. Although changing the system for overtime is a far more sweeping change than the so-called “Jerome Bettis rule,” I believe the NFL should once again recognize the need for change in their overtime system and address the issue at hand.

SOURCES:

NFL Videos: Bettis Calls Tails

Crave Online Interview with Bettis

Turning a Blind Eye

One of the most absurd parts of the NFL overtime rules issue is that people in positions of power within the organization often recognize and remark upon the problems with the rules. Despite there being ardent traditionalists who want the rules to stay “as is,” many coaches, players, and other NFL officials have publicly acknowledged the problems with the current rules. Others express support for the current rules, but seem to also contradict themselves when talking specifics.

My favorite example of this comes from Rich McKay, president of the Atlanta Falcons and co-chairman of the Competition Committee: “Sudden death is a good procedure. It's fun and everyone knows the rules," McKay said. "I would like to see the stats change because I don't like the fact that the team winning the coin flip now wins 60% of the time, and the team winning the coin flip, 40-plus% of the time, wins it on the first possession." So Mr. McKay acknowledges the inequity the stats back up, yet supports the system that creates such stats and inequity? This seems to be the mindset many officials publicly display. You can’t have your cake and eat it too; the system must change for the stats to change.

Jeff Fisher, coach of the Tennessee Titans, also acknowledges the unfairness of the coin flip, as well as the complacency to stay with the status quo. “"I think it's a system we're all used to and you're always concerned when a random coin toss determines the outcome of a game," he said. In my opinion, this sums it up. The current system has been in place for decades, and those close to it get familiar with it. However, each year a situation arises which brings the overtime system into the spotlight, and provokes discussion on whether the rules ought to change. I guarantee that if a Super Bowl ever is determined in overtime, especially on the first possession, suddenly the status quo will become a lot more challenged.

Why not proactively look into alternative methods which may reflect the nature of the game better and not allow the random flip of a coin to influence the outcome? Coaches, players, officials, and Mr. Goodell, please seriously start pursuing a path towards a new overtime system today.

SOURCES:
USA Today article

Should a Super Bowl be Determined by a Coin Toss?

With all of the games that end tied in regulation during the regular season and the playoffs, there has never been a Super Bowl that has gone into overtime. There have even been three Super Bowl games tied in the final minute, but then one team went ahead to pull off a last minute victory during regulation. Many games have been extremely close to going into overtime; in both 2004 and 2002, New England Patriot kicker Adam Vinatieri kicked game-winning field goals as time expired to win the games. In 2000, Tennessee stopped one yard short of scoring a tying touchdown as time expired.
Here’s a video of that last play which is one of the closest times a Super Bowl almost went into overtime:



As you can see, many recent games have been within a score range that could have sent the game into overtime. In fact, two of the last five Super Bowls have ended with the winning team only three points ahead of their opponent, meaning the game could have been tied up by a field goal.

My point is this: can you imagine the outrage if a Super Bowl ever did go into overtime and was determined on the coin flip and subsequent first possession? First of all, the Super Bowl garners one of, if not the, highest television ratings of any program all year. Many of these viewers are people who do not watch football regularly, but watch the national event that is the Super Bowl. Thus, it is fair to say that many of these viewers are not familiar with the NFL overtime rules, and seeing it happen in a Super Bowl would be their first exposure to the system. Even many football fans are not as knowledgeable of NFL overtime rules as one might think; in discussing this subject with some friends, two die-hard football fans actually argued with me that the NFL does give equal possessions, confusing it with NCAA college football rules.

The Super Bowl is one of the most revered traditions of American sports, and has a tradition of hard-fought battles between worthy opponents. If a Super Bowl was determined “game over” by the flip of a coin, I truly believe there would be an uproar, and this issue would get much more attention. Maybe this needs to happen to get the attention to finally address the issue; however, I’d like to see Roger Goodell, the competition committee, and the franchise owners proactively modify the system so no Super Bowl ever goes down in history as being influenced by a random coin toss. That would be a dark spot on Super Bowl history.


SOURCES:

NFL Super Bowl History
Youtube Video-One Yard Short

Yet Another First Possession Win This Weekend…Is Game Over at the Flip of a Coin?

This Sunday, October 11, yet another game was won on the first possession during overtime. The Denver Broncos won the coin toss and drove 53 yards to set up the winning 41-yard field goal. I’m not in any way saying the Broncos didn’t deserve to win the game; they came from behind in the 4th quarter to tie the game and held off the Patriots from scoring to go into overtime. In the interest of full disclosure, I was rooting for the Broncos to win this game. However, I adamantly believe that the winner of a game should not ever be determined by the random flip of a coin, especially now that field goals are so commonly the deciding three points to secure victory. The game should not come down to which kickers can perform. The Broncos did a great job on Sunday night, but the fact that they won the game on the first overtime possession on a field goal without the Patriot offense taking the field again cheapens the game for me.

The amount of games won on the first possession, 44% since 2006 (see previous post), illustrates the absurdity of this rule. In a playoff game earlier this year between the Chargers and the Colts, a Chargers player, Jamal Williams, declared “game over” as soon as his team won the coin toss in overtime. Listen closely at the end of this video clip, and you can hear Williams.



A football game, especially a playoff game, should not be able to be declared over by a coin toss. After four hard-fought quarters, how does this system do any kind of justice to the game? Even some players recognize the reality that a coin toss can indeed mean “game over.” I encourage football fans, members within the football community, and any person who sees a problem with this to let their voices be heard and join me in encouraging Roger Goodell to put serious pressure on the competition committee to bring one or several viable alternatives before the franchise owners within the next two years.

SOURCES:
Fox31 Article
Youtube Video-NFL Week 5 Highlights
Fanhouse NFL Blog
Youtube Video-OT Coin Toss Chargers-Indy Playoff Game

NFL Overtime in Comparison to Other Sports

I have long been baffled by the NFL’s overtime rules. Born into an athletic family, I have grown up watching football and many other competitive sports; I myself played several sports competitively, including soccer and softball. It has always baffled me as to why in the NFL, who gets first (and often only) possession in overtime is determined by the flip of a coin. In all other sports I can think of, overtime presents an opportunity for both teams to have a turn on offense and defense.

In baseball, you don’t stop mid-inning if the first team at bat scores. In doing that, a team to score in the top of the inning wouldn’t have to protect their lead with three outs, and the losing team wouldn’t get an equal chance to score. Even discussing baseball as sudden death seems ridiculous, but the NFL really works like this! Even in soccer where the game truly becomes sudden death as the first team to win scores, the nature of the game is reflected in this type of overtime as it allows both teams the opportunity to play both offense and defense in almost seamless transitions. Even if soccer comes down to penalty kicks, each team gets equal chances so that the best of five wins. Likewise, basketball is played true to the game, with five minute periods being played just as the rest of the game was until one team ends victorious.

I understand each of these sports is vastly different and requires different skill sets and physicality. Football is a very physical game, and one of the main reasons the NFL cites as to why it employees the sudden death overtime is the physical nature of the sport and the chances of already exhausted players getting hurt. But as Sean Gregory of Time Magazine so profoundly states, “by not giving both teams an equal shot at winning, the league cheapens all the physical sacrifices its players make on the gridiron.”

My argument is that overtime ought to reflect the nature of the game and authentically prove the better team. It should not be determined by chance. This frustrates fans and sports enthusiasts; in a recent Sports Illustrated poll, the NFL ranked last in overtime systems. It is time for Roger Goodell and the NFL to take note and seriously discuss alternative systems for how overtime will be played.

SOURCES:
Time Magazine
Sports Illustrated

A Little Background into the National Football League’s Overtime Rules…and Why I Think They Need to Change

Football is arguably one of, if not the, most popular sport in America. The Super Bowl is the biggest annual sporting event in the U.S. and gets the highest television ratings of the year, as well as the most expensive commercial spots. Millions and millions of fans attend football games on the high school, college, and professional level. Football is a cherished American tradition, and has become a culture within many communities. Players are taught from an early age to fight until the bitter end, and this rings true in high school and college football, where games are played with equal possession chances even into overtime, so that the best team wins.

However, the National Football League’s current overtime rules, adopted in 1974, allow the game to often times come down to coin flip. At the end of regulation play, “the Referee will immediately toss coin at center of field... The captain of the visiting team will call the toss prior to the coin being flipped.” (NFL Rule Book) The first team to score wins. Meaning, the team that wins the toss and elects to receive the ball may score on their first drive and therefore win the game without allowing the other team’s offense to ever take the field again.
This is not how high school or college leagues do overtime. In these leagues, both teams are given an opportunity for their offense to score; this creates a situation more like how the rest of the game has been played, and allows each team an equal chance to win.

As an avid sports fan and athlete myself, I believe the current overtime rules for the NFL are bizarre because they do not reflect the true spirit of the game. After nearly an hour of hard-spent playing time, how is it fair to allow the random flip of a coin to often times determine the end result? According to Elias Sports Bureau, in 44% of games since 2006 the winner of the coin toss has won the game without the other team ever getting the ball. Overall, the winner of the coin toss has eventually won 64% of games since the rule was implemented.



I am calling on my change agent, Roger Goodell, Commissioner of the NFL, to seriously pursue a path to modify the overtime rules to make them more fair and representative of the game itself. I call on Mr. Goodell to use his influence to encourage the competition committee to bring a viable alternative before the NFL’s franchise owners for a vote within the next two years. I also call on the franchise owners to open their eyes to the absurdity of the current system and use their power to do something about it--vote for change.

SOURCES:
NFL Rule Book
Time Magazine