Does the overtime system need changed?

[zartan]

Do you like or dislike the current overtime system in college football?

I can't deny that it has produced some exciting games, but I do think it gets a bit ridiculous once it gets past about 3 overtimes.

I actually don't think that there is anything wrong with a tie, but I don't expect many to share that view these days...

[timNem]

I'm ok with it since I don't like playing for ties and I do think its better than the Sudden Death that the NFL has.

[bamagt]

I kinda wish you didn't have to go for two after the 3rd but I like it more than the NFL. I remember watching an Ark vs. UK game a couple of years ago go into 7 or 8 OT's, it was awesome!

[Williams-Brice]

I prefer the NFL version.

[shanksta13]

I think it's fine. It's certainly a helluva lot better than the NFL's system.

[Williams-Brice]

I'm curious to know why so many people (not just here, of course) don't like the NFL system.

[shanksta13]

I'm curious to know why so many people (not just here, of course) don't like the NFL system.

Personally, I'm totally against the fact that a flip of a coin gives one team a huge advantage over the other.

[crawfish]

I hate ending a game with a tie; and I also hate the NFL overtime because if you don't win the coin toss you might not even get a chance offensively. I would love to see the game go into a "10 or 15 minute" extra quarter maybe. I can live with the present system, but I do agree that having to go for 2 points after 3 OT stinks (maybe because of losing twice in 3 overtimes this year...both because of missing the stupid 2 point.

[Williams-Brice]

Personally, I'm totally against the fact that a flip of a coin gives one team a huge advantage over the other.

If that's the case, then the team that loses the coin toss is actually the one who gets the advantage. Just a "did you know": Going into the 2007 season 52% of all overtime games have been won by the team who did not win the coin toss in overtime. It's not as big of an advantage as everyone makes it out to be.

[crawfish]

If that's the case, then the team that loses the coin toss is actually the one who gets the advantage. Just a "did you know": Going into the 2007 season 52% of all overtime games have been won by the team who did not win the coin toss in overtime. It's not as big of an advantage as everyone makes it out to be.

Interesting stat there WB! This changes everything......but for some reason I still don't like it. But come to think about it, I really don't hear the pro coaches and owners complaining about it though! I guess, I would just like to see each team be able to get the ball with an equal chance to score.

[Williams-Brice]

Interesting stat there WB! This changes everything......but for some reason I still don't like it. But come to think about it, I really don't hear the pro coaches and owners complaining about it though! I guess, I would just like to see each team be able to get the ball with an equal chance to score.

If I could change one thing about the NFL system, I would move the kickoffs from the 30 to the 35 in overtime only. 52% of overtime games have been won by the team who did not receive the ball first in overtime. However, ever since the NFL moved the kickoff from the 35 to the 30 in 1994, it has been very, very slightly tilted in favor of the team who did receive the ball first. The kickoff spot was moved back in 1994 in order to reduce touchbacks and make kickoff returns more exciting. Having briefly studied the stats regarding NFL overtime games, I hold the opinion that if the NFL were to move the kickoff to the 35 for the overtime period, then you would see a ratio very close to 1:1 for victories by the receiving team and the team that kicks. Thus, it's not that structure of the system that needs to be revamped; it's a simple 5 yard adjustment at the beginning of the period that will do the trick.

[Tennessee Ted]

I think the college OT system needs to be tweaked. When a game goes into 7 OT it seems that the OT is just as long as the game. I think that is dangerous. Once players are tired there is more of a chance of getting hurt. I think they should be required to go for two right away.

[reese]

i like it and hope they never change it

[vandyfan84]

I love it b/c of the excitement it produces...don't change a thing

[vandyfan84]

If that's the case, then the team that loses the coin toss is actually the one who gets the advantage. Just a "did you know": Going into the 2007 season 52% of all overtime games have been won by the team who did not win the coin toss in overtime. It's not as big of an advantage as everyone makes it out to be.


it doesn't matter, the winner is pretty much chosen by the flip of a coin. college>NFL

[Fadeproof]

I love it and think that is one aspect of the game that shouldn't be changed. My only fear is that some tv execs are going to start bitching about game times again and they are going to screw us out of a decent overtime.

[jthomas666]

I'd move the ball back to the 40. It seems silly to give a team the ball just inside FG distance. Apart from that, though, I'm good.

[ColonelKurtz]

The existing OT format is as equitable as you can make it. Never like the NFL's no solution as it rewards the coin flip winner.

The only change would be the requirement to go for 2 if it is still tied after each team's first possession. That would speed things up and end these 7 OT games.

[GvilleDave]

I like the college OT system as it is right now. Don't change a thing.

This is just one of the many reasons college ball is better than NFL. IMO

[volimhtown]

I personally think that the current overtime setup is PERFECT and FAR SUPERIOR to the NFL's. I wouldn't change a thing. Sure, you run into the possibility and that occasional 6 or 7 OT game, but that is certainly the exception as opposed to the rule. And let's not kid ourselves, it's not like the LSU-Arky or TN-KY game was some how "bad" for NCAA Football. Hell, if anything, it's one HUGE edge that the college game has over the Professional game. Quick...name the most memorable NFL OT game that was remembered for the shear drama on the field. Uhhhmmmm....errrrrrr.....kind of hard. Nothing compares to the likes of the OU-Boise St, LSU-Arky, TN-Bama from a few years ago....the list goes on and on. Check mate, NFL.

Finally, Brice, list your source on your stats. Seems that we hear every year how the winner of the coin flip wins something like 65-75% of those games. I guess it's really pointless, though....even if your stats are substantiated, the fact remains that the winner of the flip still has a huge advantage over the other team. It's just rediculous that 60 minutes of evenly played football by two teams should have so much resting on the chance of a coin flip. I have NEVER heard anyone in the NFL say that they like their overtime setup. Frankly, it's a huge bruise on an otherwise perfect product.

[FightinTiger71]

I'd move the ball back to the 40. It seems silly to give a team the ball just inside FG distance. Apart from that, though, I'm good.

I totally agree with jthomas. I think if they moved the ball further out that there would be nothing wrong with the over time system. I hate the NFL's system, you could lose a game in overtime without your offense or either your defense ever stepping on to the field. If the modified college system wouldn't work, just let them just keep playing quarters until a team has a higher amount of points at the end of the overtime quarter.

[the Prodigy]

I prefer the college system. The winner of the coin flip Historically, wins the game 65% pct. of the time in the NFL.

[Williams-Brice]

Finally, Brice, list your source on your stats. Seems that we hear every year how the winner of the coin flip wins something like 65-75% of those games. I guess it's really pointless, though....even if your stats are substantiated, the fact remains that the winner of the flip still has a huge advantage over the other team. It's just rediculous that 60 minutes of evenly played football by two teams should have so much resting on the chance of a coin flip. I have NEVER heard anyone in the NFL say that they like their overtime setup. Frankly, it's a huge bruise on an otherwise perfect product.

I'm going to have to look long and hard for my source because I'm going on what I read over a year ago. The source who wrote the article I'm referencing wrote it just after the 2006 season, so I don't remember it off the top of my head. I'll search for it and post it when I find it. However, also challenge Prodigy to source his info because one of us is clearly wrong.

[GAMECOCK_FAN]

I'd always heard that it was well over half the time that the team that won the coin toss won the OT in the NFL, which makes sense to me. I did a little "googling" to see what I could find and found the link below. The article was written in 2007. I'm not validating the authority of the article, but the article does reference that the league's competition committee indicates that the percentage is over 60%, which is consistent with what I've always heard.
"The problem is that winning the coin toss has become too much of an advantage in the sudden-death session. According to the league's competition committee, the team that won the coin toss has won more than 60 percent of overtime games in recent seasons."

Overtime Issue Unresolved - Mark Maske's NFL Insider (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/nflinsider/2007/03/overtime_issue_unresolved.html)

[SeanVol]

I kinda wish you didn't have to go for two after the 3rd but I like it more than the NFL. I remember watching an Ark vs. UK game a couple of years ago go into 7 or 8 OT's, it was awesome!

After the third overtime teams should have to start from their own 40 yardline, instead of going for two and start from 25 yardline, IMO.

[volimhtown]

After the third overtime teams should have to start from their own 40 yardline, instead of going for two and start from 25 yardline, IMO.

But what does that accomplish?? I mean, if you have a game between two great defenses, you could go several overtimes with NO scoring. Especially considering how tired the offenses are going to be getting. That would SUCK!!

Again, the system as it currently is structured is not broken. There's no need to change anything!!

[volimhtown]

I'd always heard that it was well over half the time that the team that won the coin toss won the OT in the NFL, which makes sense to me. I did a little "googling" to see what I could find and found the link below. The article was written in 2007. I'm not validating the authority of the article, but the article does reference that the league's competition committee indicates that the percentage is over 60%, which is consistent with what I've always heard.
"The problem is that winning the coin toss has become too much of an advantage in the sudden-death session. According to the league's competition committee, the team that won the coin toss has won more than 60 percent of overtime games in recent seasons."

Overtime Issue Unresolved - Mark Maske's NFL Insider (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/nflinsider/2007/03/overtime_issue_unresolved.html)

This issue seemingly comes up every off-season with the NFL Rules Committee and those are the numbers I recall hearing. I know I have heard reports in the past that they are reluctant to change the format because they do not want to be viewed as "copying" the college game. IOW, their egos are getting in the way of what would ultimately be best for the game. Idiots!!:brick:

[Williams-Brice]

I'd always heard that it was well over half the time that the team that won the coin toss won the OT in the NFL, which makes sense to me. I did a little "googling" to see what I could find and found the link below. The article was written in 2007. I'm not validating the authority of the article, but the article does reference that the league's competition committee indicates that the percentage is over 60%, which is consistent with what I've always heard.
"The problem is that winning the coin toss has become too much of an advantage in the sudden-death session. According to the league's competition committee, the team that won the coin toss has won more than 60 percent of overtime games in recent seasons."

Overtime Issue Unresolved - Mark Maske's NFL Insider (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/nflinsider/2007/03/overtime_issue_unresolved.html)

That's interesting. That's similar to what I was saying in one of my previous posts. It has been increasing over the past few years, and you can attribute that to the rule change of 1994, which moved the kickoff back 5 yards, giving the receiving team better field position. I guess the 52% I heard was from a specific time point. I got my info from a statistical association website. I'm having a tough time finding it. Still working on it!

[azamugg]

OT should be the starting QB's singing the Nat'l Anthem, then the crowd determines winner by applause...........or rock/paper/scissors two out of three

[timNem]

OT should be the starting QB's singing the Nat'l Anthem, then the crowd determines winner by applause...........or rock/paper/scissors two out of three
:laugh: Make it a series of events that includes those plus the kickers have to fight in a bare knuckle brawl.

[azamugg]

yea, think Vegas Vacation..............pick a number 1 thru 10

I love the kickers brawling though, thats good..........or the cheerleaders have to suit up and play at the half

[zartan]

have a battle of the bands.

[SeanVol]

But what does that accomplish?? I mean, if you have a game between two great defenses, you could go several overtimes with NO scoring. Especially considering how tired the offenses are going to be getting. That would SUCK!!

Again, the system as it currently is structured is not broken. There's no need to change anything!!

True, that would lengthing the games.

[FanninFan]

I think the current system is fine. Look at the quality, exciting games it has produced. That should be evidence enough.

[The Ramp]

i hate it. "hate" is not strong enough word...Abhor...Detest...Loathe? Nope...still not strong enough

[GetEmGamecocks]

I've always felt that the teams should start on the 50 instead of the 35.