Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Jul 9, 2009 13:15:37 GMT -5
The problem with soccer-style overtimes is that you need to accept that either ties or 90-minute games are a very real possibility, and I don't see the NFL doing either of those.
I'm pretty bored at work so I figured I'd look into the last 3 seasons of overtime games. In 44 games, the team that received the ball scored on the game's first possession 19 times (43.2%) and they won 26 times (59.1%).
These numbers are a smaller sample size than the numbers SF used which date back to when the NFL instituted over in 1974, but (a) moving the kick-off 5 yards back in 1994 is important and (b) field goal kicking is light years ahead of where it was 35 years ago. About halfway down this page (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=1716) there is a chart showing field goal percentages by distance. Kicking is significantly better than it was 20 years ago and needing one or two less first downs to kick a field goal is an enormous difference.
One of the more interesting proposals I've read (it's a little strange, but not as strange as the college overtime IMO) is a double blind auction, where both teams tell the ref where they'd be willing to take the ball, and whoever is willing to take it closer to their own goal line gets the ball on that yard line. It doesn't completely warp statistics like college overtime (this is another reason the NFL would never do something like that), and while it's a little stranger than the coin flip, it's fair.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,781
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 10, 2009 9:56:24 GMT -5
In football, if you are worried about the effect of the flip, then either play a full quarter, or ten minutes, or even give a team one possession to match.
But this 25-yard field thing is crap.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 11, 2009 13:10:02 GMT -5
SF, I will go back and look to make sure I didn't miss anything, but I haven't heard anyone advocating the college overtime version into the NFL. The closest I remember was when I said either version is better than a tie. I stand by that, but that's a far cry from advocating the "Arena Ball" version into the Bigs.
Free, that is an interesting idea and I guess it is ultimately "Fair." And if that's the goal, then you can't argue with the premise. The only issue from a legistic standpoint would be if both teams picked the same yard line. Presumably there would be another "blind auction." Theoretically it could happen again and again until both teams were willing to start on their 1 yard line. And if both teams chose the exact same strategy, then you haven't really solved anything. In practice however, I don't think that would happen. Most likely that format would solve the equity/inequity issue, although it creates an entirely different problem, in that it effectively creates an entirely new game. Stil, it's entriguing at the least.
I think maybe there could be a hybrid of the two, where each team has one possesion each, after which, it would be sudden death. In other words, if team "A" wins the toss and takes the ball, they could drive down and kick a field goal, but they would have to kick off to team "B." If they held them, then they win. If team "B" kicks a field goal, then sudden death begins. In this case, I would think that incorporating the flipped order would be an option, although the fairest would probably be another coin toss. There's no perfect solution, but this is at least good conversation during the slow summer months.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 11, 2009 13:14:53 GMT -5
Also, I presume that freemoney's statistics are accurate. If so, then 44 overtime games in 3 seasons works out to roughly 15, or almost one per "week." (active week)
I know that a 3 year sample isn't necessarily indicative of the historic or future sample, but using that as the yardstick, then it would certainly look like winning the coin toss is, in fact all that significant. I guess my question is "should it be?" Yes, it's "fair" in that it's a 50-50 proposition. But is it really "fair" to some 100 guys who bust their tails 200 days a year, only to lose because it came up heads? In that sense, I think giving each team at least one possession is a bit more "fair."
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Jul 12, 2009 15:00:10 GMT -5
Nobody loses because "it comes up heads." They lose because they can't play defense.
I'm fairly certain you give the Steelers the proposition of starting on D, they'll take it. I'm fine with sudden death or a full period in the NFL. It's alright for college too but the level of play is so much lower that the offense often has such a significant advantage in the modern game, the 25-yard nonsense is just as good as anything else. I'd just go no kicked extra points right of the bat.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Jul 13, 2009 13:01:37 GMT -5
Gigafan, fair enough to a degree. But think for a minute about a game pitting two high powered offensive teams against each other. Say it was Texas Tech and Oklahoma St. for example. That game is likely to come down to who has the ball last. Now suppose it does end in a tie at the end of regulation. Whoever wins the toss will almost certainly take the ball. You don't think it's fair for both teams, and in this case, the team that lost the toss specifically, to at least have one shot at the ball?
|
|