OT: UFR

Since it isn't worthy of its own thread I might as well threadjack and lay out how I would do overtime in the NFL (and college if people liked it over the current format). Basically it is designed to give both teams a chance, or at least increased chance to touch the ball and factor in player safety. I call it the +1 model. Basically it boils down to team A gets the ball first and team B cannot equal team A's scoring, only exceed it. 

Team A scores a TD + 2 point conversion = Team A wins

Team A kicks PAT = Team B must score and go for 2

Team A goes for 2 and fails = team B must score TD and kick PAT

Team A kicks FG = team B must score TD; FG can not be kicked

Team A does not score = Team B may kick FG

Team A scores TD/fails 2pt AND Team B scores TD/fails PAT = game continues in sudden death

I think this is a fair way to break a tie and involves strategy for the team getting the ball and for whomever wins the coin toss. 

SpaceCoyote, is that you? Where has my favorite poster gone.....?

Need to incorporate punting into OT so Iowa has a chance.

Your title is confusing. Is the OT for Over Time or for Off Topic? What does this have to do with the UFR's? Do you mean something other than Upon Further Reviews?

As far as the content of your post, how is this any different than current OT rules other than the ball is moved progressively further from the end zone? This is basically what we had a few years ago before they switched to 2pt conversions after OT 2 or 3.

I had a completely opposite idea what this thread was about from the title.  

--for additional OT sessions the ball is placed at the 40 yard line instead of the 20 to start play.   Eventually someone has to win. 

I'm not sure how this is an improvement over the current setup?  It increases the odds that neither team scores, lengthening the game.

I think the current rules are OK.  Making teams go for two in the second OT usually wraps things up at that point.  

You could eliminate the coin flip entirely using a bidding system.  The coaches of both teams bid on where they'd like to get the ball on their OT possession.  The losing bidder always gets the ball on the opponent's 25, just like today.  The winning bidder (furthest from the end zone) gets to decide who gets the ball first, but they have to start at the yard line they bid on.  If the two coaches bid the same yard line, the home team wins the bid.

So, for example, if Frames is determined to get the ball last, he can bid his own 1 yard line, but then he has to go 99 yards for a TD if the opponent scores.

Obligatory:

Mods, can we boot this guy and request that Space Coyote rejoin the board?

I thought this referred to off-topic unfunded requirements. I am living in too many worlds right now.

Put it all on the kicker.  Make them trade field goals starting at the 20 and moving back 5 yards if each make and do over if both miss from that distance until there is a winner.

Also remove eligibility requirements for Jake Moody and sign him to a long term Michigan deal.

I actually like the idea of making the threshold to score more difficult. If there's a way to also make it a 10 or 15 minute quarter, it will also help the defenses more than the untimed down situation we have now.

you should start a daily post here.

the thread title should always combine two acronyms

e.g.

WTF: LOL

C'mon, the overtime topic is like ten spots down. Your title is awful. You could have added to that topic with "start at the 20 (or the 40)".

But hey, you got your own thread, right?

I like the alternating possessions from the 25 and think OT is one thing college football really gets right. However I do wish they'd get rid of the arbitrary rules about going for two that kick-in after multiple OT periods. If they want to avoid marathon OT games then they should just declare the game a tie after a certain number of rounds. 

My personal idea is to have no coin toss at all.  Both teams roll out their offense and defense, on opposite sides of the field, and play with two balls.  Play does not continue beyond the 50-yard line.  Score as many times as you can in five minutes.  You can even tempo it and try to catch your opponent peeking at the scoreboard.

Yeah the officials will be stretched thin but it's not like they could do any worse and they're not paid professionals anyway.

CFB OT is fine. 

The NFL OT rules are the ones really broken and need revised. 

I'm going to use this thread to throw out my proposed rule change to make kickoffs interesting again.  Right now in both college and the NFL they might as well just put the ball on the 25 and avoid the process completely.  So let's try to fix that.....

1.  If you call a fair catch and actually catch it - then still the 25

2.  If you let the ball land in the endzone without attempting to catch it - then the kicker is rewarded by putting you at the 20.  I hate when the kick returner just stands there and watches it land a couple yards away.  If you don't actually catch it, no bonus 5 yards.  

3.  If the ball lands beyond the endzone on the fly, meaning that the receiving team couldn't catch it in the field of play, then they get it at the 15.  Again - reward the kicking team and make it interesting!

4.  if the kicker splits the uprights on the kick, ball is placed at the 10.  

You can always choose to return it from anywhere, but this way instead of just watching another kickoff land harmlessly in the endzone while everyone stands around watching you are actually creating some strategy for the kicking team, challenging the return team to earn their 25-yard placement, and rewarding good kickers.....without actually subjecting players to harm.  

(I do like awarding 1 point for splitting the upright, but I think that's too 'weird' compared to historical scoring rules and instead prefer earning your starting field position.)

How about: the team with the ball maintains possession where they have it with the current down and distance. No punting, no FGs, no commercial breaks. First to score a TD wins.

I like the OT rules college football uses. Watching the Arizona vs. USC game was fun! 

The one change I would make is to have the ball start at the 40 or 45. A team should have to work a little bit to at least attempt a field goal. 

Play another quarter with all the same rules.

If it's still tied - the game is a tie. The end.

If it's the playoffs - keep playing full quarters with the same rules until it isn't.

No sudden death ever, and ties are OK.

Better idea: the overtime period is one round of Whack Bat…

The defense at the end of regulation, along with their head coach, goes on offense first. The offense, along with their head coach goes on defense, consisting of three grabbers, three taggers, five twig-runners, one center tagger, against the player at whack-bat.

The center tagger lights a pinecone on fire and throws it to the player at whack-bat. The player hits the pinecone and runs to knock a cedar stick off the cross rods. Then the twig-runners dash back and forth until the pine cone burns out and the umpire calls "Hotbox." Finally, the score down are added up, then divided by nine.

 First to 21 wins.

During this time the captain(s) of the team that lost the pre-game flip get to decide to defer or get the ball first.  

I like this better than the current rule (another coin toss). I'd prefer the choice go to the team that did NOT score last. The effect of this would be slight, but would give the team scoring last in regulation a nudge in the direction of attempting to win in regulation: going for a TD over a FG to tie, or going for two instead of kicking to tie.

[FWIW (except for neutral site games) in place of the coin flip at the beginning (or in overtime), I think the visiting team should be given the choice of receiving or deferring]