College Football Overtime Rules

[PalmBayBama]

Regarding padding the stats... that's simple to "solve" - just don't count OT stats at all, or just count the stats for last possession for each team.

College football stats are meaningless anyway. Some teams are playing a 1-AA team while other teams are playing the #1 team in the nation. Some teams play 14 games, while others only play 11. Bowl games stats use to not count, now they do. Since we've now established that colleged football stats are meaningless, the effect of overtime on said stats should not be a consideration. The sole considerations should be reaching a fair and exciting conclusion to the game. I happen to think that the current rules are fairly good in this regard, but I would support moving the starting field position back to the 35.

 

[Aledinho]

I liked how the world football league handled overtime. The first team to score six points wins. The problem for college is if you have two dominating defenses you could end up playing forever.

 

[Boclive]

Either leave it the way it is now or have a designated captain from each team play each other in a one game "sudden death" game of tiddly-winks.

Either way, there should NOT be any kick-offs or kick returns in college overtime. This is NOT intramurals, buddy.

 

[Bamaball2001]

How do you feel about the OT rules ? I think they are good for nothing but padding stats.

I agree especially offensive stats revolving around touchdowns and kicker stats. If a team ends up in two or three overtimes in a season it can really boost their QB, RB, WR and kicker stats.

I like the rules, I would just like them move the starting position back some. I would move them back to the 40 or 50. That way the winning team has to make a drive to win.

That is the answer. You have to make them work for the score. It will still result in a slightly inflated stat boost but it will stop all the double and triple (or more) OTs which some fans might consider exciting but IMHO they get boring and result in very unfair stat padding.

:BigA: RTR!

 

[alatider]

I would rather have a kickoff rather that starting at the 25. A good FG kicker could kick a FG from the 25 anytime.

I say follow the NFL rules. Kick off and the first team to score wins the game.
No tie possible. After all, the whole reason for overtime is for the game NOT to end in a tie.

 

[Tide64]

I would rather have a kickoff rather that starting at the 25. A good FG kicker could kick a FG from the 25 anytime.

I say follow the NFL rules. Kick off and the first team to score wins the game.
No tie possible. After all, the whole reason for overtime is for the game NOT to end in a tie.

Actually, a tie is possible if neither team scores in the extra time. Except in the playoffs where they play till they get a winner.

NFL ties since sudden death was implemented

 

[BrettStah]

Here's one way:

1) Flip a coin.

2) The team that wins the coin flip is asked what yard-line the ball will be kicked off from.

3) The team that loses the coin flip then decides whether to receive or kick the ball.

4) Play football* until one of the team scores.

<<< Potential modification to the #2 and #3 above would be to give the team that wins the coin flip the option of determining the yardage, OR deciding on kicking or receiving after the team that lost the coin flip decides on the yardage. >>>

What will this accomplish exactly? Well, both teams have a big say-so in which team gets the ball first in overtime. If Team A wins the coin toss and says that the ball should be kicked off from the 50 yard-line, what will Team B do? Do they receive, figuring that the ball will likely be a touchback, will gives them 80 yards to go? If they do receive, does Team A take a shot at an on-sides kick, figuring that even if it doesn't work Team B will have a decent number of yards to go before being in position to score? So it adds some strategy to overtime, instead of just the luck of the coin toss.


* Football includes kickoffs, punts, and returns.

 

[Elefantman]

The only change I would like to see is that in every OT periods, a team must go for two after a touchdown.

 

[pvilleguru]

i like the college rules, don't see any reason to change them.

 

[BrettStah]

Some other ideas (not my original ideas, just passing along ones that sounded better than what we have now):

Idea #1: When the 4th quarter ends, if the score is tied, there's a short break, and then play resumes "as-is", using normal football rules. So if Team A has the ball and it's 3rd down, if the clock runs out in regulation then it's Team A's ball at the same spot on the field, and it's 4th down. It's sudden death, no game clock - just play until one of the teams scores.

Idea #2: Same rules as the NFL, except both teams get the ball at least once. If the team that gets the ball first scores, the other team has to beat that score on its first possession or they lose. (So if Team A gets the ball first, and scores a field goal, Team B needs a touchdown. If Team A gets a touchdown and kicks an extra point, Team B needs a touchdown and a 2-point conversion.) After that first set of possessions, if the game is tied then it's simply sudden death.

I also like the idea posted earlier in this thread, about the winner being the first team to score 6 points.

 

[Alanbama27]

There are way too many complicated and ridiculous ideas in this thread. There are two options that should be put into place IMHO. First, move the ball back to the 50 and start from there. Second, only allow field goals on the FIRST possession for each team. By not allowing field goals after the first possession teams will have to go for it on 4th downs, thus creating a bigger buzz but likely less scoring overall. I would guess that 2 OT's would be the max for 90+% of the games. There would be none of this 4,5,6 and more OT's, which is ridiculous.

Not allowing field goals in any possession just means that teams will play longer than they already do. And by starting back at the 50, there will be a heck of a lot less scoring.

Finally the NFL rules stink for OT! While statically the first team with possession wins only a few % more than the kicking team, it's terribly boring when both teams don't get an opportunity to go for it. One fluke play and it's over and while that may be exciting for vestamark overall, it stinks up the game. By allowing both teams the opportunity to have the ball, you get the same effect as college but with a longer distance (more than likely) to travel.

 

[BamaSkins]

starting further back than the 25...would help

 

[IHateUT]

i feel the same way as you do.... in more ways than one too (check out my username; booout). that was one of my car tags. i tried to use one like yours, but it got rejected by the state (uthatr). i currently have boo tn.

"boo tn" is pretty funny. If only you had enough room to finish it with "Hooray Beer!"

 

[crimsonbleeder]

no, they start at the 25! i agree, move them back, don't start in field goal range!

totally agree. I like the rules other than I'd rather see a start around the 40-45 yard line. That'd probably shorten overtimes as well...

 

[Bama63]

I despise overtimes. When the game is over, the game is over, and if you kissed your sister--Well, too bad. You should have played a better game. The whole concept is a gimmick from the gambling industry....

RTR

 

[BrettStah]

I despise overtimes. When the game is over, the game is over, and if you kissed your sister--Well, too bad. You should have played a better game. The whole concept is a gimmick from the gambling industry....

RTR

I've seen that before (about the "gambling industry")... how and why would they push overtime? I don't gamble on sports, but don't they work with point spreads?