clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

NFL Discussing a Change to Overtime in Playoffs

New, comments

As of now, overtime can be a very one-sided event- there could be a kick-off, a 30 yard return, a 20 yard play and a field goal. However, should the defense be pinned with a loss after a field goal? Due to the rise in kicker accuracy and strength over the past couple of decades, there has been recent discussion about changing the rules of playoff overtime to the following:

There will be a coin flip, as usual.

The team that receives the ball will have a chance to score a touchdown. If they score a touchdown, they win the game.

However, if the receiving team only manages to score a field goal, the opposing team gets a chance to receive the kick off and score their own touchdown or field goal.

This is after the NFC championship between the New Orleans Saints and the Minnesota Vikings was decided by a Saints march to a field goal. Not the most fair way to decide which team should go and represent the conference in the Super Bowl. If this new proposal gets passed (which needs 2/3rd of the teams to agree), overtime in the playoffs should be a lot more fair and there should be little room left for argument.

The rule change would provide a different facet to the overtime game. Now, it's "get as close to the end zone as possible, if not, we'll get a field goal." If the change occurs, the game changes. Should you go for 4th and 2 if you can get a field goal? Should you grab the field goal points and rely upon your defense?

I hope this proposal goes through. I want this rule change to apply to both the regular season and the playoffs, but the Players Association have voiced concerns about the extension of overtime raising the possibility of injury. It's an understandable concern, but, as a viewer, I would ant this rule to apply for the entire season.