• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Overthinking Overtime

wcbsas said:
I'm glad the Rams are in it versus NOS but Rams didn't get it done they benefitted from one of the most horrific non-calls in the history of playoff football.

I'm OK with the non-call for PI but where's the egregious helmet to helmet call?
Click to expand...
The Rams had nothing to do with the terrible non PI/helmet call while on the other hand NOS had everything to do with their OT loss. IMO Rams did get it done by forcing the turnover and subsequent winning FG. NOS does their job they are in the SB but that's why they play the games....

For the record I'm also glad NOS isn't in the SB........
 

wheat said:
I guess I don't get the angst about ties. You obviously can't allow ties in CCGs or CFP games but a regular season game ending in a tie might feel unsatisfying but, after three overtimes, would be the appropriate result. It seems to me it would have been a pretty accurate reflection of the game had the A&M-LSU game ended in a tie after the third overtime, more so than how it actually ended.

Edit:For clarity from my previous post, I think they should leave it alone. If they feel compelled to do something with it, I think they should declare that regular season games that are undecided after three overtimes are recorded as ties.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of this except I think there's nothing wrong with having co-champions of a conference. Bolded is an excellent point.
 
Bigger Ed said:
That line of thinking makes no sense to me. Why not have that same rule for regulation? If a team scores on the first possession of regulation, game over. If you're defense can't stop 'em when they're fresh, you don't deserve to win.
Click to expand...

you're kidding right?
we're talking about breaking a tie after the a game was fully played based on the rules in place. by your line of thinking we should only play one point in tennis, score one basket in basketball, play one hole in golf....that's not how the rules of the games work.
should we not allow an overtime goal in hockey to count if it's on the first shot of the OT period because the other team didn't get a chance to shoot the puck?
 
Middle-aged_Ball_Coach said:
As a basketball coach, I can definitively state that free throws win championships. Even Shaq at the height of his powers had to upgrade his free-throw shooting to prevent losing to inferior teams. Basketball games and championships have been decided by free throws since free throws were invented. As a former player who was an excellent free throw shooter but mediocre scorer in almost every other way: Thank God for free throws! It's the only reason girls noticed that I played basketball, and that was pretty dang important when I was about 16 to 17 years old. ;-)

I have to disagree again. I like hockey, but there's nothing more exciting to me in hockey than an OT shootout. I am NOT much of a fan of soccer (but my wife is), so OT penalty kick shootouts are the ONLY time that I find soccer interesting. Heck, I even think the Dr. Pepper Shoot-Out is fun to watch.
Click to expand...

definitely disagreeing on this. hockey shootouts are the horrible. there's so much delay between shots. so much standing around. the energy gets completely sucked out of the arena. waiting, waiting, waiting...only to watch the player lose control of the puck and not even get a shot off. compared to the actual OT it's the absolute worst.
 



Bigger Ed said:
I agree with all of this except I think there's nothing wrong with having co-champions of a conference. Bolded is an excellent point.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with co-champs either but, in the CFP era, there wil be concern a tie reduces that conference's chance of getting a CFP participant. I also think the CCGs will eventually become de facto playoff games.
 
Lavaman said:
The point is a football team should be deciding its fate in OT, not just the defense
Click to expand...
I agree. The OT rule should be first team to get a stop and a score wins, that being said the OT rules as they exist now don't really bother me that much, if nothing changed I wouldn't complain.
 
If player safety is the overriding issue then the OT rules should mimic whatever was going on in the Pro Bowl.
 




canadianhusker said:
not a fan of the NCAA overtime at all. and i really don't understand all the crying about "both teams should get the chance to score"
if you can't stop a team from going 75 yards and scoring a TD on the first possession then you don't deserve to win.

i think they should go to a format where they play the game the same way they do the first 60 minutes of the game and the first team to score 6 points wins whether that's 2 field goals or one touchdown.

i also never had a problem with the ties in college football, but i know we will never go back to those unfortunately.
Click to expand...
canadianhusker said:
you're kidding right?
we're talking about breaking a tie after the a game was fully played based on the rules in place. by your line of thinking we should only play one point in tennis, score one basket in basketball, play one hole in golf....that's not how the rules of the games work.
should we not allow an overtime goal in hockey to count if it's on the first shot of the OT period because the other team didn't get a chance to shoot the puck?
Click to expand...

No, it's your line of thinking and you just made my point for me. Your justification for the sudden-death rule is the team doesn't deserve to win if it can't stop the other team from scoring on the first possession. I just applied your reasoning to regulation time, and that doesn't sound so logical, does it. You're right, that's not how the game is played so why change the rules for OT. Play the game, not a sub-set of the game just because regulation ended in a tie.
And though I couldn't care less about hockey so I may be speaking out of ignorance in this case because I don't follow hockey, no, I don't think the first goal in NHL overtime should determine who wins. Play the whole 5 minute OT period.
 
wheat said:
I don't have a problem with co-champs either but, in the CFP era, there wil be concern a tie reduces that conference's chance of getting a CFP participant. I also think the CCGs will eventually become de facto playoff games.
Click to expand...
I get your point but if Alabama can get in without even winning their division, I'm not convinced a tie (especially if it's against another high ranking opponent) will prevent a team from getting into the playoffs.
 
anotherdumbprediction said:
Oh yeah. Thanks for reminding me why I don’t watch college basketball anymore. Game............grinds.................to.................a.............................halt.
Click to expand...
Northern Iowa showed
cthusker said:
The Rams had nothing to do with the terrible non PI/helmet call while on the other hand NOS had everything to do with their OT loss. IMO Rams did get it done by forcing the turnover and subsequent winning FG. NOS does their job they are in the SB but that's why they play the games....

For the record I'm also glad NOS isn't in the SB........
Click to expand...

That doesn't even take into account throwing twice before the non-call and not running the Rams out of timeouts
 
canadianhusker said:
definitely disagreeing on this. hockey shootouts are the horrible. there's so much delay between shots. so much standing around. the energy gets completely sucked out of the arena. waiting, waiting, waiting...only to watch the player lose control of the puck and not even get a shot off. compared to the actual OT it's the absolute worst.
Click to expand...

The 3 on 3 is awesome though
 



After two overtimes, let the fans vote.

Well, OK, if you don't like that, team with the tallest player.

OK, if not either of those, flip a coin to see who gets the ball first, and the first team to score a touchdown wins.

Ok, if none of those, just call it a tie and go home, even if it is the national championship game.

If they have played 60 minutes and it is a tie, then it should be a tie.
 
Bigger Ed said:
No, it's your line of thinking and you just made my point for me. Your justification for the sudden-death rule is the team doesn't deserve to win if it can't stop the other team from scoring on the first possession. I just applied your reasoning to regulation time, and that doesn't sound so logical, does it. You're right, that's not how the game is played so why change the rules for OT. Play the game, not a sub-set of the game just because regulation ended in a tie.
And though I couldn't care less about hockey so I may be speaking out of ignorance in this case because I don't follow hockey, no, I don't think the first goal in NHL overtime should determine who wins. Play the whole 5 minute OT period.
Click to expand...


So starting alternate possessions from the opponent's 25 yard line isnt a subset of the game?
Sounds like you need to rethink your argument
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top