• 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.

Overthinking Overtime

cthusker

You talken to me?
5 Year Member
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?
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........
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
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.
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.
 

canadianhusker

Red Shirt
10 Year Member
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.
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?
 

canadianhusker

Red Shirt
10 Year Member
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.
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.
 

wheat

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
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.
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.
 

Black41FlashReverse

Recruit
2 Year Member
The point is a football team should be deciding its fate in OT, not just the defense
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.
 

Bigredjeff

Recruit
If player safety is the overriding issue then the OT rules should mimic whatever was going on in the Pro Bowl.
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
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.
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?
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.
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
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.
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.
 

Professor Chaos

Recruit
2 Year Member
Oh yeah. Thanks for reminding me why I don’t watch college basketball anymore. Game............grinds.................to.................a.............................halt.
Northern Iowa showed
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........
That doesn't even take into account throwing twice before the non-call and not running the Rams out of timeouts
 

Professor Chaos

Recruit
2 Year Member
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.
The 3 on 3 is awesome though
 

EastOfEden

Scout Team
10 Year Member
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.
 

canadianhusker

Red Shirt
10 Year Member
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.

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
 
Top