NFL Annual Meeting

[Ottawapatty]

Just thinking about the meeting,

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/6263432


I will be quite upset if the rules are changed to this two possession crap. Trust me that is what we are using now in the CFL and it is just wretched. It isn't fun to watch as a fan, it isn't a fair and even way to determine a winner and it is a change that isn't being well thought out!

It is the same thing as a shootout in hockey or soccer (which also make me sick) or if in baseball after nine innings they just decided to have a home run hitting derby.

I mean you line up on the twenty-five yard-line, if it is done the way the CFL or I think NCAA does it, and you get four tries to score. Boring! It changes the mentality of football (IMO) and takes away from the skill of the ALL-ROUND players.

The only way I would I see this as semi-tolerable is if each team recieves a kickoff. You get one DRIVE not one series.

However, the BEST (IMO) way to do overtime is this.

Simply keep it the same way it is now, but instead of first point wins then it becomes the first to get a six point lead. If someone marches all the way down field afterwinning the drive they have earned the win. The loser's defense sucked so they lost end of story. If you keep them to a field goal or off the board all together you get your chance to try and take a three point lead, tie the game or win. Maybe this is an old idea (I haven't heard it before) or maybe you disagree, but what are your thoughts.

I say keep it the same or keep it so that the game of football and strategies are the same as regulation. None of this shootout crap.

Matt

[bideau]

Originally posted by Ottawapatty
I mean you line up on the twenty-five yard-line, if it is done the way the CFL or I think NCAA does it, and you get four tries to score. Boring! It changes the mentality of football (IMO) and takes away from the skill of the ALL-ROUND players.

The only way I would I see this as semi-tolerable is if each team recieves a kickoff. You get one DRIVE not one series.

This is close to what may be proposed. I agree that the college system sucks. The most popular idea is to guarantee each team a posession. The OT starts with a kickoff. If team A scores, team B gets the ensuing kickoff and must score to match or beat team A's score. If team A does not score, team B gets possession (via punt, turnover, downs, etc) and can win the game with a score on their possession. Once each team has had at least one possession, the sudden death rules take over.


However, the BEST (IMO) way to do overtime is this.

Simply keep it the same way it is now, but instead of first point wins then it becomes the first to get a six point lead. If someone marches all the way down field afterwinning the drive they have earned the win. The loser's defense sucked so they lost end of story. If you keep them to a field goal or off the board all together you get your chance to try and take a three point lead, tie the game or win. Maybe this is an old idea (I haven't heard it before) or maybe you disagree, but what are your thoughts.

I say keep it the same or keep it so that the game of football and strategies are the same as regulation. None of this shootout crap.

Matt

The problem with the 2nd scenario is the possibility of many more ties. Getting to 6 points via 2 FGs in one OT period will result in many more ties than wins/losses. I like the guaranteed possession idea but I'd like to see a guaranteed winner. Forget about one extra period and play until someone wins.

[pookie]

Originally posted by bideau
This is close to what may be proposed. I agree that the college system sucks. The most popular idea is to guarantee each team a posession. The OT starts with a kickoff. If team A scores, team B gets the ensuing kickoff and must score to match or beat team A's score. If team A does not score, team B gets possession (via punt, turnover, downs, etc) and can win the game with a score on their possession. Once each team has had at least one possession, the sudden death rules take over.


I like this above proposal as well. It would even the playing field a little more in OT games. The current OT process is unfair in that too many games are decided by the coin toss..... followed by a conservative drive for a game winning FG. Unless of course, you're a member of the Detroit Lions in which case you forfeit the ball and opt for the loss.:eek:

[Ottawapatty]

What is the one thing you would like to see changed coming from the AGM this year?

[Ottawapatty]

One other thing

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/6267219

If the Overtime format wasn't set up the way it is the Patriots may not have a Superbowl title. They MAY have knelt on the ball and waited for overtime except that they were afraid of not getting the ball back in OT. Just a thought though.

Matt

[Hawg73]

Why can't they just give the ball to the team that last scored to tie it up? It seems kind of fair to me, at least as fair as a coin flip Unless it was 0-0 which has never happened. Of course there are other ways of determining who gets the ball first:

Do an instant internet and phone poll over which team has the hottest cheerleaders. Have the girls come out for a bit and do some cheering while the votes are tabulated. The teams try harder to find hot chicks, ratings go through the roof, salary cap goes up - everybody wins.

Speaking of which - why not give it to the team with the lowest salary cap figure at that moment?

Have a table set up before each game manned by independent arbiters and have each team donate to a local food bank. Most food donated gets the ball - the food bank gets to keep the chow even if no OT.

Have an "immunity" challenge run by the producers of Survivor. The teams have to designate, say, 5 participants without knowing whether the contest would involve brains, brawn or speed. Many possibilities here. Imagine Gilbert Brown having to stand on one leg on a stump vs. say, Sam Adams. (I'm working on it)

Three words: TUG OF WAR

There has to be a better way than their proposal.

[Ottawapatty]

Well, Hawg you almost got me fired from work. It is my bosses first day back from vacation and I am sitting in my office alone laughing my ass off. He comes in and says what are you laughing at. Being the Communications Coordinator and Newsletter editor I say I am laughing a poorly written email I received with lots of stupid grammar and spelling mistakes. This worked great until he asked to see it. Needless to say it all ended badly and he now thinks I derive far, FAR too much enjoyment from commas.

In revenge I respond. Your ideas are good, but how about this. Each team gets to pick one player from the opposite team, excluding kickers.

Then the two chosen players line up at the back of their respective end-zones and run full speed at each other. The first player to hit the ground loses. It is judged solely by the ref and the play is not review-able. If the ref can't make the call they must repeat the play again in 20 seconds or forfeit the game.

or how about these five words

Full Contact Duck-Duck-Goose?

Finally and I think my favorite you take the nickname of the team
(i.e. A bear for Chicago, a horse for Denver and a patriot for New England) and place them both in one end-zone. Then coach goes to the other end-zone. At the sound of a horn they call the respective animal, person, object and try to encourage it to come towards them. The first animal to cross the 50 yard-line wins.
I simply like this because Miami would NEVER win an overtime game. I can see it now.

"C'mere Flipper, c'mere! Here Flipper, Flipper, Flipper! Damn dolphin doesn't even have legs this sucks, I mean he can't even breathe!"

However, there would be a plethora of Raiders to choose from their stands are packed with them. Luckily they too would never see an overtime win because most Raider fans can't count to 50. Unless they are counting Gannon's INTS.

Just a thought or two,

Matt

Matt

[Hawg73]

Sorry to get you in trouble OP, but after reading some of your mildly crazed ideas - maybe a career change isn't such a bad idea.
;)

Actually, people that live in glass houses..........(yours were pretty funny also)

I heard the other day that the stat for teams winning the coin toss winning on the first possesion was 40%. I figured it was a mistake and the number was probably closer to 60%. I don't think that is a really unfair number at all.

Turns out the 40% was correct. So I have reevaluated my stance on the matter. No change is necessary. The game is working well as is and if it ain't broke don't fix it. Let's keep things rolling and prevent more 4 hour football games.

[dropKickMurphy]

Originally posted by Ottawapatty
Simply keep it the same way it is now, but instead of first point wins then it becomes the first to get a six point lead. If someone marches all the way down field afterwinning the drive they have earned the win. The loser's defense sucked so they lost end of story. If you keep them to a field goal or off the board all together you get your chance to try and take a three point lead, tie the game or win. Maybe this is an old idea (I haven't heard it before) or maybe you disagree, but what are your thoughts.

Matt -
I'm with you. As a matter of fact, I proposed something quite similar on Patriots.com some months ago. My proposal was for a 5 point sudden death, rather than 6. That seemed to offer more interesting possibilities. For example, a team kicks a FG to tale a 3 point lead. The other team comes back and scores a TD, putting them up by 3. They can elect to go for the 2 point conversion to try and end it right there.
A couple of more twists in my scenario...
1) The game cannot end in the first 5 minutes of OT. After the first 5 minutes, the game ends whenever either team has a 5 or more point lead.
2) The game ends after the 15 minute OT. Whichever team is leading wins. If the teams are tied, the final result is a tie.

Originally posted by Ottawapatty
Full Contact Duck-Duck-Goose?

As opposed to FLAG-Duck Duck Goose, Or Touch?

[Ottawapatty]

Well,

They voted to keep OT the way it is! Thank God, I hate the college system. I mean 58 per cent isn't that bad. No matter what format is used there will always be a varible affecting the outcome. I mean I am sure that Oakland would whine about 40 km/h winds in their face in OT during the Snow Bowl had the crappy college format was in place then. Whiners are whiners and winners are winners. I mean if you used snot-rocket hucking to decide games it won't come out 50/50 every time.

Just a thought,

Matt

[pookie]

Originally posted by Ottawapatty
Well,

They voted to keep OT the way it is! Thank God, I hate the college system. I mean 58 per cent isn't that bad. No matter what format is used there will always be a varible affecting the outcome. I mean I am sure that Oakland would whine about 40 km/h winds in their face in OT during the Snow Bowl had the crappy college format was in place then. Whiners are whiners and winners are winners. I mean if you used snot-rocket hucking to decide games it won't come out 50/50 every time.

Just a thought,

Matt

The additional playoff team per conference proposal isn't happening either... So they did what in this annual meeting?

[Ottawapatty]

I bet they just sat around and discussed how perfect they already are ;) !!

However, it is a lot better than the CFL Annual Meeting where only four owners show up out of nine teams. Hehe, god it is charming isn't it.

Matt

[Peg]

Well, they did decide to proceed with the NFL Europe season as scheduled... :)

I didn't think that they would vote to change the overtime system or to expand the play-offs...

They are usually slow to make major changes & they usually like to cogitate for awhile, on changes that are proposed...

Besides, when they expanded the league to eight divisions and realigned, as well, didn't they say that they were gonna wait at least two years before tweaking it at all?... As much as I would like to see the play-offs be expanded, this is probably a prudent plan of action...

Any word on how they are going to deal with Detroit and their violation of the racial diversity interviewing policy?... IMHO, this is a good example of a policy that has good intentions, but that has glitches in reality...

All in all, the meeting sounds like a good excuse for the owners to spend a few days in Arizona at a very nice time of year to do so... :)