Unique OT Situations

is that team B throws and interception. Team A’s player then goes into the endzone, but not of his own momentum, but rather trying to return the ball for some reason. This would put him in position to be tackled for a safety, the game ending 3-2 in OT.

i don’t think it’s stupid, though. it’s how it works during the rest of the game…you recover an onside kick and you basically steal/switch the alternating of possessions. plus, i think it’s a bad job on the receiving team’s part if they arent able to recover an onsides kick.

admittedly, i may have played it up a little. if teams go for it at the beginning of OT, they’re risking giving their opponents the ball on their 40…although they’d still have their chance for a possession (if they dont let up a TD). teams could attempt an onsides kick after they got a field goal. yes, they win if they get it BUT if they dont the other team is practically already in field goal range for the tie…or could score a TD and win. although it may encourage teams to try because they’d still get the ball first when if it goes to sudden death.

you could always support a rule change like what ohiosteel suggested below. i’m sure we’ve all seen a game where a team kick offs squib-kick style, the ball bounces around, and the kicking team recovers without the receiving team ever having possession. i really think that should count as a possession (theoretically/philosophically speaking).

bottom line: i really like it because all it’s doing is re-weighting the risks and benefits of things. with how football is played, football OT is far more like baseball OT than it is like hockey, soccer, or basketball.

it’s nice to see OT end with a score, but football OT is more similar to baseball than to hockey or soccer than ppl realize. an epic game where a team is trying to make a comeback can end on an incomplete pass. that’s not anti-climatic. i dont think super bowl XLIII was anti-climatic because it ended with a turnover by warner & us kneeling out the ball instead of our touchdown. even if it had ended with an incomplete pass by warner it still would have been an epic game and the final play wouldnt have detracted from it.

and you CAN’T take away special teams. they’re just as important as any other aspect of the game.

good points but i’ll counter with this:
-does the team kicking off really deserve an opportunity to try to score if they let up a TD? i know a team can argue their defense did a good job only letting up field goals as long as their offense can counter TD’s. but their defense did a bad job by letting up TD’s.
-yes, by going second they get the advantage of knowing what score they need and getting 4 downs to get it. but it’s not straight up an advantage, because 1) if they let up a TD they never get their possession. 2) if they only tie with another field goal, then other team gets the ball first in sudden death OT.
that’s why i like this system because it’s not a straight up advantage for one team like the last system. the team receiving first still gets more of an advantage, but not as much as before.

i have a feeling most ppl are going to be happy with the change once they see it in action. it may sound a little complex/crazy right now, but the only games affected will be those where the team receiving first gets a field goal on their first possession (granted that happens a fair amount). all other scenarios will end up having the same result as they would if it was the old system. i do realize that though it could change the thinking process at the time decisions were made thus leading to different decisions and different outcomes,