Perspective of Super Bowl LI Overtime
Super Bowl 51 was the first super bowl in NFL history that was decided by overtime. Given the current overtime format, would you agree or disagree that the receiving team has an unfair advantage due to the fact that they can win the game with a touchdown? If so explain your reasoning, if not explain how you would change the format?
I think that the receiving team has an unfair advantage. They have the opportunity to win right away, while the team on defense might not have a shot to win the game. I really like the way that college overtime works. I think that it gives both teams a fair shot. Even though not all sports are about fairness, I do think that in a game as important as the Superbowl, it makes sense for both teams to have the ability to win. The coin toss really decides who gets the ball, and it is not fair for something that can be considered so trivial to have such a large impact on the final outcome.
ReplyDeleteSome may argue that it is up to the defense to stop the opposing team from scoring. In reality, sometimes the defense has no shot of stopping the offense. A crazy catch can determine the outcome, and even if there are three defenders on one man, he can still catch the ball for the final touchdown.
What I really like about the college overtime rules is that both teams have the opportunity to prove themselves for the last time. They have the ability to leave everything out on the field, and knowing that in order to win, they HAVE to score a touchdown makes the players, and fans, more excited. I think that the current overtime rules are great for the regular season, but in a game with such high stakes, I think the format deserves to be changed.
For a many years now, overtime in the NFL has been an issue that is argued about all the time. Overtime to decide the Super Bowl really brought this long-standing issue into the spotlight. I personally think that the NFL should switch their overtime rules to what was mentioned in the article; it should be the same as college ball except it would be moved twenty or thirty yards further back to not make a field goal guaranteed every time. On top of making the game more fair, having this style of overtime would get rid of any ifs, ands, or buts regarding the outcome of the game that would keep you up at night if you were a fan of the losing team. Like many other aspects of college football, like only needing one foot inbound for a catch, I think that they do it better than the NFL, and that the rules should be consistent.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the receiving team has an unfair advantage in overtime. I think now that there's been a Super Bowl that has gone into overtime, the NFL will try and change the rules. I don't think they would ever change the rules the exact same way that college football does it, but I think they should do something similar. A game shouldn't essentially be decided by who wins the coin toss, so I think if the receiving team scores a touchdown, then the other team should get a chance to get a touchdown. If the other team doesn't get a touchdown then the receiving team wins, but if they do, then the game should go to sudden death. This would give both teams an equal chance to win in overtime.
ReplyDeleteYes, I believe that the receiving team definitely has an unfair advantage with the current NFL overtime rules. Even though the team on defense can stop the team on offense and get the ball, I feel that it is more likely for the offensive team to score on the first try. I think that it is unfair because it is possible that the defensive team WOULD have scored a touchdown on their next possession, btu because of the sudden-death style the game ends. Also, the team who receives the ball first in overtime is determined by the coin toss. This is pure chance, and has nothing to do with the abilities of the teams. Although, the first possession of the game is decided by a coin toss, the other team receives after halftime, so it is more fair. This doesn't happen for overtime in the NFL, since after one touchdown the game is over.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I do not think that the college overtime rules are flawless. Since it isn't sudden death, it can go on for a really long time. My proposed solution would be to add another 5 or 10 minute quarter (first possession decided by a coin toss) that isn't sudden death, and if that ends in a tie to move to sudden death. I believe that the current NFL rules are unfair, and doing something like this would be a better solution.
I think that the receiving team has an unfair advantage in overtime. They have a chance to win the game without the other team even touching the ball. It doesn't allow the other team to have a chance to keep the game going if the receiving team scores a touchdown on their first possession. If the defending team has poor defense, but a very strong offense, they will most likely lose in overtime if they lose the coin toss and have to defend. This unfair advantage is received by chance and it gives the winner of the coin toss a better chance to win the game in overtime. I agree with Alex in the sense that by doing so gives the winning team a better chance to win the game not through skill or ability, but through luck.
ReplyDeleteThe overtime rules for the NFL needs to be changed so that no team gets an advantage to win the game in overtime, or the defending team at least gets a chance to to keep the game going if they concede a touchdown.
I think that it the current overtime rules are fair. Even though the receiving teams can win the game on a touchdown, field goals give the team a chance to match. Touchdowns occur on much less than half on NFL drives, so the defense is definitely capable of giving their offense a chance. Plus, if both teams are allowed to have a chance on offense, overtime will take longer and more games will go to ties, which nobody enjoys. Their are even cases where teams do not choose to receive in overtime. Against the Jets in 2015, the Patriots captain Matthew Slater selected to kickoff hoping that they would be able to cause a defensive stop and then go down the field quickly and score a field goal to end the game. It is understandable that people disagree with the current overtime rules, but they actually sense and are generally fair.
ReplyDelete-Jesse H.
I think the current overtime rules are unfair in favor of the receiving team. Especially when your opponent is a great QB such as Brady, it is even more unfair. A team with a strong offense and weak defense may have no opportunity to use the strong offense. The great thing about the college system is that each team has the opportunity to score and use both their offense and defense. The NBA uses a similar system in the form of a shortened quarter, which I wouldn't be opposed to.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't believe this year's Super Bowl overtime is the best spark to cause this change. The Falcons blew a 25 point lead, so in my opinion they had enough chances to score before overtime. I still believe it should be changed, but I don't think this will cause it.
I think the receiving team doesn't get a fair advantage. Then again you could argue not every sport has a fair advantage when it comes to their overtime. In MLB, if the home team scores more before the away team can, it results in a walk-off. In NHL, any team that scores first during OT wins. The NBA I think does it well with a shortned OT quarter and they play til the buzzer.I think the Superbowl needs to change their rules a bit to give both teams an advantage though.
ReplyDeleteI think that the over time rules are not fair. And they should look to use the same over time rules as college football. I think it causes a lot of fun anticipation with the current rules, however, if your a fan of the non recieving team it's not really a fun exciting anticipation. And they should change it to have both teams getting a better chance.
ReplyDeleteThe way I would do it is a hybrid of the current NFL rules and College football rules. I would make it that if you score a TD in overtime the second team gets the ball and has a chance to score a TD to tie and send it into second overtime. Then after that the next TD wins. If the team doesn't score a second TD and kicks a field goal the second team can get a chance to score a field goal and send it to sudden death, where next score wins, or win the game with a TD. The ball placement I haven't figured out yet.
ReplyDeleteI think with the current overtime format for the team that does not win the coin toss is unfair. The team that loses the coin toss does not get a chance to put their offense or even their special teams on the field. If a touch down is scored in overtime by the team that wins the coin toss the game is over and they win the super bowl. I would definitely change the format because I think it would be fair to add another quarter to the super bowl in case of a tie.
ReplyDeleteI would like to see a rule change similar to how college football has implemented their Overtimes. This year we saw the highest amount of ties in the regular season in the NFL in a long time. I like how in college both teams get a chance to get the ball and score. I like how both teams get the ball on the 25, but I could see the NFL maybe not wanting to give teams the ball that close to scoring. A potential solution would be having teams start at the 40 yard line.
ReplyDeleteUltimately I don't know that the NFL will change their overtime rules, but I hope they consider it. I am not a big fan of College football but I love watching the Overtimes because both teams are immediately threatening to score. I hope the NFL considers following the College move.
For the first time in 51 years, a Super Bowl has gone into overtime. After seeing this epic Super Bowl between two teams with the best offenses in the league, I can say that I believe they should change the rules of overtime in the NFL.
ReplyDeleteTo truly make the Super Bowl fair, I believe that the NFL should change it's overtime rules to the same rules they use in the NCAA. The way the current overtime rule in the NFL works is if the team that gets ball first in OT scores a TD then they automatically take the win. I think the NFL should change it to NCAA rules which allow the other team to match the first teams touchdown. NCAA is basically like a sudden death, shootout style overtime. I think this is the best way to conduct OT in a Super Bowl because it will give both teams a fair chance to score, especially when both teams are primarily known for their offense, not their defense.
As of now, the NFL overtime rules are the first team to score a touchdown scores. If the team scores a field goal, the other team has a chance to match it, or score a touchdown and win the game. I think these rules should be changed to NCAA football rules, where no matter what type of scoring play happens, the other team always has the chance to match it or win the game. I think these rules will make NFL overtimes more fair. With the current rules, the result of overtime is based hugely off of the coin toss. Whichever team gets the ball first, if their offense is respectable, will most likely win the game. If the other team is always able to get a chance to rebuttal, the coin toss would be less important.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the NFL overtime rules should change in order for them to be similar to college football’s overtime rules. As stated in the article, college football overtime rules are very simple, and fair. Since the NFL has implemented such complex rules for overtime, this does not give both teams a fair chance to win. The receiving team will always have an unfair advantage because their opponent may not get the chance to fight back from the automatic win with a touchdown. If the receiving team messed up their attempt at getting a touchdown, I believe both teams should be able to play it out until the time is up. If the NFL were to just take away the automatic win rule, I believe that the overtime rules would be much more favored and fair.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deleteagree that the receiving team has an unfair advantage due to the fact that they can win the game with a touchdown, I think the NFL should play by the college football rules. I think this because if the first team scores a touchdown then they win, I think if the offensive team scores then the defensive team should have an opportunity to also get a touchdown within that quarter time period. It is not fair that a coin toss can give such an advantage to one team, it makes you think how the falcons could have one if they had won the coin toss. Therefore, changing the overtime rules would make the game fairer.
ReplyDeleteI think the NFL should make the change to at least in the playoffs or superbowl that they have a full extra quarter with no sudden death. This allows both teams to showcase their offense and defense. Especially like the 2 teams we had in the super bowl 51 this year where they were the 2 top scoring offenses in the league. Obviously Tom Brady could score a TD in one drive if he wanted to and that's exactly what he did. Matt Ryan could have come back and scored another touchdown to tie it up. We will never know. It all comes down to the coin toss and a lot of luck as either team I believe could have scored on their first drive, had they won the coin toss.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the current rules are fair. After watching the first overtime Superbowl in NFL history, I believe that the Patriots had an unfair advantage in overtime. For a team like the Falcons that has been able to go so far based on their strong offense, losing the coin toss could potentially mean losing the game, and in this case it did. It should not be sudden death based on a touchdown, the time should be played out to the full or the NCAA rules should be followed - no matter what form of scoring, the opposing team always has the chance to rebuttal.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the NFL overtime rules are good because it saves time in the game so that it doesn't last too long. Also, the rules are fair because there is a possible opportunity to rebuttal if it is a field goal. However, reasons why it isn't that good is because who ever wins really comes down to who wins the coin toss. Overall, I disagree with the rules because I think it is unfair because since teams are tired it is harder for the defense to continue to. Also, for more ratings for the NFL, the rules should be taken away because it would go on longer for more money. I also disagree with the rules because it is unfair and less exciting.
ReplyDeleteThere is definitely an unfair advantage because of the rule during overtime. They should change it so that each team gets a chance to respond within a quarter time span. With the rue being how it is now it leaves the defense on reserves struggling to keep up and press with the offense just running up and down the field with a quarter back who is no where near as tired as the defense from the opposing team. No matter what the change is though something definitely needs to be done to make the NFL Superbowl fair to all teams.
ReplyDeleteIn the grand scheme of things the NFL probably just doesn't want there to be a tie during the superbowl or a super long game going into an unlimited amount of overtimes. It will be hard to stop a tie while keeping the game fair. It should probably just be another quarter added to the game and let the teams play ball.