Incentive to intentionally go to overtime

CFL uses point difference between tied teams as a means of breaking ties. Unfortunately, they count points in OT equally. So here's a weird one. Let's say Montreal and Hamilton lose next week. Then Toronto beats Ottawa. This will leave Hamilton needing to beat Montreal by 8 points no matter what.

So let's say on last day Hamilton are winning by two points near the end of the game, it would be better for them to concede a safety and put the game into OT, so they could try to win by 8. Also they would have to try and take first possession since they wouldn't be able to try the conversion attempt if they scored a winning touchdown.

Generally, it would be a very weird situation and I'd really like to see it play out if anything just to expose this somewhat "inside baseball" but still valid anomaly in the rules.

I think that is only true in the NFL

It's such a unique situation I can't see it ever happening. The only way it happens is if they scrimmage first, score a TD with the 2 point convert successful, and then make the stop. If the other team goes first they're almost guaranteed a field goal.

You are a genius for ever thinking of this... I dont think that any coach in the CFL has an IQ high enough for thinking of such a scenario... I'm very impressed that you thought of this... Id love to pick your brain for other amazing ideas..

or simply match the ORBs score in the first go, then try to stop them and score a td and 2pt conversion on the 2nd possession.

Whether Hamilton or Montreal gets First possession, Montreal only needs to kick a field goal. They would lose the game but finish 1st because Hamilton could win by only 5 points

Here's another interesting scenario,what happens if it comes down to the final game Mtl vs Ham and Ham wins but by only 7 pts ? That would leave things virtually deadlocked: both teams at 9-9,a win apiece,and even on pts for/agst in the two games.
If it indeed finished like this(entirely possible) then which team is determined to finish ahead of the other ? Anybody with an answer to that one ? What would be the determining factor in place to decide in the tie breaking procedures in the rules ? In order for this scenario to play out the Cats would need a win over the REDBLACKS and the Als a win over the Argos this week.
Like I said,anybody with the answer to this please post the answer and solution to this "What If " scenario.

in this case the CFL rulebook states;
(in descending order)

[b]-has scored the higher net aggregate of points (i.e. points scored for less points scored against) in all games played against all of the other tied Club(s), then,
-has scored the higher net quotient of points (i.e. points scored for divided by points scored against) in all games played against all of the other tied Club(s), then,
-has the higher winning percentage in all games played against all member Clubs of the Division, then,
-has scored the higher net aggregate of points in games played against all member Clubs of the Division, then,
-has scored the higher quotient of points in games played against all member Clubs of the Division, then,
-has scored the higher net aggregate of points in games played against all member Clubs of the League, then,
-has scored the higher net quotient of points in games played against all member Clubs of the League, then,
-has won a coin toss against the other tied Club.

Note: If two Clubs remain tied after other Club(s) are eliminated during any step, tie breaker reverts to step a).[/b]

Thanks Tangled,so if I'm reading this right then,it should be the Cats awarded 1rst based on the fact of their better net aggregate points which is using the current standings: Ham-pts for..354...pts agst...355 (-1) as opposed to the Als-pts for...328...pts agst...351(-23) So it looks like if I'm reading this right that the Cats have to win by at least a TD and not 8 pts to clinch 1rst place. That is providing that the Als and Cats both win their games this week against the Argos and RB's.

This is for all games played for Ham and Mont. Before it would come down to this they would have to be tied in aggregate points WITHIN the division first.

Upon further review as just posted by Taleback it appears that it would come down to divisional play to break the tie. The Als would then be rewarded 1rst based on their 6-2 record against Eastern opponents as opposed to the Ti-Cats 5-3 mark. It would appear that the Cats have to indeed not only win against the RB's but also need an 8 pt victory against the Als the following week to finish up in 1rst in the East.

They should skip all of that and just revert to the coin flip.. Canada got into the Gold Cup 2000 playoffs by a coin flip and won the whole

Ummm....I have no idea if you're being sarcastic or having a piss at me, but I'll take it.

This situation is also in play for Edmonton/BC game if you assume that BC is at least immaterial between getting to face Edmonton in Edmonton or facing an Eastern team.

Not true, see article 5 of the rules. file:///C:/Users/Becky/Downloads/2013-cfl-rule-book2014015559.pdf

why not just quote the rule??

have you given all of us access to your local drive?

Sorry guys, here's the quote:

NOTE: There shall be no convert attempt on the winning touchdown scored in overtime.

I have thought of this many times. As far back as ten years ago I've played in online sim leagues where I've lobbied to get OT scoring removed from tiebreak aggregate, basically treat an OT win as a win by 0 points. Simple really, winning a game in OT is a closer game than a 1 point win in regulation.

For instance: this season there has been one OT game, Sask beat Ottawa 35-32. The game was tied at 32 after 60 mins. Sask has 375 points scored for and 424 points against for an aggregate of -49. But if it wasn't for the fact that they FAILED to beat Ottawa outright they would not have had the opportunity to gain those extra 3 points. So for the purposes of tiebreakers, the Riders should have 372 points for and an aggregate of -52. Because if those extra 3 points were juuuuust enough to eliminate (lets say Winnipeg) from the playoffs (won't happen this year but just suppose) why punish the Bombers because the Riders FAILED to get the job done in the alloted 60 mins?

When a hockey game ends 2-2 and one team outscores the other 3-1 in the shootout is the final score 5-3? Hell no! Same with soccer and penalty kicks.

I've also argued that regulation wins should outweigh OT wins in tiebreaks. If team A finishes 9-9 with all 9 wins in regulation and team B finishes 9-9 with 8 reg wins and 1 OT win, team A should win the tiebreak because they got the same job done without needing OT. Conversely if team C finishes 9-9 with one of their LOSSES in OT they should win tiebreak over team A and B because they took a little extra finishing off. They were tougher to beat.

I've been through these arguments LOTS in at least 2 sim leagues over the past 10 years.

TBH, I think the CFL should not do OT during regular season, and should do two five minute halves in playoffs. But I'm a soccer guy first and foremost, so I might be biased.