Overtime(Merged)

Hey all ! First post, although I've been a follower for a few years. I've always asked this of anyone who follows the league, so I'll throw this out there for others to chew on in case it hasn't been brought up. Why does the overtime have to end in a tie! Let's keep playing until a winner is decided. Love the CFL!

Welcome rdrfn65! :rockin:

The CFL adopted the NCAA style OT about 10 or years ago, or so. In the first season they tried it, I believe each team had 3 possessions...but the games dragged on for too long. After 3 hours of non-stop CFL action, then add 20 minutes of OT, the fans were getting as drained as the players. So the league reduced OT to two possessions each...which does result in some ties, as witness to the exciting 45-45 tie in Calgary vs BC, in 2007...and the game last week.

Through most of CFL history, the league used 20-minute mini-games to settle ties, complete with two-ten minute halves with kickoffs and everything. Then a couple decades ago, OT was reduced to two-five minute halves, but that still added 20 minutes to the game length. I think the games were just too long for TV.

I like the new format, but starting off in field goal position is a little too easy...but at least it is fair to both teams and usually results in a winner. :thup:

I didn't like the old format or this one either. At least spot the ball out of field goal range so that a team needs at least one first down before they are in field goal range. Currently you get the ball and you are already in pretty good field goal range. Better yet, they should keep playing a regular game until somebody wins however unlike the NFL, if the team that won the coin-toss scores first, the opposing team should have a chance to answer.

:thup:

This is a good idea

I like the shootout, but I don't like that it can end in a tie.

I'm fine with starting at the 35. If a team doesn't make any yardage then it is a 40 yard FG which isn't a gimme. This year especially we've seen a lot of so-called gimme FGs missed.

I personally have no problem with the concept of a draw. If you play out 60 minutes and both teams earned the same points... then no one was better that day. It doesn't make what happened to get to that result less entertaining. In North American sports we're addicted to a forced climax. Playoffs don't determine the best team, a balanced regular season does. Adding gimmicks (hockey shootouts, football shootouts, sudden death, 4 on 4) as appendages to sports games to force a winner isn't necessarily representative of the outcome of the game depending on how much you change the nature of the game in OT.

Baseball I can cope with. I mean the sport itself is boring but at least they go right on playing the same game until a winner is decided.

I was at the most famous OT game...the 2005 Grey Cup game between Edmonton and Montreal. Needed 4 possessions by each team to settle things.

It was a great game, but after that game, I've always thought spotting the ball on the 35 made it way to easy for the teams to score as well. Especially with defences going 'vanilla' to ensure they don't make a mistake that led to a score (i.e. a receiver getting wide open behind a defender, etc).

I think if you moved it back 20 yards you'd make it harder for teams to score and likely result in a true 'win' for 1 team or the other. And, the 55 is the most 'Canadian' of yard markers. Couldn't think of a better place to decide a game or a championship.

I agree. should be harder. Thought they moved the line of scrimage for each different drive. Dont they?

This came up at work the other day, another coworker and I (we work real hard btw :wink:) came to an agreement that starting at the 45 would make it a bit more interesting.

I think in the Playoffs , you should go to 2 ot halfs. Maybe something like 7 1/2 minutes per half ? They should do away with ot in regular season and let ties stand. The 1 point is deserved for both teams.

There's nothing wrong with a tie, I agree. As for overtime in the regular season, it doesn't happen too often so I don't mind the way it is now. However, I'd prefer in Playoffs to have a "5 minute Quarter" and let the boys settle things just as if they were playing any other quarter of any game. Still tied? Keep on going until a winner is chosen.

You would need two halves, as wind could be a huge factor.

you can't just play on and on and on.. that would not be wise, afterall this is football!

Ties are part of Football, always has been! leave it alone.

Never really thought of that. Honestly. Then I guess you'd play 2 five minutes halves/quarters.

Team A should get the ball on their own goal line and move the ball as far as they can. Then team B does the same. Whoever moved the ball the furthest wins. If both scored TDs, then whoever did it in least number of plays wins. No fields goals or punting for singles. If still tied, which is unlikely, do it again.

really sorry but that sounds very dumb...

the whole point of trying to win a football game is by scoring.. not by seeing who can go the furthest..

thats almost as stupid as the XFL rule on who gets to choose first, instead of a coin toss. that was the dumbest rule ever!

2 five minute halves? I have seen drives last longer than that.

have another coin toss to start the OT and let them go at it full bore. once a team scores the other team gets 1 drive to match. (15minute 1/4s),

i kinda like the idea of no OT in the regular season.

You need 2 halves, what if the wind is 40 km/hr . May as well just flip the coin for a winner. 7 1/2 minute halves is perfect.

I totally agreed with the changing ends things it was the length of time that i was questioning. 5 minutes is way to short, i would think your'd want a round number so i would go with 10 minute halves for playoff games.