Things You Learn When You Are Sick
Posted: December 1st, 2008 | Filed under: Other Sports, Pop Culture | 114 Comments »
I’m not going to go into the gory details here, but I can tell you that I just went through one of the worst flu-bug illnesses of my life. It hit me like a Foreman uppercut sometime Friday evening — I can’t remember if the uncontrollable shaking landed first or if it was the stomach flu portion of the contest — but I will just tell you that Friday was one of the most awful nights of my life. You know that scene in “Unforgiven†where Clint Eastwood is sweating and seeing visions and crying about how he doesn’t want to die. Yeah. It was like that. Saturday I wandered in and out of sleep, and half the time wasn’t able to tell the difference. Sunday was moderately better, but that’s only grading these things on a curve. I felt pretty lousy on Sunday too. I’m not feeling all that great right now.
Because of all this, I spent all weekend buried under a heap of covers, and I watched television. I almost never do that because of my job — heck, I was supposed to be in Oakland to watch the Chiefs play there THIS weekend — but I have to admit that it was a pretty educational experience. Here are a few of the things I picked up:
1. Lorraine Bracco was a Supermodel in the 1970s. I had no reason to doubt this, but I can’t say I had that bit of information at my fingertips before catching her on Paula Deen’s Party.*
*Yeah, Paula Deen’s Party. I told you I was sick. Even in my stupor I did manage to change the channel before Tony Danza appeared.
2. Alabama has a very good football team. I guess from afar I’ve been pretty skeptical about Alabama … but I watched a lot of that Auburn-Alabama game, and even though it’s clear that Auburn isn’t any good, that might be the most intense rivalry game in America — any sport, any level — and for Alabama to just destroy Auburn like that, well, it told me something. Also, I saw Alabama do something unique, a wrinkle that I’m not sure I’ve seen any other college team in the country do: I saw them play defense. Having watched Big 12 football all year long, I had come to believe that the new college rules did not allow teams to play defense. I guess people who know better than I do say that Florida will handle Alabama, and that’s certainly what I had thought. I’m not so sure now.
3. I really like Brent Musburger. I feel pretty certain that this wasn’t always true, but somewhere along the way Musburger has passed that nostalgia line so when I hear him now it doesn’t even matter what he says — his voice and his mannerisms tell me that what I am watching matters. Plus I love how he will, out of nowhere, pull out some sort of bizarre Southern expression like he’s channeling Keith Jackson. I’ve mentioned last year my favorite Keith Jackson line ever but I think I should offer it up at the end of every college football season. He said: “Danny Wuergfel is the kind of guy who sneaks into your room and steals your favorite hat.†I believe the secrets of the universe are locked in those words.
4. I have a special sympathy for television announcers who get stuck with terrible football games. This week’s unlucky duo was Bill Macatee and Steve Beuerlein, who got stuck announcing the Chiefs-Raiders game. And so Macatee gets special kudos for pulling of a great line … early in the game, the Raiders tried what had to be the single dumbest fake field goal in the history of the world. It was dumb in about 384 different ways — not the least of which: “YOU DO NOT FAKE FIELD GOALS AGAINST TERRIBLE TEAMS.†Those words should be on the first page of every “So You Want To Be A Football Coach†book along with the ultimate two-point conversion rules, which I will get to in a minute.
Anyway, in addition to the sheer stupidity of faking a field goal against the absolutely terrible Kansas City Chiefs, it was also the worst designed fake in the history of mankind — the idea apparently was to flip to the ball to 30-year-old kicker Sebastian Janikowski and have him run for the 10 yards necessary to pick up the first down. Now, what exactly would have to happen for this plan to work? I suppose if one of the other Raiders could have released some sort of a gas that made all the defenders fall asleep it might have worked, depending on how long-lasting the gas was. I suppose if the earth suddenly opened up and swallowed all the Chiefs defenders, it might have worked, assuming one of those Chiefs did not punch his arms through the ground like in “Night of the Living Dead.†Other than that, no, it had no chance.
And, of course, it not only failed, but it failed comically, as only the Oakland Raiders can. The ball was pitched to Janikowski, he could not catch it, a Chiefs defender picked up the ball and ran it back for a touchdown.
So now we move to action in the fourth quarter, when Macatee and Beuerlein were clearly punchy from watching so much mind-numbingly bad football. There was some promotion for David Letterman’s “Stupid Human Tricks.†Beuerlein said, “Do you do any stupid human tricks?†And Macatee muttered, so that only those listening carefully could hear it, “I can think of a fake field goal that could be on there.†Give that man a raise and a better game next week.
5. Here would be my recommendation to every coach in college football: Take that two-point conversion chart you have … and burn it. Go ahead. Burn it right now. I’ll wait here. OK, you don’t have to burn it. You can tear it up into little pieces. You can use it as the welcome mat for your house. Whatever. Just … get … rid … of … it.
Twice on Saturday I saw coaches go for two at the most ridiculous times. One of those was Missouri coach Gary Pinkel, who is a very fine football coach but has to be the worst two-point conversion man on planet earth. He should hire someone to be his two-point man — it doesn’t even have to be a full-time position. I would volunteer. I could be like a lifeline on “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?†The conversation would go like this:
Pinkel: “OK, so here’s the situation …â€
Me: “Don’t go for two, Gary.â€
Pinkel: “But the chart says …â€
Me: “Don’t go for two, Gary. Don’t do it.â€
Pinkel: “But don’t you want to hear the situation?â€
Me: What quarter is it?
Pinkel: Third quarter.
Me: NO! (Hang up the phone).
Missouri was down 16 to Kansas on Saturday pretty early in the third quarter when they scored a touchdown. Now, that made the lead 10, and the chart will tell you to go for two — you make the two point conversion and then you are down just one score — a touchdown and a two-point conversation. And that does make sense, you know, if there are like three minutes left in the game or something.
But as it was there were like 23 minutes left in the game, and Missouri and Kansas’ defenses aren’t very good, and after Missouri failed in their two-point attempt there was absolutely no doubt in my mind that the lost point would cost Missouri. At the end of the game, Missouri tried a long field goal that would have tied the game. The field goal missed, but my point is this: If they had not gone for two, the field goal would have been to WIN the game. That’s just bad coaching.
Oklahoma State had a similarly misguided two-point conversion even earlier in the third quarter. They were down eight, when they scored a touchdown. They went for the two pointer to tie the game, which was ridiculous … what good does a tie game do you with 11 minutes left in the third quarter? Especially against Oklahoma, one of the best offenses in the country. The two-point conversion killed Oklahoma State in a whole different way — they fumbled and an Oklahoma defender picked it up and raced the length of the field to give Oklahoma those two points. In the end, Oklahoma scored 61 points, so the two-point decision was not in any way decisive — but it was dumb.
If I could make a new two-point conversion chart it would read like so:
– Don’t go for two until the fourth quarter, and except in bizarre emergency situations wait until LATE in the fourth quarter.
– Don’t go for two unless it’s the obvious choice — as it will directly help you tie or win the game.
And that’s it. Put away those charts. They are killing you.*
*There has been one situation this year when the coach very obviously should have gone for two and did not. Remember when Texas Tech scored with one second left against Texas? The touchdown gave Tech a five point lead — 38-33. Obviously at that point, the game was almost certainly over — it would have taken a miracle for Texas to score on the following kickoff. But as a coach you want to put yourself in position to beat miracles — Tech OBVIOUSLY should have gone for two there. If they get it, the lead is seven and even if Texas does pull off the unthinkable, they would only tie (or need a two-point conversion of their own to win). If they don’t get it — there isn’t any REAL difference between leading by five or six with one second left. Tech lamely kicked the extra point. It didn’t matter, but it was wrong.
6. Did you see the Verizon commercials where two “friends†get together at a table? One asks: “So if there’s only one Verizon phone left, which one of us get it?†The other says, “I do.†The first then blows a poison dart into her neck. Maybe it was my illness, but I was unduly disturbed by that commercial. Really? Is that the message we’re sending this holiday season?
7. I cannot believe how good the New York Giants are. It was hard not to get caught up in the New England Patriots undefeated season last year, but when it comes to playing dominant football, I think these Giants are even better. They are an overpowering rushing team, great defensively against the rush, they can throw the ball effectively, they get to the quarterback, they don’t give up touchdowns in the red zone, they are just a great team. I’m not sure how many teams in football history won a Super Bowl and only THEN became a great team — that’s actually an interesting question. I would say the first Belichick Patriots team probably would qualify. The first 49ers team to win the Super Bowl might qualify too.
8. There are about 20 shows on television now that all seem to have the same exact plot — and to be fair I have never seen any of them, so I could be wrong. But I kept seeing these commercials for The Mentalist and Eleventh Hour and Cold Case and the CSI that will soon feature Laurence Fishburne, and that CSI that has Mark Harmon in it (I guess that’s called NCIS) and a bunch of others that all seem to begin with some sort of gruesome murder and all end with some sexual tension between two main characters. I suppose at some point I should watch one of these shows to find out what it’s all about*. Maybe the next time I get this death flu …
*Alfie.
9. Bill Cowher offered some ideas for fixing up the NFL. One of them, I think, is so obvious it is absolutely amazing that it has not yet been picked up: They just HAVE to tweak the overtime rule so that both teams get the ball at least one time. It’s such a simple change after both teams get the ball once you are back in sudden death. In fact, if the team does not score on the opening drive, then you are immediately in sudden death. It’s only a slight change, but it would make things so much more fair … I cannot believe the NFL has not picked up on that one yet.
But then he brought up an idea that I don’t like at all … he wants to to create a three-point line for field goals. Basically, if I remember right, he was saying that any field goal 30-yards and in should be worth TWO points, while any field goal 31-yards and out would be worth three. All I can think of with a rule like this is that teams would constantly try to take penalties so they could get back into three-point range*. This would just add a whole new layer of complexity to football, and let’s be honest: Coaches can barely manage the clock and the game NOW.
*Speaking of managing the clock — you probably know there’s a 10-second runoff on penalties in the final two minutes. So my question is: Why don’t teams trying to run out the clock wait until the 40-second clock is about at zero and THEN false start? That way they could run FIFTY seconds off the clock instead of 40? I guess the defensive team could decline the penalty, but even then you haven’t really lost anything. I just wonder why nobody’s tried that. You do think of some weird things when you are under the influence of a fever.
Loading ...
Does anyone else get the feeling that if Joe lay dying from some tragic event there would be an 8000 word post on this blog called “Things You Think About While You’re Dying”??
I’d nominate Pittsburgh as a team that didn’t become truly great until after they won Super Bowl IX.
The reason you’ll never see two-possession overtimes is television doubleheaders. You guys can hate it if you want but it’s true. There are other ways you could make overtime more fair without going to multiple possessions. Here are two:
1. Home team always receives the OT kickoff
2. OT simply picks up where the 4th quarter left off. You just switch end zones and keep playing. Personally I LOVE this idea but I know I’m in a small minority.
The Cowher field goal thing sound like one of those columnists who writes a gimmicky list piece, like “Ten Ideas to Fix the NFL,” and No. 1 (OT) is a reasonable idea, and then by No. 7 or 8 it’s clear they’re running on fumes and wondering why they didn’t write a column hedded “Six Ideas to Fix the NFL.”
“depending on how long-lasting the gas was” – bwah-hah-hah!
The ten-second runoff only applies if you are out of timeouts, but doesn’t it also only apply if you are tied or trailing and have the ball? I could be wrong about the second part, but definitely right on the first part. Odds are, most teams trying to run out the clock have a timeout in their pocket that would prevent the running off EVEN IF the second part is wrong.
A good survey question might be: Is it better to have 2 days of “knock you out flu” or 5-7 days of more mild, yet still somewhat icky flu?
Hope you feel better Joe.
I don’t always argue about spellings, but I think that Mr Beuerlein deserves some credit for stretching that first syllable over six letters.
“Why don’t teams trying to run out the clock wait until the 40-second clock is about at zero and THEN false start? That way they could run FIFTY seconds off the clock instead of 40? I guess the defensive team could decline the penalty, but even then you haven’t really lost anything.”
Could the defensive team decline it? I’m not sure, but I was under the impression that false start penalties and dead-ball fouls in general couldn’t be declined.
The NFL should go to college rules for overtime. Both teams should have an equal chance at winning.
I would think you would want the field goal rule to be the opposite, where a longer field goal is worth less points. I would think a rule shouldn’t take points away for getting further down the field.
Rule change:
Put celophane between the uprights. If the ball hits the celophane or the uprights, the kick is good. If it goes over, left, or right, it is no good.
Nothing dumber than 48000 out of 60000 people in a stadium staring blankly at an official waiting to see if he puts his hands up. Not sure what the down side is.
Best rule change ever.
Brent Musberger is great. I find it awesome that while some of the other high profile announcers only make it out to big-time games or events, Musberger will be doing a basketball game with Steve Lavin on a Tuesday in January after a snowstorm in Madison for a game between Wisconsin and Perdue. Just something endearing about that…the man still WORKS.
As far as OT goes, Phil Simms once said something like, “You know, Jim. If you have this kinds of situation going in top of the Overtime, than the team that DON’T get the football first……you get to have the ball for four down instead of Three.” Luckily, my minor in college was in Phil-osophy, so It THINK what he was trying to say was:
If you give both teams a possession in OT, then Team Two will have a distinct advantage by being in four-down territory from the get go.
Sure, I think that’s a legit concern, but the advantage is not any more than what Team One has by getting the ball first under the current system. There’s still an amazing amount of Football Purists when it comes to the OT rules: “The Greatest Game Ever Played was decided Sudden-Death-Style, and dammit, if it was good enough for Alan Ameche, than it’s good enough for me!!”
Yikes…sounds like something Chris Berman would say…better change that rule…
I think overtime needs to go to XFL rules:
1. Possession goes to the team whose player races down field and captures a ball with an insane into-a-scrum dive before the other team’s player.
2. The ball is tied to a rope that’s tied to the tail of someone dressed up like a giant terry-cloth furry leopard mascot.
3. The leopard is running away from the players at the time.
4. Both players must be backup kickers.
5. Ideally both are Gramaticas.
Musberger is an interesting character. Born in the upper midwest, went to a private high school in Minnesota, college in Illinois, yet he often talks like he was raised up in, say, Tennessee or Georgia. Where’d he get that?
I’ve always felt they should eliminate the field goal altogether and it never has made sense that 20 yard field goal is worth the same number of points as a 50 yard field goal.
How about this with regard to Cowher’s field goal point strategy??? Construct a goal with a pipe (or something maybe a bit wider) directly in the center of the area parallel to the two goal posts. It could be the same heighth as the 2 goalposts or not…. Anyway, if an accurate kicker hits this pipe dead center between the goal posts an extra point is added.
Probably not…but Cowher’s idea of making a lengthy field goal more valuable pointswise just would gum up late game strategy where teams should be forced to drive closer to the goal line to ensure a better chance at making a field goal.
Yes, but what if you use the opposite approach. A team who has advanced the ball to the 10 yard line has clearly done a better job of moving the ball then the team who stagnates at the 35. More points should be awarded to the team who kicks the shorter field goal then the team who kicks the long field goal. Reward the team that moved the ball not the team who was stopped. It shouldn’t be about the difficulty of the kick but about the length.
I could be wrong but a drop kick could only be made from a relatively short distance. When they changed how a kick could be made they should have changed the points. I see no point in rewarding teams who can’t move the ball just because they have a great field goal kicker.
I’ve been trumpeting Cowher’s OT proposal for years. Everything stays the same except both teams are assured of one possession. I particularly think this is what they should be doing in college. The college OT system is so absurd it’s beyond belief.
Fix OT? One answer. Play the whole 15 minute period.
Do you try to get into the endzone or nurse a FG lead?
Joe, I’ve always wondered something, and I’m curious about your take. It bothers me when announcers and writers say things like “that missed PAT will come back to haunt them” after a botched snap in the 1st quarter (or 2nd, 3rd or 4th, really). When it inevitably comes down to a 1-pt loss, you can feel justified. But actually you can’t. From the missed field goal on, the entire game goes differently than it would have if the team had made it. Each play leads to the next one. To use Tigers-Jayhawks as an example, every play after the missed 2-pt try would have been different in some way. Different play-call, different personnel packages, etc. And if even one play has a different result, yardage-wise, the entire rest of the game totally changes, so we have absolutely no idea on earth whether the Tigers would have been in a position to win the game at the end, had they gone for the PAT. Sorry to go Hawking-physics on the comment, but it’s such a big part of our sports conversation that we get totally, painfully, mathematically wrong, day-in and day-out. All this said, yeah, that 2-pt try was horribly stupid.
You get paid for this?
Stevo, how is your drug rehab going? When does the next Jackass movie come out?
Personally, I can’t stand Musberger. But then, I can count on one hand the announcers across all sports, ever, that I can stand. At least Joe didn’t say he liked Al Michaels.
The biggest issues I had with MacAtee and Beuerlein was:
1) that MacAtee couldn’t seem to know where the tackle occur. Larry Johnson would get tackled short of the blue line they had up for the line of scrimmage and he’d say “for a two-yard gain”, or the runner would go down short of the 35–you know, with the long white line that runs across the field–and he’d say “at the 37″. I’m not sure exactly what they’re looking at in the booth, but if you can see things better just watching the telecast, shouldn’t they?
2) I think it was Beuerlein who made a comment following a Raiders fieldgoal along the lines of “Fortunately, Janikowski did blah, blah, blah”. I know I’m being a hypercritical biased fan, but come on, “Fortunately”? For whom? Saying “Fortunately for the Raiders” or “…for Janikowski”, fine. But the universe is not a more perfect place because something went the Raiders’ way.
If they’re going to make any change involving fieldgoals, I think it should be to give some number of points for hitting the uprights. Maybe 1 point for hitting it and it bouncing away and 4 points if it hits and goes through anyway. For as much as it seems to happen, they ought to put some value on it.
I think it was Bill Simmons who basically said that coaches should just hire a couple of college guys who play Madden to decide for them when to go for two, when to onside kick, and when to go for it versus kick on fourth down. A lot of coaches could use some help as to when to call their timeouts on defense in late game situations. A common sense coordinator. He wouldn’t even need to be onsite, so no one else would have to know.
Verizon commercials have bothered me since the one with the creepy crowd (the network) following the customer around first appeared on TV. There’s someing very unsettling about that commercial. I don’t like the poison dart/handcuffs phone commercial either, but I didn’t realize they were both Verizon until your column.
Bobby Willams did the same thing at Michigan State – kicked an extra point when he was up five in the last minute against Notre Dame.
His reasoning? He didn’t want to give up a defensive two-point conversion, because then Notre Dame could tie the game with a field goal.
Not surprisingly, he didn’t last the season.
So, I’m thinking that a team drives to the ten yard line and stalls. This would be a 28 yard FG. If I’m the coach, I’m instructing the holder to line up 2 yards further back and get the extra point.
I’m with Tony B. It’s so simple. Play 15 extra minutes, whoever is winning afterwards wins. Why not?
Try living 31 of your 42 years on earth with a chronic illness. One that has caused 3 of your organs to fail, many painful surgeries that you have to be AWAKE for, affects every system in your body, and leaves you in constant pain and unable to do simple tasks. One that people constantly misunderstand. A few days of the flu? That would be a welcome relief for me.
The overtime debate has a simple answer. Just play for an extra 15 minutes. If nobody is ahead after 15, then the game ends in a tie. Two TO’s per team, all replays from the booth. So simple it’s beautiful!
just let mcnabb know when you come up with an overtime solution
Joe, I think you’re committing one of your own pet peeves — second-guessing a decision because of the result. Missouri failed on their two-point try, and that left them down 3 instead of down 2 in the closing seconds. But what if they would have made it? Assuming the rest of the game played out as it did, they would have scored the next touchdown and gone for two again. If they made that, the game would have been TIED in the closing seconds, and they wouldn’t have lost at all. If they had failed the second attempt, they would have been down two, just like you wanted. Basically, if they make that first attempt, it’s a brilliant decision.
The real question is what the likelihood of success was. And as you pointed out yourself, nobody plays defense in the Big 12. Missouri has one of the top offenses in the country. Chase Daniel never throws an incompletion. The average offense succeeds 50 percent of the time going for two, so I have to think that Missouri in the Big 12 has to have at least a 65 percent chance of punching the ball in.
I think the odds were in their favor, so it was a smart decision. The fact that it failed doesn’t make it wrong.
I’m with you Joe, I was confused as to why OK State went for 2 so early. But perhaps that very outcome is why Texas Tech chose not to – there are more things that can go wrong than with a routine extra point.
I was a bit amused by the announcing during the Chiefs game, it seems they went out of their way to praise all of the young talent the Chiefs have. I agree that there is some young talent there, but it seemed a bit over the top for a team that only had one win all season.
As far as the Verizon commercials, the dart was a bit shocking at first. But it was fun to see all the variations they ran after that.
“Brent Musberger is great. I find it awesome that while some of the other high profile announcers only make it out to big-time games or events, Musberger will be doing a basketball game with Steve Lavin on a Tuesday in January after a snowstorm in Madison for a game between Wisconsin and Perdue.”
It’s Purdue. We’re not in the food industry!
“There’s something kinda… I mean there’s something kinda ewwwwwwww about a (boy who’s never played baseball) man who never enjoys a nice showa.”
As far as longer field goals equaling more points, there is an easy fix to get around intentional penalties or loss yardage plays. On fourth down, the team with the ball can move the line of scrimmage back as far as they want. That way, they can slide back for the 31 yard three point attempt, or even the fifty-one yard 4 point attempt. This would also lower the amount of delay of game penalties when teams want to give there punter a better chance to pin a team deep in their territory.
I agree that something should be done about the overtime rule. Does anyone know the data on what percentage of teams that receive the OT kickoff win the game? If it’s fair, it should be 50%, right?
Mikey, I initially liked your idea about just continuing the 4th quarter. But, then I realized that if 2 teams were tied and there was only a minute left, there would be no urgency. The team with the ball wouldn’t need to hurry up at all. It would just be like the end of the 1st or 3rd. I think that would be bad.
Kenny…I’m not sure how big of a problem waiting for the officials to call a field goal is, but, how easy do you think it would be to attach and maintain celophane between the upright, especially in places like Chicago and Cleveland. That suggestion put a smile on my face, though. I don’t think it is necessary, nor do I think it would work. But, I definately think SOMEONE should try it.
What’s wrong with ties? Why not just eliminate overtime altogether and go back to the way it used to be?
Mark W,
The goal-post setup with additional points for hitting a smaller central area is done in Australian Rules football, a free-for-all combination of soccer and rugby.
My pet NFL change is also from rugby, where there’s an uncontested extra-points kick after every try, taken straight upfield from the point in the end zone where the try scorer touched the ball down, at whatever distance the kicker wants. So the kicks are sometimes taken from near the sideline.
Re: Alabama’s defense. Another great college defense this year is at USC. In fact, it might be as good as any college defense I can remember. I wouldn’t be surprised if half a dozen of them end up as 1st round picks in the NFL draft.
I had to question Beuerlein’s comment when he chastised Thigpen for not making an effort to make the tackle after throwing a pick. With two QBs on the shelf, I don’t want Thigpen sticking his nose in any scrum … and I would expect a former QB like Beuerlein (although that’s debatable) to know that.
Extend the uprights another 10 feet up, put a crossbar on top, and add a soccer net to it.
If the FG goes in, and stays in, you get the 3 points. Simple.
Keith Jackson = announcer who says folksy things because that’s who he is whether there’s a mike there or not
Brent Musberger = announcer who says folksy things because of how it affects his ‘image’
Dan Rather got the same way toward the end of his career. Actually, I’d rather (sic) listen to Rather call a game than Musberger; in fact I’d prefer almost any carbon-based life form.
My suggestion to “fix” overtime: Eliminate the coin toss; the team that scored last in regulation has to kick off.
If you don’t want to lose in overtime without getting the ball, then play for the win in regulation.
Isn’t the stat something like 25% of OT games are decided on the first possession? That doesn’t sound like a problem to me.
I wouldn’t mess with the field goals, either. I agree with Phil that a team should be rewarded by finding themselves closer to the opponents end zone when attempting a field goal. Should the reward be more points? No, just an better chance of getting the 3 points. I’m really surprised that Cowher would offer up that suggestion, not because I think he’s smart but I would just think he might have more respect for being able to move the ball down the field.
Musberger stinks. He consistently calls players by the wrong name. For example, suring the OU – OSU game, he called Kendall Hunter “Kendall” THE ENTIRE GAME. He seems to pick out one player each game and call him by his first name. It drive me crazy! He also anoints one player in the game as the second coming of … well whoever was the greates college player of all time. I guess Sam Bradford will be turing pro as soon as possible.
p.s. to Kirk Herbstreit; the OU tight end is Gresham (rhymes with freshem ???), NOT Grisham lik the author. He’s missed that two weeks in a row.
One easy rule for OT. Leave the sudden death, but decide, who’s going to get the ball, before the 1st quarter. The you may factore this in 4th quarter strategy.
Don’t want to take a chance with your defense in OT? Fine, go for the win in the regulation.
Obviously I’m a little biased but I see no weak points in my solution. It would even shorten average gametime (more teams would go for the win in the 4th Q).
[...] “I really like Brent Musburger. I feel pretty certain that this wasn’t always true, but somewhere along the way Musburger has passed that nostalgia line so when I hear him now it doesn’t even matter what he says — his voice and his mannerisms tell me that what I am watching matters. Plus I love how he will, out of nowhere, pull out some sort of bizarre Southern expression like he’s channeling Keith Jackson. I’ve mentioned last year my favorite Keith Jackson line ever but I think I should offer it up at the end of every college football season. He said: ‘Danny Wuergfel is the kind of guy who sneaks into your room and steals your favorite hat.’ I believe the secrets of the universe are locked in those words.” – Joe Posnanski [...]
I think in the Texas Tech/UT game it was actually valid to worry about giving up 2 points to UT with no time running off the clock (which is what happens if UT gets an INT or fumble and runs it back on the two point conversion) and then giving up a FG to tie the game (do they still have the fair catch gives you a free kick rule in college football, I know they do in the NFL, someone tried to use it last week).
Apparently if Joe thought the fake FG in the Chiefs game was bad, he didn’t see the absolutely stupid one the Cornhuskers tried to pull on Friday. Leading by a TD at the end of the first half, they lined up for a long FG and then had the holder flip the ball BACKWARDS over his head to the kicker in a fake. The CU player intercepted the pass in the air and ran it back for the tying TD. Given the time on the clock when this occurred, had NU simply punted, they would have almost certainly been up at the half by a TD.
That commercial with the dart is disturbing. One that is less disturbing, yet I find objectionable is the Chevy (I think) commercials where the gas pumps “hate” the car and do things to the car (like let air out of a tire) when the owner parks at the pump and doesn’t buy gas. I always think, I hate the car and its A**hole owner too, what kind of jerk takes a spot at the pump when they aren’t buying gas?
Overtime should be an extra 10 minute period. If it is still tied, then either it is a) a tie or b) sudden death OT. No one can complain then that they didn’t have a chance to win it.
I HATE to shave. I always tell my wife that she better like facial hair, because when I am done working in my life, I am done shaving in my life.
Quick note on the field goal issue:
There’s no reason to change the value of a field goal. The obvious arguments against making longer field goals worth more has already been covered, but I want to point out why longer field goals shouldn’t be worth less either.
From a statistical standpoint, longer field goals are less likely to successful. For example, say your kicker makes field goals at the following rates:
<20 yards – 100%
20-30 yards – 95%
30-40 yards – 85%
40-50 yards – 75%
50+ yards – 50%
Rather than looking at each field goal attempt and saying that each time it’s worth three points, you have to look at your odds of making the kick, and figure an “expected value” for each attempt. In other words, while a made 52 yard field goal is worth the same as a made 19 yard field goal, the 19 yard field goal attempt is worth twice as many points, because your kicker makes it every time, whereas he only makes the 52 yarder half the time. Make sense?
So, for the kicker above, expected value of each attempt looks like this:
<20 yards – 3 points
20-30 yards – 2.85 points
30-40 yards – 2.55 points
40-50 yards – 2.25 points
50+ yards – 1.5 points
In a single game, this may not matter so much, but over the course of a season – and certainly considering the entire league – a longer field goal attempt effectively is worth less than a shorter one. Teams are rewarded for driving closer to the goalline before kicking their field goals because they are increasing their chances of making the kick.
I would like to see all overtime played like they do in the NFL with one exception. The team that kicks off gets a chance to match the team that received the OT kick-off – that is if the receiving team scores on their first possession. After each team has a possession it becomes “sudden death”.
I would also like to see the extra point be eliminated and all teams must go for 2 after every TD.
Mike
““Brent Musberger is great. I find it awesome that while some of the other high profile announcers only make it out to big-time games or events, Musberger will be doing a basketball game with Steve Lavin on a Tuesday in January after a snowstorm in Madison for a game between Wisconsin and Perdue.â€
It’s Purdue. We’re not in the food industry!”
Actually, I thought it was an exhibition between Whisky and the 7 footer from Vandy, formerly of the Bulls and Spurs. Hard for him to beat a whole team, though, despite the probable height advantage.
The Verizon commercials that bother me are the “Dead Zone” ones that riff on scenes from horror movie classics/cliches. It’s not the ads themselves I have a problem with, but the fact that Comcast always shows them at the start of on-demand children’s programs. I go to put on an episode of Dora the Explorer for my 2 year old daughter, and we’re treated to a remake of a scene from The Shining, replete with scary music and atmospherics. Thanks, Verizon.If the intent of your ads is to give a toddler nightmares, mission accomplished.
Here’s an idea – sudden death overtime in basketball… would make the jump ball in OT very interesting.
jason taylor made a similar list. he thinks OT should be decided by a ballroom dance off
Matt:
Networks don’t think much when they play ads. I remember watching a middle of the Saturday afternoon college basketball game on ESPN a few years back when an ad for a horrow movie (The Hostel, I believe) came on. Of course, my 5 year old was busy playing in the room and hadn’t glanced at the TV the whole game, but as soon as this ad came on, she immediately started watching intently.
ABC/Disney got an angry email from me on that one. I mean, when can I watch a program and expect non-objectionable ads to be on if it isn’t Saturday afternoon?
Horror of course, not horrow (which is not a word, I don’t think)
Joe, I’m going to defer to your expertise more often than not, but I have an exception to your 2-point conversion rules. Ron Prince gave the same reasoning you did for not going for 2 against CU early in the third quarter of the game this season. KSU ended up losing 14-13 and Prince is now out of work. That seemed to be a situation when the decision not to go for 2 came back to bite them.
Things I Learn From Reading the KC STar…Posnanski is such a sports writing hack. It’s unbelievable this windbag gets the attention he receives. “Alabama is a good team”…really? You finally figured that out now sports genius? “I like Musberger”. Musberger is awful…always has been, always will be. How do people like Posnanski and WHitlock get national attention???? HOW?????
Sorry for your lost weekend. . . If you thought this flu was bad, don’t take your chances with a case of the adult mumps. . . .
I know that NFL Europe instituted a four-point field goal in one of its last seasons. I think everything outside of 50 yards was a 4-pointer. I don’t know how it worked strategically since like everyone I avoided watching WLAF games like the plague.
gary pinkel has come out and said that it was, in fact, his daughter’s decision – not his – to go for two
Thanks, Brent…caught that right after I posted.
And don’t EVER underestimate the dominance of the TRUE Will The Thrill…
KB,
At least Poz and Whitty have learned how to DEpress THe SHift KEy AFter TYping THe FIrst LEtter in a WOrd.
Okay, MK wins the Oblique Isiah Thomas Reference of the Year.
When the NFL first adopted the 2 point conversion, some Rutgers Professor actually did a statistical analysis of “when to go for 2″ and the basic point of his findings was this: You don’t go for 2 until you can accurately predict the sequences of the final scoring. His study then concluded that this couldn’t be done with enough certainty until about 4 minutes left in the 4th qtr. If you think of the term “chasing points”, it’s a perfect term for this effect, because its all about going for 2 too early.
Quick, somebody get KB back on his meds.
Field goals don’t exist in a vacuum though, there’s (generally speaking) three downs or multiple sets of downs before them. If your team is attempting a 30 yard field goal it’s because you were good enough to get to the 13 yard line before having to attempt one. If you’re going for a 50 yarder, it’s because you didn’t get drive deep enough. Yeah, your 50 yarder is a more difficult conversion, but only because you weren’t good enough to drive it deeper. Rewarding poor offense with more points is hardly sensible.
I’ve heard one suggestion to fix OT would be requiring a team to score (at least) four points – an idea i kind of like… unless there are 4-pt field goals
Seriously Joe, I hope the KC Star is paying you Vitale kinda money to link to your blog, because since they’ve started doing it, it’s getting more and more like 1/2 off Mullet Night at Billy Ray’s Clip & Dip in the comments section. The comments here have always, or far more often than not, been thoughtful, considerate, funny, sometimes even poignant and well worth the price of admission and I’d hate to see them become the pig sty that dribbles after any KC Star article*. Perhaps you’d consider a VIP comments section with admission to only those with a receipt showing proof-of-purchase of Soul of Baseball or a coupon for really snazzy pants.
*where there appear to be a significant number of “readers” who have selflessly devoted their whole lives to typing “who cares” after each and every and any article containing the words “Royals” or “Chiefs.” One shudders at the thought of how many other topics they may not care about.
NFL overtime is fine the way it is. You’ve got eleven guys out there, play defense.
Perhaps a sign-up system is in order. There’s no need to do something complicated (and it should certainly be free) but you could eliminate at least some of the unhelpful commenters if they actually have to provide a valid email address and get an account verified before posting. Maybe the KC Star could handle that for you Joe? Anyway, the point being that I – and I’m sure many others – wouldn’t mind having to sign-in to comment if it limits the number of garbage posts in your comments (and even if there aren’t many yet, the bigger your readership, the more likely it becomes).
field goals actually do exist in a vacuum. they are far easier to predict, given the lack of wind resistance, or the interference of other atmospheric pressure and matter.
The home team should always get the kickoff in OT.
There should be no field goals in OT-you should have to punch it in to win. (you could also win on a safety)
If the team that gets the ball first scores a touchdown, oh well, the other team should have played better defense.
Paul F. is right on about the value of a closer field goal-leave extra points for longer ones to kickers in fantasy.
I ca’t stand Brent Musberger. While there is no doubt that his voice is nostalgic, and that he works hard, and loves what he does, some of the things he says makes me wonder if he follows the game. Barely OK on college football, bad on pro football, unlistenable at college basketball.
That being said, KB, I can disagree with Joe and still recognize that he is a great sportswriter. The Kansas City Star has the best newspaper sports section in the USA, and Joe & Jason are the two biggest reasons why. You discredit yourself with your ignorance and barely disguised envy.
Brent:
“When can I watch a program and expect non-objectionable ads to be on if it isn’t Saturday afternoon?” Surely it depends on the program you’re watching on Saturday afternoon. You’d expect different ads to be airing during college basketball games than during an episode of Strawberry Shortcake, would you not? If you would, then you recognize that you expect more adult-oriented ads during the sporting event than during Strawberry Shortcake. And if you recognize that, then you personally are just hot comfortable with where the line is drawn. Do you want ESPN to insitute its own, more restrictive standards for advertising than the FCC already imposes?
Certainly, CBS (the channel that airs Strawberry Shortcake on Saturday afternoons in NY) would refuse to run an ad for Hostel during Strawberry Shortcake on Saturday afternoon (though or course CBS would never be in the position of having to do so because whoever made Hostel would surely not want to pay to advertise it during Strawberry Shortcake.
And to a large degree, when ads air is not up to the networks. I mean, of course it is in one sense, as they drive the whole shebang, but advertisers buy ad time for specific programs. If Verizon buys ad time during “Friends” which runs from 8-8:30 NBC can’t decide to move the ad to air during “Suddenly Susan” which runs from 9:30-10 because they think it will scare kids and more kids are still up during Friends than during Suddenly Susan. Verizon paid for the ad to run during Friends.
So if the studio that was marketing Hostel paid for ad time during ESPN’s saturday afternoon college basketball, ESPN didn’t have much of an option to run the ad at what you felt would have been a more appropriate time. They could have refused to sell ad time to the studio, which I would suggest is not reasonable to expect. And in any case, they might not even have sold avdertising specifically for Hostel. The studio might have bought x number of 30-second or 60-second spots to air on Saturdays during college basketball throughout the season in order to advertise all of its movies and Hostel is just the one they were promoting that weekend.
Do you think a blanket rule that ads for R-rated movies can’t run during daytime sports programming would be a good idea? What about beer ads? Are those inappropriate during football games because kids are watching and the ads promote drinking? Or maybe just beer ads that depict women in bikinis because that’s too sexual for kids?
And again, should ESPN self-impose these types of restrictions on advertising? Should we expect ESPN to do more than is required by the FCC? I think the last thing we want is for networks to start imposing more restrictive standards than the FCC already imposes.
Overtime is fine the way it is.
Fairness?
You had 60 minutes to win the game. You didnt. Tough ship.
If they did decide to change OT, they should play 1 series each, then go to a FG kicking competition if still tied. Whoever kicks the longest wins.
Or, play 7 on 7 with no blitzing.
bill c. spoken like a true ad exec.
can we all agree that verizon maybe shouldn’t use the horror movie ads in front of on-demand dorah the explorer episodes?
and i don’t think it’s all that outrageous to think that a network like espn could set their own standards with a sense of corporate responsibility. the fcc actually allows certain explicit content after a certain hour on cable networks, but espn doesn’t take advantage of it like, for example, comedy central does with their uncensored vault programming after 2am. or f/x often does. the fcc responds to customer complaints. like with howard stern or the janet jackson super bowl thing.. they freaked out because alot of people freaked out.. they’re political and bureaucratic and don’t wield quite as much power as most people think.
all that being said, those verizon ads are, ultimately, the most offensive because they’re terrible.
a field goal kicking contest? that goes against the spirit of the ‘you had 60 minutes to win the game’ argument.
i like your 7 on 7 idea way better. in fact i love it. i say 3 on 3, and if you wanna rush the qb, you count 5 mississippi’s. that’s edge of your seat entertainment
The networks have a high degree of control over when ads run. Every ad is subject to the approval of a standards department (please withhold all easy jokes).
ESPN frequently sells ads in rotations, so that the client really doesn’t know quite where his ads will run. They just buy, say, 200 rating points on ESPN and let the chips fall. That may sound careless but it mostly works because the ESPN audience doesn’t change that much from show to show.It’s kind of a radio business model that many cable networks apply to TV. While this sometimes leads to questionable commercial content early in the day, the number of people who complain is so miniscule as to be practically irrelevant. So if it really bothers you, call Bristol or write to the ESPN ombudsman instead of posting it here.
In the case of an on-demand show I tend to agree with you. That’s an easy scenario to foresee and avoid.
I work in TV and I have to say I’m surprised at some of the stuff that airs on weekend afternoons, especially in movies on basic cable. But that’s just me. The public in general clearly either doesn’t care or is too lazy to say that they do.
[...] Vote Things You Learn When You Are Sick [...]
[...] Vote Things You Learn When You Are Sick [...]
Re the “field goals do exist in a vacuum” comment:
At times the NFL season becomes numbing, with the weeks dragging on into the dark and the cold and too many bad games. So why not have a little fun?
At one of these games where the indoor stadium is only half full in the fourth quarter, send everybody home with a couple of free cans of beer (do not open until you reach home). Put oxygen tanks and masks on a long snapper, holder, and kicker. Suck all the air out of the dome and see what does happen in a vacuum.
I suppose you would have to supply oxygen to a pool reporter in the pressbox.
“‘It’s Purdue. We’re not in the food industry!’
Actually, I thought it was an exhibition between Whisky and the 7 footer from Vandy, formerly of the Bulls and Spurs. Hard for him to beat a whole team, though, despite the probable height advantage.”
Ah, why did you not say so in the first place! How would Will even inbound the ball!?
It’s the end of the 1991 Nebraska-Oklahoma game, and the Huskers score a late touchdown to take a FIVE point lead. During the ensuing two minute drill, Musberger talks about NEBRASKA’s need to get into FIELD GOAL RANGE. TWICE.
Answering someone else a few comments, college football DOES NOT have the fair catch free kick. That is a pro rule and is also used in some states for high school ball.
What the hell is Dora the Explorer??
college football is a poor excuse for a sport, and there is no evidence of anyone on the planet with more mis-guided self-importance than a college-football coach..Charlie Weis, Nick Saban, Steve Spurrier…these guys make me ill..their talk about “systems” and “programs”…guys, you get 19-yr olds to runs the sweep or a post-pattern, it ain’t rocket-science..(and yes, the good Dr. Funkenstein is indeed a rocket scientist)
Musberger…love him on the NBA, hate him on college, he deserves tar-and feathering for his LL World Series work…
YES YES YES YES YES THANK YOU i have been wanting that exact overtime rule change for years.
please nfl. please
Having been in Lincoln for the Nebraska game on Friday, have to agree with Brent. When I saw the Raiders “highlight” of the fake field goal, my thought was “I can’t believe they would run that after it absolutely blew up in Nebraska’s face. I guess that’s why they are the Raiders.
Late in the Nebraska game as we lined up for a 57 yarder that nobody thought the kicker could make to take the lead, my Dad turned to me and said “You don’t suppose Colorado will fall for that fake field goal a second time do you?” I never laughed so hard a sporting event (non-Royals game of course) in my life.
Eric–Pinkel has no idea when to go for two. Never has. He can recruit though and he gets could enough athletes to overcome his poor decision making. The Pinkel Factor is real.
As a sort of answer to your question, this year’s Giants are the 5th team to win more regular season games (excluding strike-impacted seasons). 3 of the previous 4 repeated as Super Bowl champions….
Record Playoff result
2008 Giants 11-1 ?
2007 Colts 13-3 L, Divison Playoff
1998 Broncos 14-2 Won Super Bowl
1989 49ers 14-2 Won Super Bowl
1975 Steelers 12-4 Won Super Bowl
>>Non-strike seasons
FG do actually happen in a vaccuum in KC. You can tell . . . wait for it . . . from all the sucking.
I can’t believe no one’s ripped that gem off yet.
I don’t have a problem with OT as it is. Defense and special teams are just as much a part of a team as offense is, and if the ST do their job, the coin-toss winner is starting somewhere around their own 25, and if the D does its job, they go 3-and-out and the team kicking off ends up with the ball around their own 40, in much better shape than the other team.
The “each teams gets a possession” thing has a surface fairness to it, but really doesn’t hold up on scrutiny. So if Team A scores after receiving the kickoff, Team B gets the ball. But what if Team A and Team B both fail to score on their first possession, and then Team A scores on its second? Do you give team B a matching possession? Why is 1 possession vs. 0 more unfair than 2 vs 1, or 3 vs 2 for that matter?
If a change must be made, I’m all for the proposal mentioned earlier – make it like basketball, where you play out a full extra period. Like hoops, it doesn’t have to be the full 15 minutes; make it 7 1/2 or 10. You’ll end up with more ties, but so what? If anything, more ties will make the playoff scenarios at the end of the year considerably clearer and less subject to convoluted standings tiebreakers.
“Is that the message we’re sending this holiday season?”
Did you hear the pre-Thanksgiving JC Penny’s radio ads? Variously intoned by Mike Golick, Dan Patrick, and anonymous man and woman:
“NOW is the time to buy what YOU need BEFORE shopping for the rest of your loved ones.”
Something like that — I wrote it down, but lost the paper.
Forget the (phony, hysterical, straw man) War on Xmas — this was a direct assault in the War on the Spirit of Xmas.
How to fix OT: eliminate it. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with a tie.
Fake field goals and two point conversions are only stupid if they don’t work. If they are successful, they are genious.
If I were a football coach, I’d go for 2 points almost all the time, except for late in the game in situations when you definitely need one sure point. The average is around 50%, so it wouldn’t cost you points in the long run, and your team would get better at it the more they tried it. You would presumably learn which plays work best for your team, and your players would have more experience at it than the defenses would.
I’d also go for 4th downs way more often than most coaches do.
These are probably two of the many reasons why I’d never be allowed to be a football coach. But my teams would be way more exciting than the others.
Get well soon, Joe. TV can rot your brain and we all need you nice and sharp!
Put me in the Can’t Stand Brent Mushpuppie crowd, never could and he hasn’t improved with age. The Keith Jackson folksy ripoff is unbearable. The best alltime moment this weekend though was when he went into this creepy thing about Beyonce, how “she sure is attractive, OH BABY!” Oh baby indeed, young enough to be his grandaughter…..
Paul F.’s thinking is too baseball-centric, where the law of large numbers makes such logic correct. Football — as a sport, not as a league — needs its rules and penalties to create the outcomes it desires because there’s no statistical likelihood that in just 16 games, things will “even out.” I prefer making the distant field goals worth less than the close ones. (For one thing, field goals are boring, while going for 4th down is exciting. Anything that decreases the frequency of field goals, I support.)
…
But my Big Solution To Football As We Know It is to make safeties worth the same as touchdowns.
(1) Safeties’ rarity points to a degree of difficulty that exceeds everything else in the sport. For example, punts are returned for touchdowns more often than defenses get safeties.
(2) A safety results from a string of events involving special teams AND defense. No single play causes a safety.
(3) If safeties were worth seven points, no one would ever kick a field goal once inside the five. The offense would attempt 4th down, knowing that if they failed, the *chance* for a safety would be rather valuable.
I have many other solutions to the world’s problems, but this is the one I feel most strongly about. In a future installment, I’ll be happy to explain why extra point attempts should be moved back to where the success rate is roughly 85 percent, instead of the current 98 percent.
A safety is worth only 2 points, true, but then the team that was tackled has to kick the ball back to the scoring team, AND from it’s own 20….this is a considerable penalty, giving up points AND possession w/ bad field position….I don’t think MORE points should be awarded on top of that.
Was it the flu with the Patented Dual-Exit System? Those are always good.
As for Alabama, we’ll see this Saturday. They’ve played an absolute CREAMPUFF schedule. I need to see them beat an actual good team before I start believing in them.
(Actually I still won’t then, as my wife’s best friend went to Alabama, and I enjoy just needling her about her team being the worst #1 in CFB history).
Put celophane between the uprights. If the ball hits the celophane or the uprights, the kick is good. If it goes over, left, or right, it is no good.
Nothing dumber than 48000 out of 60000 people in a stadium staring blankly at an official waiting to see if he puts his hands up. Not sure what the down side is.
You mean other than having to wait 20 minutes for the two poor schmucks with their ladders having to replace the celophane, because you just KNOW the refs won’t continue the game until both field goals are in the proper state again? Yeah that sounds great…
And as for Cowher’s idea, I can see where he was going with it, he sees it as an added incentive for a team to try for the touchdown rather than settle for a field goal. Because, let’s admit it, a field goal is a pretty boring thing to watch, especially from < 30 yard. It’s just a glorified PAT that gives you extra points for some reason.
I’d be perfectly fine with field goals being 1 point period.
I like Joe’s idea that teams would just take deliberate penalties to get back beyond 30 yards. That’s the kind of thing a guy on TV never thinks about when he’s making suggestions. Heh.
Someone from Football Outsiders — I think Mike Tanier, but don’t hold me to it — came up with the best overtime idea I ever heard of. You might call it the Kids and Cake idea. You know — there’s a big slice of cake and two kids that want it, so to teach them fairness and stuff, you let the older brother cut the cake, and then the younger brother picks which slice he wants.
Scrap the coin toss altogether, scrap the kickoff, and let the NFL do the same thing.
Home team names what yard line the ball will be placed on to start overtime.
Then the visiting team decides whether it wants the ball or not.
First team to score wins.
Sudden death OT distorts the game. The college system is an attempt to fix that, but it makes things worse.
As other posters have suggested, why not just dispense with all the shenanigans and play a fifth quarter? You could make it 10 minutes if you’re worried about the game taking too long (for example, in the extremely rare case of multiple OTs).
Football games should be decided by playing football.
“Ah, why did you not say so in the first place! How would Will even inbound the ball!?”
Clearly, if you bounce the ball off the opponent’s back or head, then retrieve the rebounding ball, you’ll have accomplished the task.
As far as the Verizon commercials, none of them have ever really bothered me, save one. It was the commercial where the main guy was being supported by a lot of people into a car, then the car drove into a tunnel and the guy turned into a pregnant woman. That really made me uncomfortable. I mean, Lost Highway uncomfortable.
The NFL should force teams to go for a TD during the first possession of OT. After that, field goals are good. It’s still first team to score wins.
Radical idea: Why not outlaw field goals altogether?
Punters and kickers are too good for the sport. The 2-points-and-the-ball would be fine if the team that scored the safety were given the ball — via punt or automatically — in field goal range. But on the free kick, punters are able to send it to the other 20, and the return goes back to the wrong side of the 50, meaning without another 20 yards of offense, there’s another punt.
In basketball, two points and the ball means four points. In football, two points and the ball means two points.
all of these overtime ideas are so good.
to be honest i have always argued to people that if a team has a problem with OT rules they should just get a better defense
BUT i was also always willing to admit that the idea of both teams getting one chance at a td would be fine by me (ie: 1 team scores, the other should be given one chance).
however, as someone suggested earlier, that creates an unfair advantage for the 2nd team since they can go for it on 4th down. i guess that’s not really THAT unfair, since they essentially HAVE to make the 4th down conversion, but still, i don’t like it anymore.
the kids and the cake suggestion is pretty awesome, but a little too weird to be implemented in mainstream football.
love the idea of forcing a team to go for a td on its first possession, but that’s also too weird for the nfl.
in the end, i changed my mind and i vote for a full OT quarter of 5 or 7 minutes. if still tied, it’s a tie game.
that would get rid of all the exciting OT wins though, which i like
joe, you should take all these OT suggestions and make a poll
also, if kids and the cake were implemented, it would only take a few games for every single OT to start with the ball on the 50 since no one would be willing to gamble.
“also, if kids and the cake were implemented, it would only take a few games for every single OT to start with the ball on the 50 since no one would be willing to gamble.”
No way in hell. If the home team put the ball on the 50 the visiting team would take it every time. If the home team put it on the 20 the visiting team would take it every time.
Where the ball would be placed would depend on how much the home team likes its defense against the visiting team’s offense, but I suspect generally it would be placed around the 10.
wait what? maybe i was misunderstanding, but i thought he said that team A would choose where to place the ball, then team B would choose whether or not they wanted to be on offense or defense.
if team A would choose to put the ball at their own 10, then team B is obviously going to choose offense every time since they only need 10 yards to score. no way in hell will any coach ever let a chance of that happening.
if team A chooses the opposite 10, then obviously team B will choose defense every time since it’s now 90 yards to score if they wanted the ball. and no way in hell team A’s coach would ever want to risk being pinned on their own 10 either, so it would take just a few games for coaches to release that the relative risk is the least if they just place at the 50.
No, sorry; what I mean is the home team decides where to place the ball on the field, with the assumption that it will be on the long side of the 50. i.e., if the home team names the 20, whichever team gets the ball will always get the ball on its OWN 20.
This is how overtime in the NFL should work:
If you score a TD on the opening drive of OT, you win the game. However, if you only get a FG, then the other team should have a chance to match or tie.
honestly, that idea might just be the best of all
Re: Musberger.
“his voice and his mannerisms tell me that what I am watching matters”
Excuse me but his voice and mannerisms tell me what they have always told me; that Musberger assumes that what he’s describing matters…or else the network would have sent a lesser mortal there to describe it. He’s the worst play-by-play guy working in the big-time. He doesn’t appreciate the difference between play-by-play and analysis…or maybe he does but because paying attention is hard and bloviating is easy, he chooses to blur the line. When working baseball, because he doesn’t understand baseball, he reaches for football metaphors. When calling football, he treats every single play as though the greatest moment in sporting history is unfolding and that we’re blessed to have him there to tell us about it. He’s an ass. He’s a blow-hard. He’s a prima donna. I’ve been suffering with his insufferability since my youth in Chicago when he was just the local sports hack and hadn’t even begun doing the NBA with Bill Russell yet.
But hey, love your blog!
College football has the right OT idea; they simply start too far in (already in FG range for most teams), which leads to absurd multiple-OT games.
Football overtimes should be one possession each, starting at the 50-yard line, defensive scoring permitted. Break.
Make it 30 for high schools, 40 for sub-FCS college games.