Pre-script: I am an Indianapolis Colts homer. I grew up in southern indiana, work often in Indianapolis, and follow them fervently. I am still heartbroken over yet another crushing defeat to the San Diego Chargers. Worse than that, I have to work in San Diego next week. Hopefully the Steelers will grant me some relief. Still and all, I hope my homer-ism won't taint too much what I believe is a strong case against Sudden Death overtime.
Last night's game at Qualcomm stadium was as great a game of football as the NFL has seen this year. A close game throughout featuring two fantatsic quarterbacks matching wits against tough defenses on every down. Watching the Chargers linebackers playing game of "musical zones" as NFL MVP Peyton Manning sung out audbles and adjustments was brilliant drama.
It goes without recapping (again) that the game ended with an easy San Diego overtime drive, helped by a chipmunk sized back, penalties, and an exhausted Indianpolis defense, which ended in a touchdown.
Its not the San Diego win that bothers me. I'm not even all that bothered by 8-8 San Diego having home field advantage over 11-4 Indianapolis simply because San Diego's divisional opponents (Denver) were THAT bad, and the Colts opponents (Tennessee) were THAT good. What does bother me is that I watched that overtime drive continue as the league MVP sat on the sidelines, hat on head, helpless to stop it.
NFL's sudden death overtime deprived NFL fans of a fantastic showing. The league's best player was waiting his turn, keeping his arm warm, ready to shoulder his teammates on his back and fight with them to victory. But a chipmunk sized running back and a few penalities killed that chance.
In the end, San Diego might have won, but watching Phillip Rivers and Peyton Manning duke it out point for point would have been truly "can't miss."
I have heard few arguments in favor of NFL Sudden Death that don't amount to the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." John Madden likes to say "I'd like to leave the rules the way they are." and offers little other reasoning to back it up. I'm not going to argue that overtime the way it is is broken, but like my cell phone, it needs an upgrade.
How could we forget that week 11 game in New England? The one which ended in overtime after Brett Favre drove the Jets to a game winning field goal in the first possession of overtime. The outcome of that game is now clear. Favre looked washed up down the stretch, and missed the playoffs with a bum-arm. New England is the first 11-5 team to miss the playoffs in 23 years. If New England was able to outscore the Jets in an overtime session where both teams had their turn, a most deserving team would have a playoff berth. Besides that, imagine watching a Cassell vs. Favre in a last-point-wins shootout.
If a coin flip can win football games, I advise George Washington invest in some shoulder pads.
Cintia Dicker
Shanon Lersh
Men's Grand Slam All-Time Leaders
Roger Federer's Grand Slam Titles
Comments (9) Add A Comment
Just say 'no' to 'sudden death'
Enterprise Alabama
Total Comments (129)
You seem to forget that in Football the defense has the opportunity to make plays that can cause interceptions or fumbles, which could either bring their offense on the field or be run back for a game ending touchdown. Let's not forget they can actually make a stop. Overtime isn't broken, just the losing team's defense.
Jerimiah
El Monte , CA
Total Comments (1)
All the Colts had to do was stop 'em. That's how that side of the coin toss goes.
ObliqueStrategy
Indianapolis , IN
Total Comments (1)
I agree with both points.
But I won't agree if you say its an even playing field.
Jerimiah - Its the reason there are so few games that end scoreless, or even all that low scoring. There aren't alot of 7-0, 3-0, 6-3 games in the NFL, etc. Its because by the end of the game, the offense is a lot more fresh than the defense. The offense can decide who's in, who's out, even who works harder on what play...defenses can't, they are slaves to the offense. By the end of the game, they're blown up. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who wouldn't agree that whomever won the toss in that game (and the NYJ - NE week 11 game) would've been the winner.
Oblique - That's my whole point it shouldn't come down to "that side of the coin toss."
I don't think there was a rightful winner or loser in that game, both SD and Indy played admirably. I think I would've much more enjoyed watching the two teams continue playing until there was a winner.
MillerJake30
Missoula, MT
Total Comments (21)
I've said that overtime should just remove the coin toss. Decide it by other means. Winner of the opening toss loses the ball in OT. Home team gets it etc. This would encourage the second possession guy to prevent OT and would shut everyone up.
Grachuus
Westford , MA
Total Comments (264)
Nah. That doesn't help, because the point is the outcome should be in the players' hands, not based on a coin flip, or home field advantage. It must be changed so we never see a one posession overtime again.
MillerJake30
Missoula, MT
Total Comments (21)
I agree that the current "sudden death" format appears unfair and that the coin toss is the deciding factor in too many instances. But I believe that only a third of OT games are won on the first drive. However, I think that everyone would be better served with a system, something like college, where both offenses get equal chances.
fact-no-hype
Total Comments (96)
The playoffs are important so why not just play another whole quarter? Keep playing em' until someone wins. It would be killer to play but mega to watch.
ewz
Ann Arbor , MI
Total Comments (2)
I think a full extra quarter of play is the best solution. (Perhaps abbreviating it to 10 minutes would be in the players best interests.) Ties occur if there score is the same at the end of that period. In the playoffs, we'd enter sudden death after that period, only in the case of a tie.
MillerJake30
Missoula, MT
Total Comments (21)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.