There has never been a Super Bowl decided in sudden death overtime much less than one decided in OT without the losing coin-flipper ever gaining possession. If there were ever a Super Bowl where the winner of an OT flip of the coin was likely to be able to score points on that first possession, this game with these two potent offenses is the one to do it.

If you are a proponent of change in the rules you are probably hoping for such an outcome as the outcry for change would be so loud that the NFL would have to make some sort of concession to its current OT format.

If you are a Vikings fan, there is no question that it would be easier to accept the loss to the Saints in the NFC Championship game if your offense also had a chance to possess the ball.

Factually speaking, over the past decade, there were 158 OT games, including playoff games. There were 2 ties, and there was 1 game in which the coin flip winner chose to defend a side of the field rather than choosing to receive. (They lost.) In 96 of the 158 OTs, or 61%, the coin flip winner won the game.

One of the most reasonable changes to the OT rules I've heard that may appease those who feel the current arrangement is not fair that likely would not offend traditionalists who do not like change is to return the OT kick-off spot to the 35-yard line. While this wouldn't seem like a big deal to some, this is a modest change that will greatly increase touchbacks, forcing offenses to start at the 20. For those of you that are really into the game, you know that "hidden yardage" on special teams is vitally important to the game. If you return a kick-off to your 40-yard line, statistically, your chances of scoring points are dramatically different than if you start at your own 20.

Moving the kickoff line back to the 35, where it was when the current OT format was instituted, might go a long way toward equalizing the chances of the coin flip winner and loser. Unfortunately, that's only half the problem. Over one third of OT games result in one team losing the game without ever touching the ball. I think that's the bigger issue to many people.

Those who argue that each team should have an equal number of possessions in OT have a whole in their argument that they either don't realize or don't care to give any credence to and that is the team with the second possession would have an even bigger advantage than the coin-flip winner has now.

Knowing whether or not it needs a TD, FG, or can afford to punt, the second team can adjust its strategy accordingly, using its 4th downs to move the ball when necessary. The current college OT format has this problem, which is mitigated to some degree because teams alternate 'going first' on successive rounds.

A look to baseball's approach to the situation may ultimately be the wisest solution. The NFL could simply keep the current sudden death format, but award the first OT possession to the home team. While this would simply be "home field advantage" during a regular season game, home field advantage comes in all kinds of ways in sports and is a universally accepted 'edge.' There literally is no reasonable solution to that aspect as the notion of playing all regular season games at neutral sites seems silly.

With this arrangement in the playoffs, it would be easier to accept what happened to a visiting team like the Vikings. We would say, "While their offense didn't get a chance, the Saints did earn the right to the first possession by winning home field during the season." The assumption here is that it is better that a team earns a break than has it granted by the flip of a coin.

Lastly, I'd like to address a statistic mentioned at the beginning of this article that is always quoted by proponents of the current rules, however I believe this is widely misunderstood if not misquoted statistic.

In 2009 there happened to be only 13 OT games, and the coin flip winner won 7 (54%). In 6 of the 13 (46%), the loser never touched the ball. This proves nothing really other than a sample size for any single year is too small for a reasonable estimate of the true numbers. However, don't be tricked by people that say "only 61% of coin flip winners traditionally win the game."

If you agree 50% would be the fairest rate, you might think 61% isn't very far from 50%. But that's not the right way to look at it. The NY Times recently correctly pointed out that the correct comparison is 61% vs. 39% for the respective winning percentages of the coin flip winner and loser, not 61% vs. 50%. An advantage of over 3:2 is no small advantage.

While I am not in favor of the NFL making drastic changes to OT and adopting the NCAA rules, I am in favor of giving the first possession in OT to the home team rather than flipping a coin.

We'd like to hear how you feel about this topic. Please vote in our polls to the right and feel free to comment below. - Mike Cardano

Mike is the founder of the Around the Horn Baseball Blog and the Extra Point Football Blog.

Have a Fantasy Football or Rotisserie baseball question? Want to know who to pick up, who to activate and who the hot prospects are? Ask Dr. Roto. Let Dr. Roto guide your team to a league championship.

Comments (7)

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment