Only applies to playoffs. Regular season stays the same.

http://www.nfl.com/news/s...nfirm=true

HUGE NFL fan...I like the change, however, I would include it even for the first TD scored...give the other team a chance to score the same TD.

Should be interesting.

Revolution said:

No, not for touchdowns. They don't come cheap.

I don't agree with the change. U either score 2 win or u don't. Why should a field goal be any different from a TD? What about a safety.... apparently u can win a game with that, but not a field goal? It just doesn't make sense 2 me.

The specific change they're asking for is stupid. Why not just ask that a new time period/ "quarter" is played, like in the NBA, and whoever has the most points at the end of that "quarter" wins?

paisley2002 said:

It's not about the amount of points.....the thinking is that the team that wins the coin toss and receives the kickoff in OT often is in field goal range after only having to gain 20 or 30 yards.

Much 2 do about nothing.....this will result in less than 1% of games.

Sowhat said:

The old system was perfect. You don't want the other team to score - stop them. That's why you have defense and special teams.

uPtoWnNY said:

Agreed.

uPtoWnNY said:

I'm not saying I agree with their decision....I was just pointing out their reasoning for including Filed Goals only and not TD's or Safety's.

Sowhat said:

Oh yeah, I agree. They want to eliminate cheap FGs.

The question is - what does a coach do on 4th & Goal in OT? Do you take the FG or risk going for it?

uPtoWnNY said:

interesting...I had not thought about that kind of situation yet. I would think that most coaches would go for the win in that situation unless it was 4th and goal from like the 10 or farther.

Sowhat said:

It also depends on your defense and your opponent. If I'm going against Peyton Manning, I'd probably go for it.

uPtoWnNY said:

definately going for it against Peyton.

Now if it's 4th & Goal at the end of REGULATION and I'm down three, I'm kicking the FG and take my chances in OT.

uPtoWnNY said:

I originally didn't think i wanted the change but this new proposal is
actually good i think as long as they don't make any more changes to it.
The reason i think it's a good idea is let's just say a team gets the
kickoff and return it to the 35 yard line then run a couple of plays
for positive yards and then you have a penalty on the defense and then
maybe a questionable or bogus one that allows the offense to end the game
with a 48 yarder. Well now that team has to put their defense on the field
if they settle for a fg and if the other defense has to be put on the field
to stop an opposing score why not force the other team's defense to stop
a score. This system is far more realistic than the crap college football
has for sudden death. I think this will make overtime more exciting especially
in a critical playoff game. If a fg is scored first by the receiving team,then
i think it's fair to put their defense on the field for a series and if the
receiving team in OT wants to shut it down then score a damn td instead of
settling for a cheap fg.