Much of the country had a front row seat to an intense drama last night. Young Garrett Hartley became a household name as he sent the New Orleans Saints to their first Super Bowl in franchise history defeating the Minnesota Vikings (For non-football fans, read this to get an understanding of why this is such a big deal). Unfortunately, the hoopla and unparalleled celebration which can only come from a New Orleans fan base was somewhat diminished due the the circumstances of the victory. While the entire game was nothing spectacular, it was filled with drama and excitement at every turn. The least climactic series of the 66-plus minutes was the final drive in overtime. After the coin flip was decided and the Saints took the field, many expected (or almost assumed) the game to be over.
Historically good offense + tired defense x overtime rules = lackluster ending
For the most part, the overtime went according to the normal patternI would have enjoyed a nice Jerome Bettis coin flip fiasco or a Matt Hasslebeck over anxious winning proclamation, though. . The Vikings put up a fine effort and there were moments of doubt for the Saints, but in the end the Saints put themselves in position for the previously mentioned Hartley game winner.
Why would any professional sport choose to have a game decided by its least exciting element? No fan is excited by field goals. If you ran a sports league, wouldn't it make sense to place rules in place which ensure an exciting finish, or at least a fulfilling finish? Movie producers do not build a story around the least carismatic actorException: Adams, Amy inJulie & Julia . Authors do not lead readers to a climactic point of the story only to have the protagonist avoid the conflictException: Kafka, Franz, and yes I understand the existential appeal, but come on, his stuff is beyond insufferable . CEOs do not hold shareholder meetings and reveal depreciation expenses as the big announcementException: CIT, annual meeting 2009 . But this is how the NFL has decided to build their product. As fans, should we not demand more from our marquee sport? Should we not be given a proper ending to a dramatic game?
Some would go on and on about the opportunities afford the defense to make a stop and give their own offense a chance. Others will bore you with countless other options for how to end the game"The team that wins the coin toss gets 7 plays, if they do not score a touchdown then the other team gets three shots at the endzone from the 45 yard marker, if they do not convert then the first team gets the ball at the 25 yard line...." . No need to waste your time with these type of ideas. Instead let us just look at the way other major sports decide their winners if the game is tied at the end of regulation and see if we can't find a consensus.
Major League Baseball
Premise: Extra innings are played until the tie is broken. Same rules as regulation.
Positives: The game is decided by the same methods no matter what. Both teams get a fair chance to win.
Negatives: Could last HOURS beyond scheduled time.
National Basketball Association
Premise: 5 minute overtime sessions until the game ends with a winner. Same rules as regulation.
Positives: The game is decided by the same methods no matter what. Both teams get a fair chance to win.
Negatives: Fouls carry over from regulation with certain players ruled out for the overtime.
National Hockey League
Premise: (Regular Season) One overtime session is played followed by a 'shootout'. (Post-season) Overtime periods are played until a goal is scored.
Positives: Both teams get a fair chance to win.
Negatives: In a shootout, the premise is entirely changed. No longer is the game decided based on the 'regular' rules. In the post-season, games can last for HOURS.
Soccer (most leagues)
Premise: (Regular Season) Games end in a tie. (Post-season) Two extra time periods are played with sames rules as regulation. Most leagues have eliminated the "sudden death" element and instead play both extra time periods in full. If still tied at the end of the extra periods, a shootout is used as a tie-breaker.
Positives: Both teams have a fair chance to win. They include at least a significant portion of extra time played under the same rules as regulation.
Negatives: The shootout has no correlation with the actual game. It is not a true reflection of how soccer is played.
NCAA Football (closest comparison to NFL)
Premise: Teams recieve possessions on the 25-yard line with an opportunity to score. Each team is given a chance to score. The team who ends an overtime with more points wins. Additional rules apply after numerous tied overtime periods.
Positives: Both teams have a fair chance to win. Rules are only slightly changes.
Negatives: Defenses are placed in a negative position to begin, thus altering the premise of the game. Chance for the game to last significantly longer.
Obviously this is not the be-all-end-all list. However, this represents the most popular and successful leagues and their rules.
Let's recap and then compare to the NFL.
3 Easy Rules for Overtime Structure:
- Both teams should have a fair chance to win
- Rules should be the same as regulation
- Should not allow for extensive extra time
These are the three most consistent elements throughout the other major sports. The NFL goes completely against the first two rules. Teams are not both given a fair chance to win and the rules are not the same as regulation (sudden death). While the final rule may be viewed as a positive to the NFL system, any fan knows how stretched out time can be in a football game. Add to this the chance of no scoring for the entire overtime period and we can see this as a potential negative as well.
The NFL is the greatest sports league in America. It is just a shame to see its marquee game of the year (until the Super Bowl) be decided in this lackluster fashion. The powers that run the NFL have always catered to the television audience, but this is one instance which leaves millions wanting more.
GRM for RAL
