Overtimes

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
YES, WE CAN'S. SO?

WE R TEH RIGHT. NO ADVANTAGE TO GOING 1ST OFFSETS THIS OBVIOUS EDGE OF GOING 2ND (or MAYBE IT R SOME MYSTIC POWERZ THAT MAKE GOING 2ND = ADVANTAGE).

WTF R WE RLY TALKING ABOUT HERE?

[/ QUOTE ]

Lots of things that arent immediately obvious or intuitive turn out to be true. Just because there arent any OBVIOUS or intuitive advantages to going first does not mean that they do not exist. And just because there ARE obvious and intuitive advantages to going second, that does not mean that these are huge advantages that automatically outweigh everything.

I think maybe you are being sarcastic with the all caps and such but my argument is a general one.

[jogsxyz]

Hate NFL overtime.
Like kicking from the 35.
Sudden death on a TD only.
If FG, the other team should get one possession to
win the game. Meaning the second team must score a
TD to win. No playing for a tie.

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
Plus, not only do they have advantage in the first OT, they have advantage in the 3rd OT over the 4th.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course going second in odd numbered OTs is an advantage, but it's a marginal one for which there is no clear solution. Does the team going first get to pick the end zone they go at first? Fine, then they'll pick the downwind one for their first possession, which would mean that, if I'm thinking this through properly, the team going second would constantly be playing into the wind. This is a marginal advantage going the other way which is variable dependent upon the conditions.

[lastchance]

Edit: Ok, fine, w/e. Obviously, the explanation could have been wrong despite making tons of sense, compared to your (initial) ramblings against the explanation.

Can we agree that there is a problem with CFB overtime that allows the team to win the coin toss to have a significant advantage? /end stupid argument.

<-- wants better football OT.

[MicroBob]

Actually, the teams both try to score into the same end-zone in the OT. They don't walk down to the other end when Team B gets the ball.
I think the direction often-times comes with the band and student-body. Home team wants to play at the noisy end and away team wants to play at the quieter or more empty end.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well they only have 3 downs because they are cowardly bitches. Its not really a problem inherent in the structure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? If you go first and it's 4th and 10 you have to kick a FG because if you don't convert, it's an insta-loss. Why do you think no team ever elects to go first?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not an insta-loss, but of course, 4th and 10 isnt the only kind of 4th down. It makes no sense. What if its 4th and 4? If you kick a FG, what are your chances of winning? If you go for it, what are your chances of winning? If the answer to question 2>question 1, you get 4 downs.

If you go second and the other team scored a TD, you are no longer allowed to kick a FG. This is unfair!

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] I was trying to think of drawbacks to going second. Thats exactly my point. There could be lots of hidden drawbacks that cumulatively sum to be greater than "But they always know whether they need to go for it or not." Is it likely? I dont know, I guess not. The data shows its beneficial to go second, to the tune of 45/55 or something like that.

Its still possible and I think a lot of people are putting WAY too much stock in a superficial argument that turns out to be marginally true in this case.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: Ok, fine, w/e. Obviously, the explanation could have been wrong despite making tons of sense, compared to your (initial) ramblings against the explanation.

Can we agree that there is a problem with CFB overtime that allows the team to win the coin toss to have a significant advantage? /end stupid argument.

<-- wants better football OT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, it seems like its about a 45/55 advantage, how does that compare to NFL overtime? I would be in favor of anything that reduces this advantage as much as possible but you have to weigh that against making it still watchable and still sort of resembling football.

I dont have any solutions.

[MicroBob]

lastchance - Still like CFB OT better than NFL OT.


Speaking of all the different OT's there were several others that were neglected:

Japanese baseball: I think it's a tie after 14 innings

College hockey: 5 minute sudden-death playing full-squad 5x5 then it's a tie. In tournament games it's 20 minute sudden-death periods like in the NFL playoffs.

Tennis - Always have to win by 2. These long sets and tie-breaks can be fun.

Soccer - I like the old NASL timed shootout thingee they did because it was weird.

Beat the Schwab - When two of the contestants are tied after round 1 Stuart Scott asks some question like "How many intentional walks were there in the major leagues last year?" and they write their answers on a card and whoever comes closest advances to the next round.

[.Alex.]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont have any solutions.

[/ QUOTE ]
PokerFink already posted a fair solution. Alternatively, have the teams decide who gets first ball by the farthest away yardline they wish to start from "auction style." So basically, team A says they'll start from their 15, and team B can either accept or offer to start from their 14, etc. Starting from the 1 is obviously advantageous to the defense so the average result would probably be around the 10 yard line.

[ClarkNasty]

I like ties. in playoffs, play another half.