Im just messing around with the Farve thing, but blaming the officals? Come on, get over it. For ever supposed "blown call" against the Vikings you can find a "blown call" against the Saints. It works both ways. At the end of the day the Vikings had the ball in field goal range with a chance to win. Farve threw a pic and that is why they are not playing in the Superbowl. If you want to go even more to the extreme count the two redzone fumbles. The refs did not blow this game, the Vikings did.

 

-----signature-----

Sadly this would probably not have been a loss for the Vikings if it had not been for the the lousy overtime system he NFL has. In no other major sport do you go the whole time in regulation relying on all aspects of your team to preform and win the game. To only go to overtime and potentially have it comedown to one aspect of your team to win or lose the game. Have never and will never like the NFL OT.

I understand the stats associated with winning the coin toss and the fact they don't want a game to last forever. So here is what I suggest. Both team must get the ball on offense at least once (like college). If neither team scores then it comes down to whoever scores first. If one team scores and the other doesn't its over. If both teams score identical points (FG vs FG or TD vs TD) it then comes down to Time of Possession. The fast team to have scored wins. This will make sure no game drags out forever, and that all aspects of the team are tested to win. Even more so then the current system because now it becomes a factor whether your defense can force them to slow down and score slower or if your offense can run a fast offense. It also challenges coaches to call the plays that will accurately and quickly score against their opponents. Just my thoughts.

 

-----signature-----

That isnt all that great of a system either. Tell me that a good Offensive team doesnt have an advantage over a bad offensive or run oriented team in that situation Slavel. A run team should almost always have longer TOP scoring drives than teams like the Colts and Saints. That is like saying here you go high powered passing teams here is the win, even if you do not play defense then can still win because your offense is built to score quickly unlike the opponets offense. There is not 100% fair way to do the overtime system. I like the NFL OT system, you want to win the game, play a little defense.


I have proposed one alternate system. College rules but score it similar to an NHL shootout. You score two points for every TD, and one for a FG. The team who has the most overtime points wins the game, and gets one point added to the end of regulation score to make them the winner. None of the overtime stats count toward game stats, season stats, team stats, or career stats; it is like the overtime never even happened. That would be the only way I can see NCAA type of overtime in the NFL. There is no way I could support the NFL if a game ended 49-48, after being tied 17-17 after regulation.

 

-----signature-----

Not necessarily because most teams will go to a prevent (2 minute) defense where all they are doing is trying to not give up the big throwing play. This could open up a good running team to run fairly fast down the field. Where as a throwing team is going to slowly move down the field as well eating up the clock somewhat with smaller passes.

As for you liking it you contradict yourself right in that paragraph. My system isnt fair because it gives an advantage to the good offensive team. Under the current system it does the same or should I say it gives a disadvantage to the not so good defensive team. How anyone can like a system where after 60 minutes of play and all aspects of your team can be won or loss by a coin toss and one aspect of your team is beyond me but ok, its your opinion.


Edit: Also under my system several new and fun scenarios could come out of it. If Team A scores a TD and Team B scores one but knows it took more time it is then forced to try the 2 point conversion.

 

-----signature-----

That is a huge assumption that teams will play prevent defense. What if the opposing offense goes on a one play touchdown to start the OT with. Now your offense gets a one play hail mary, the opposing team can stick all its defenders in the endzone. Sure your offense got a one play chance, but the coin flip let your opponets score really nullify your offensive chance with the ball. The second things is when would you end the game? The second your TOP exceeds your opponets or would you let the opposing team play it out. The going for two thing can be a very unfair to. Lets say a team is going second and scores, they know they are going to lose the TOP battle. They go for two and get it, they won because the coin flip put them in a position to know they had to convert that two point conversion. Your system does not make it anymore fair, it just takes the burden of responsiblity off the defense and puts it on the offense. Instead of it being the defense job to get a stop, it is just their job to slow them down. That does not sound like an appealing system to me, I would rather keep it the way it is.

 

-----signature-----

I would suggest the Vikings figure out who will be taking over for him in 2012.


Helpful Hint: Its not Sage Rosenfels or Tarvarus Jackson

 

-----signature-----

Ouch