< Back to front page Text size +

Assessing the overtime rules

Posted by Albert Breer  March 1, 2010 10:58 AM

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

Say you play a single, 10-minute OT period in the regular season, and play them until you have a winner in the playoffs. Sound good?

It probably doesn't to the players. They'll see it as more time on the field, which means more injury risk, particularly when you factor in the fatigue factor. But look at last year's overtime games, with the end point in parentheses ...

Week 1: STEELERS 13, Titans 10 (1st possession, 4:32)
Week 4: BENGALS 23, Browns 20 (7th, 14:56)
Week 5: Cowboys 26 CHIEFS 20 (4th, 6:27)
Week 5: BRONCOS 20, Patriots 17 (1st, 4:51)
Week 6: JAGUARS 23, Rams 20 (1st, 7:00)
Week 6: Bills 16, JETS 13 (6th, 12:16)
Week 11: CHIEFS 27, Steelers 24 (2nd, 6:32)
Week 11: GIANTS 34, Falcons 31 (1st, 3:54)
Week 12: RAVENS 20, Steelers 17 (4th, 8:18)
Week 13: Saints 33, REDSKINS 30 (1st, 6:29)
Week 15: TITANS 27, Dolphins 24 (2nd, 3:42)
Week 16: Buccaneers 20, SAINTS 17 (1st, 6:54)
Week 16: BEARS 36, Vikings 30 (5th, 5:45)

... Eight of these 13 games went at least six minutes. Plus, if you go to 10 minutes, you eliminate the possibility of those extra five minutes (in the regular season) and add the element of teams bleeding clock, which will cut down on the amount of plays.

Either way, this is an interesting debate. What do you guys think?

News, analysis and commentary from Boston.com's staff writers and contributors, including Zuri Berry and Erik Frenz.

NFL video

Watch Patriots analysis and commentary by CineSport

browse this blog

by category
archives