Overtime Solutions

Because of San Diego's overtime win against Indianapolis Saturday night -- in which the Colts never touched the ball in the extra quarter -- there has been the same talk we hear at least once a season about how the NFL's overtime format should be changed. It seems like most fans want it changed, but the NFL shockingly doesn't have the balls to fix it (just like the playoff system).

People who want to keep the status quo say "Well, your defense just needs to step up."

If you know me well enough, you probably could figure out that I hate answers like this. Why should one team's defense be held to that standard while the other isn't? Because of the flip of some stupid coin?

Also, lovers of the current system, consider this: What if baseball used the NFL's system? If a team scored in the top of the 10th, then that's it. Game over. There would be outrage, I gaurantee it.

"Why didn't the home team get a chance in the bottom of the 10th?!"
"Well, their pitcher should've just stepped it up."

It might seem silly to use that system in baseball, but there's practically no difference.

Thus, I offer three potential solutions to fix overtime in the NFL:

1.) Each team is guaranteed one possession. This is the easiest and most likely solution, and it also doesn't require much explanation. The team who wins the coin toss would still have a slight advantage (because of having the third and fifth and seventh chance of scoring), but that would be offset by the fact that the second team would have a slight advantage in knowing if they NEED to score on their first possession. Then, they can forego punting or kicking a field goal if they need a touchdown.

2.) First possession is determined by something non-arbitrary. This should be a good comprimise because it keeps the sudden death format intact. Supporters of the current system try to argue that the coin toss isn't as important as it really is. The truth is, everyone knows how important it is. Notice how you always see the players celebrate hardcore after winning the toss for overtime? You ever see that at the beginning of the game? No -- because it doesn't matter. Why can't we give the first possession to the team with more yards? Or less penalties? Or here's an interesting thought -- the team that scored last in regulation gets the ball second. That way, maybe we'll see more teams get aggressive when they're down by 3 with a minute to go. Instead of just playing it safe, kicking the field goal and waiting for OT, maybe they'll take some shots at the end zone. Also, if a team down by 7 scores a TD at the end of regulation, maybe they'll go for 2, knowing that they get the ball 2nd in OT. It would force teams to be more aggressive, and that's always more fun. ... We could also always use the XFL route of making two players race for the ball (the league's one and only good idea).

3.) First team to six points in OT wins. I actually read this idea in some sportswriter's column years ago, so I can't take full credit for it, but it's kind of interesting as another compromise. I have less sympathy for a team that gives up a touchdown on the first possession in overtime. I hate seeing games end in OT when the first team kicks a field goal from about 53 yards out. Boooooring. Now, if you can go down and make two field goals in the overtime period, then I think you earned it.