We think that the overtime format, more than 50 years removed from its first use with no modification, has worked just fine. However, if we were on the Competition Committee—and we had to make a modification to overtime—we would have considered the following proposals before “modified sudden death.”

1. Move the kickoff to the 35. The simplest solution to reverse the field-position advantage gained when kickoffs were moved back to the 30 yard line is to move the overtime kickoffs to the 35.

2. Replace the coin toss in overtime. Rather than let an arbitrary coin flip “decide overtime,” as is often (incorrectly) argued (roughly a 60/40 advantage goes to the coin-toss winner), use an on-field element to determine the first possession in overtime. By giving possession to the team last in the lead, a team couldn’t score a last-second tying field goal in regulation and then have the first possession in overtime (essentially preventing two consecutive possessions at the end of the game to the trailing team).

3. Start overtime from the fourth quarter dead-ball spot. A slightly more radical proposal would do away with the coin toss and kickoff to start overtime, and have the teams merely switch sides of the field as if the beginning of regulation was the same as the beginning of the second or fourth quarters. The only way overtime could have a kickoff would be if the final play of regulation is the game-tying score. The downside is a tie game at the two-minute warning gives no urgency, as the offense could grind out a ten-minute drive through the first eight minutes of overtime. (There would also be no kickoff starting the third overtime period, either, but that has never happened in an NFL game.)

4. Best kickoff return. This is the most radical suggestion, but only slightly better than the proposal voted by the owners. Essentially conduct two kickoffs to start overtime, with the team attaining the best field position keeping the ball. Of course, back-to-back runbacks to the house would turn overtime into a home-run derby.

The Competition Committee moved on changing the dynamic of postseason overtime on a nonexistent platform: field position after a kickoff gives a short field for an easy put-the-game-away field goal.

In postseason play, this situation has happened only three times. Yes, only three times has a team advanced the ball in overtime from kickoff to field goal in a playoff game, most recently in the 2009 NFC Championship game where the Saints advanced over the Vikings.

The Vikings, not one to sour on their lost destiny, voted against the modified sudden-death proposal. The Bills, Bengals and Ravens were the only others to reject the proposal

Unintended consequences of the new rule (that we see) are:

• Overtime can end on an unspectacular loss on downs, or worse, a measurement.
• There is less risk in tying the game at the conclusion of regulation, rather than boldly going for the lead.
• A team scoring the opening-possession field goal can follow up with an onside kick, ending the game if they recover (OK, that would be kinda cool, I suppose).
• The inequity supposedly created by the kickoff return offering field-goal prime field position is not remedied if both teams score field goals on their first possessions. This is because the next possession is sudden death, and it begins with the oh-so-dreaded kickoff.
• Defensive errors, magnified in overtime, can be softened when a second chance is awarded after surrendering a field goal.
• Somehow, a single drive in overtime ending in a field goal is unacceptable, but a game-winning field goal that breaks a tie at the expiration of the fourth quarter is just fine without a retaliatory possession by the losing team.

We will be adding to this list as a stream of consciousness. Add your suggestions in the comments.

Yes, that headline is screaming. And for good reason. The NFL now can’t simply resolve a tie game much like Major League Baseball (if necessary, play till 5 a.m. to resolve .006  percentage points in the standings), the NHL (after five minutes, go to a shootout that resembles pregame warmups), and NCAA football (a sudden-life format that was called “last licks” in my elementary school days).

The NFL owners approved a “modified sudden death” system, in that a field goal on the first possession of overtime extends the overtime period for a retaliatory possession by the other team. If the score is then equalized, then the next score wins the game. Therefore, the “catch-up” team must score at least a tying field goal on the second possession to stay alive. A touchdown at any time ends the game.

Oddly, this is only implemented for the postseason. The league stance is that there are already separate rules for regular season and the postseason. (This difference is merely that one overtime is permitted in the regular season and an additional timeout is given in postseason.) This may be to avoid an odd, but plausible, circumstance where an overtime session only lasts two possessions because of two conservative, ball-controlling offenses.

Competition Committee members Bill Polian and Rich McKay (Colts and Falcons presidents) explained that there were fundamental inequities to the team losing the coin toss in overtime. We will dissect them in another post. You can watch the news conference here.

• The oft-talked-about play of the week (video), where a down-by-contact ruling for the Redskins was overruled as a fumble and recovery for the Saints in overtime. Pereira points out that the ball is moving and being separated from the receiver, and therefore is a fumble. (A ball can move, as long as it remains in a hand or arm, as described in elegant prose to us.)
• Regarding the Flozell Adams hit on Justin Tuck (Cowboys–Giants) after the expiration of the first half, we have something for our offseason clip-and-save file:

It really doesn’t seems right that that play shouldn’t result in a 15-yard penalty on the opening kick of the third quarter, and I think that is something we’ll have to take a look at [in the offseason]. … It will be interesting to see how the Competition Committee addresses it. … I already promised [Giants head coach] Tom Coughlin on the Monday after the game that I would present it to the committee, and I’m sure it will be one of the things they look at early.

• An incomplete pass by the Buccaneers against the Panthers was reviewed and overturned by referee Don Carey and replay official Lloyd McPeters. Periera did not see indisputable visual evidence, andacknowledged that replay officials are graded on their performance for playoff assignments.
• In the same game, a rush by Maurice Jones-Drew of the Panthers was reviewed to see if it was a touchdown. It was ruled short by the line judge, and replay did not have indisputable visual evidence to overturn.

Pereira did not come near addressing any plays from the 49ers–Seahawks game, which the Niners organization alleges “several paragraphs” worth of disputed calls.

On the final play of the second quarter, the Cowboys were short on a 57-yard field goal attempt. While the Giants tried to advance the missed kick, the play was whistled dead. After the play was clearly over, Cowboys lineman Flozell Adams dealt a cheap shot to Justin Tuck (update: video). As Adams racked up four fines in the first three weeks of the season for flagrant personal fouls—including a leg whip that injured Tuck in Week 2—Adams likely faces a fine of repeat-offender magnitude and possibly suspension.

The personal foul was called on Adams, which was declined. Unfortunately the Fox Sports supposed “star” production team (another argument for another day, perhaps) was heading to commercial when announcer Joe Buck declared over unrelated video that a fight broke out. Without any visual, the network went to commercial, leaving the studio commentators on the other coast to explain what happened, with a short follow-up at the start of the third quarter.

It was explained, secondhandedly, that Bill Leavy announced the penalty on Adams was declined. While, as a technical matter, the penalty was vacated due to the end of the half, the Giants did not decline the penalty. (We reported as the Lions celebrated a comeback during an untimed down, if there had been any excessive celebration penalty, it would not be marked off because of the conclusion of the quarter.) Fox analyst Troy Aikman questioned why the Giants were even allowed to decline the penalty, even though the rules state that a team can decline any opponent’s penalty, as long as there are not offsetting penalties (ejections cannot be declined, even though the penalty that caused the ejection can be).

Since the field goal was no good, and the Giants were to assume possession on the next play if the clock did not read 0:00, the ability to extend the second quarter by a down was not available to the Giants. From the Rulebook, 4–8–2(c):

If there is a foul by the offense, there shall be no extension of the period. If the foul occurs on the last play of the half, a score by the offense is not counted. However, the period may be extended for an untimed down, upon the request of the defense, if the offensive team’s foul is for: …

(4) a personal foul or unsportsmanlike conduct foul committed prior to an interception of a forward pass or the recovery of a backward pass or fumble; or

(5) a foul by the kicking team prior to a player of the receiving team securing possession of the ball during a down in which there is a safety kick, a scrimmage kick, or a free kick.

Since Adams hit came in the action following the play, it is essentially unpenalized. If, hypothetically, a player goes after an opponent while the teams are heading for the locker rooms (perhaps a difference of five to ten seconds), that penalty is not part of the “continuing action” of the play. In addition to be a possible disqualification, Paragraph D of the same rule–section–article:

If there is a personal foul or unsportsmanlike conduct foul that (1) is not in the continuing action immediately after the end of a down and (2) occurs between the end of the second period and the beginning of the third period (or between the end of the fourth period and the beginning of an overtime period), the penalty shall be enforced on the ensuing kickoff.

We are placing this in our clip and save file for our end-of-season Competition Committee mock agenda.

The issue of protecting the umpire was on the agenda at the owners meeting earlier this month in Boston. The Competition Committee makes recommended changes in the offseason on matters of safety and fair play, subject to league approval.

Of course, with all of the attention paid to the umpire position, just today we witnessed a back judge in the wrong place at the wrong time.

We did not specifically address the star-treatment aspect here, as there is an entire conspiracy movement well documented on the Internet that the officials are out to “get” certain teams or protect certain players.

The conspiracy movement gained some steam over the past week with two hairline judgment calls in the Week 4 Ravens–Patriots game. The league won’t weigh in on whether the calls were bad, because it does not want to affect future judgment calls. In fact, the league’s Game-Related Discipline manual distributed to the players specifically addresses such judgment calls:

The Competition Committee emphasizes that whenever a game official is confronted with a potential unnecessary-roughness situation and is in doubt about calling a foul, he should lean toward safety and not hesitate to throw the flag.

Some have seized upon the effort of Tom Brady to draw a 15-yard penalty against the defense, and this week’s “Official Review” segment on NFL Total Access has the video of the play in question. After mostly evading a hit from Terrell Suggs, Brady turns to referee Ron Winter and gestures for a penalty flag. Winter, who is already reaching for the flag, nods to Brady and throws the flag. To those believing there is a conspiracy, this looked like Winter acquiesced to Brady’s plea, rather than—having already decided to penalize—merely acknowledged Brady’s request. (Much like if a quarterback unsuccessfully lobbies for the call, the referee would likely shake his head “no.”)

Not surprisingly, the commissioner yesterday dismissed claims of impropriety:

I don’t think they influence the officials. I take a different position. I think it’s really to some extent a coaching matter. The players should be playing. They should be focused on doing their job. And the officials need to do their job. If it interfered with the officials doing their job, then I would have more of a concern. I don’t think it influences the officials. I don’t think it’s been a problem that has been raised to me that it’s a conflict or in any way difficult for our officials to manage on the field.

• The call of interference with a fair catch on the Titans
• The interception caught off of a foot by the Giants, overturned on replay, but the return nullified.
• The catch possession through to the ground was discussed as it pertained to the Texans and Panthers touchdowns being upheld. Also, the Dolphins had an interception overturned on Monday Night Football on similar grounds (video highlight at 1:05).

The segment also covered the noncontroversial call on the last play of the Bengals–Packers game. With the clock about to expire, referee Ed Hochuli ruled that the game was over prior to the snap. He then corrected the call that there was one second left on the clock, but since the Packers were not set in their stance at the snap, it was a false-start penalty. Of course, a false start with the clock running under two minutes also includes a 10-second runoff, which then consumed the one second. It was only a matter of clean bookkeeping, as the game ended without a play being run under both circumstances.

Pereira did express regret that the catch/ground issue has been so misconstrued and misunderstood only two weeks into the season. Whether this results in a Competition Committee review (as he alluded to with the Titans interference play) remains to be seen.

John Madden’s retirement from broadcasting was short-lived. No, he’s not returning to the airwaves, but will work with the league in a consultant role.

The league announced today that Madden, the former CBS/Fox/ABC/NBC color commentator and Raiders coach, was appointed as an unpaid adviser with the league. In a statement released, Madden will have four duties in his position:

• advise Commissioner Roger Goodell “on matters pertaining to the game, including competitive issues, coaching and personnel development, technological innovations, player safety, and the Pro Football Hall of Fame.”
• discuss with a league executive about “multiple league-related issues”
• chair the Coaches Subcommittee of the Competition Committee
• participate in meetings of the General Managers Advisory Committee as well as conference calls with the commissioner’s office about issues from the previous week’s games.

While some have criticized Madden’s ability to convey complicated or obscure rules to the viewing public, his career focus on football is undeniably valuable. Factoring in his time since he was drafted by the Eagles in the 21st round (yes, 21st, and injured in training camp before playing) and his nine-year college coaching career, Madden has been drawing a football check for 50 years. While he always pines for the smashmouth era of football, he has adapted to the changes and new innovations that have come in that half-century.

From the press release, it sounds like Madden can essentially get involved in pretty much anything he wants. Or, Commissioner Gordon—er, Goodell—will just illuminate the secret Fatman distress signal as needed.