Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Should the tie be abolished?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Should ties be abolished?
Yes
52%
 52%  [ 89 ]
No
47%
 47%  [ 80 ]
Total Votes : 169

Author Message
biggio7


Joined: 18 Feb 2007
Posts: 10563
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



Yes, get rid of the tie.

I don't want it to be like college cause that would get crazy with the stats etc. Just keep going.

A field goal shoot out is a really good idea. You move back every like 5 or 10 yards after each made turn.
_________________

Adopt a Texan: Mr. Kareem Jackson
FFBB; Suule o nerte!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
diamondbull424


Moderator
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 12988
Location: Baltimore, MD
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't like ties. I'd much rather see a decided game. Sure a game is 60 minutes long... but everyone saying blank statements like "if you can't get it done in 'x' minutes"... it just makes me laugh. I could say the same thing for why we shouldn't have an overtime period to begin with. The overtime is established to create a decided winner.

I think we should shorten the extra period to 8 minutes... and if no one scores in that time period then we move onto "double overtime" in which we utilize the college rules (FTMP)... put the ball at the 50 yard line and allow teams to go field goals for the first drive and have to go TDs on the 2nd drive. This should allow us to see more "fun" plays to end the game. We could see 60+ yd field goal attempts regularly in overtime. And we could see more hailmary climatic finishes to the endzone.

A tie means nothing to me. I'm sure the players (that matter) wouldn't mind if games were extended a few plays if it meant deciding a winner. None of them even seem to like ties anyway. Or at least they're somehow surprised that they actually exist.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrashMan510


Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 4594
Location: Bay Area
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the poll would be a tie Laughing
_________________


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eSN8Cwit_s
fuarge
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48344
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CrashMan510 wrote:
the poll would be a tie Laughing


Sorry, i just killed the tie.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MathMan


Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 21858
Location: wisconsin
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CrashMan510 wrote:
the poll would be a tie Laughing


Laughing

Lock it up, mods
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FirstDownFaulk


Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 5495
Location: New York
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

diamondbull424 wrote:
I don't like ties. I'd much rather see a decided game. Sure a game is 60 minutes long... but everyone saying blank statements like "if you can't get it done in 'x' minutes"... it just makes me laugh. I could say the same thing for why we shouldn't have an overtime period to begin with. The overtime is established to create a decided winner.

I think we should shorten the extra period to 8 minutes... and if no one scores in that time period then we move onto "double overtime" in which we utilize the college rules (FTMP)... put the ball at the 50 yard line and allow teams to go field goals for the first drive and have to go TDs on the 2nd drive. This should allow us to see more "fun" plays to end the game. We could see 60+ yd field goal attempts regularly in overtime. And we could see more hailmary climatic finishes to the endzone.

A tie means nothing to me. I'm sure the players (that matter) wouldn't mind if games were extended a few plays if it meant deciding a winner. None of them even seem to like ties anyway. Or at least they're somehow surprised that they actually exist.

They should utilize the college system anyways....it almost certainly ensures there isn't a tie. If the score is essentially "0-0" at the end, what was the point of playing in the first place ?? There NEEDS to be a winner.
_________________
jrry32 wrote:
Tom Brady hasn't left NE and proven himself not to be a system QB...so he is one.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10637
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm fine with ties. If the game was such a sloppy defensive slug fest that neither team could score in an entire extra period, I'll take it. In the regular season there is no NEED for a victor.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
geeknhard


Joined: 03 Jan 2011
Posts: 192
Location: NW Iowa
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't have a problem with them, especially considering how infrequently they happen. Besides, it's not like they can happen in the playoffs, so I don't see where there's a problem that needs to be fixed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MathMan


Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 21858
Location: wisconsin
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FirstDownFaulk wrote:
diamondbull424 wrote:
I don't like ties. I'd much rather see a decided game. Sure a game is 60 minutes long... but everyone saying blank statements like "if you can't get it done in 'x' minutes"... it just makes me laugh. I could say the same thing for why we shouldn't have an overtime period to begin with. The overtime is established to create a decided winner.

I think we should shorten the extra period to 8 minutes... and if no one scores in that time period then we move onto "double overtime" in which we utilize the college rules (FTMP)... put the ball at the 50 yard line and allow teams to go field goals for the first drive and have to go TDs on the 2nd drive. This should allow us to see more "fun" plays to end the game. We could see 60+ yd field goal attempts regularly in overtime. And we could see more hailmary climatic finishes to the endzone.

A tie means nothing to me. I'm sure the players (that matter) wouldn't mind if games were extended a few plays if it meant deciding a winner. None of them even seem to like ties anyway. Or at least they're somehow surprised that they actually exist.

They should utilize the college system anyways....it almost certainly ensures there isn't a tie. If the score is essentially "0-0" at the end, what was the point of playing in the first place ?? There NEEDS to be a winner.


why does there need to be a winner.
If things are that close, the records should reflect that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FirstDownFaulk


Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 5495
Location: New York
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MathMan wrote:
FirstDownFaulk wrote:
diamondbull424 wrote:
I don't like ties. I'd much rather see a decided game. Sure a game is 60 minutes long... but everyone saying blank statements like "if you can't get it done in 'x' minutes"... it just makes me laugh. I could say the same thing for why we shouldn't have an overtime period to begin with. The overtime is established to create a decided winner.

I think we should shorten the extra period to 8 minutes... and if no one scores in that time period then we move onto "double overtime" in which we utilize the college rules (FTMP)... put the ball at the 50 yard line and allow teams to go field goals for the first drive and have to go TDs on the 2nd drive. This should allow us to see more "fun" plays to end the game. We could see 60+ yd field goal attempts regularly in overtime. And we could see more hailmary climatic finishes to the endzone.

A tie means nothing to me. I'm sure the players (that matter) wouldn't mind if games were extended a few plays if it meant deciding a winner. None of them even seem to like ties anyway. Or at least they're somehow surprised that they actually exist.

They should utilize the college system anyways....it almost certainly ensures there isn't a tie. If the score is essentially "0-0" at the end, what was the point of playing in the first place ?? There NEEDS to be a winner.


why does there need to be a winner.
If things are that close, the records should reflect that.

Without a winner...whats the point of competing ?? Might as well stay home and not play the game since the results essentially reflect that it wasn't.
_________________
jrry32 wrote:
Tom Brady hasn't left NE and proven himself not to be a system QB...so he is one.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
justo


Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 13425
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

james.mcmurry13 wrote:
If they just kept adding quarters to the game, that wouldn't work, but if they made some other sort of alternative overtime, it would be nice to always have a team win and lose.
Slapboxing. We've already discussed this james.
MrDrew wrote:
FirstDownFaulk wrote:
Leave it to the kickers, kind of like a shootout.....line up from 40-45 and whoever hits the most out of 3, wins Laughing


Field Goal H-O-R-S-E? Might be more interesting.
Better way to do this. PATs but with different players. Golden goal style.
ninjapirate wrote:
In the event of the game ending in a tie I feel opposing teams kickers should rochambeau for the win. flip a coin and winner of the call goes first.
Akers win the toss. Goes first with rock. Paper is chosen. Second kicker always wins Wink Laughing


Gonna possibly say a crazy statement and say that I don't think we should have OT outside of playoff games. Teams are too conservative as is. Play to win the game. :ducks from tomatoes:
_________________
Webmaster wrote:
The difference is that this is a FOOTBALL forum. Heated debates about FOOTBALL are expected and encouraged. If you want to discuss your cure for Ebola, try ebolasfuture.com or any other appropriate forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MathMan


Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 21858
Location: wisconsin
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FirstDownFaulk wrote:
MathMan wrote:
FirstDownFaulk wrote:
diamondbull424 wrote:
I don't like ties. I'd much rather see a decided game. Sure a game is 60 minutes long... but everyone saying blank statements like "if you can't get it done in 'x' minutes"... it just makes me laugh. I could say the same thing for why we shouldn't have an overtime period to begin with. The overtime is established to create a decided winner.

I think we should shorten the extra period to 8 minutes... and if no one scores in that time period then we move onto "double overtime" in which we utilize the college rules (FTMP)... put the ball at the 50 yard line and allow teams to go field goals for the first drive and have to go TDs on the 2nd drive. This should allow us to see more "fun" plays to end the game. We could see 60+ yd field goal attempts regularly in overtime. And we could see more hailmary climatic finishes to the endzone.

A tie means nothing to me. I'm sure the players (that matter) wouldn't mind if games were extended a few plays if it meant deciding a winner. None of them even seem to like ties anyway. Or at least they're somehow surprised that they actually exist.

They should utilize the college system anyways....it almost certainly ensures there isn't a tie. If the score is essentially "0-0" at the end, what was the point of playing in the first place ?? There NEEDS to be a winner.


why does there need to be a winner.
If things are that close, the records should reflect that.

Without a winner...whats the point of competing ?? Might as well stay home and not play the game since the results essentially reflect that it wasn't.


but the game was played. there were chances to be had.

yet it still stayed equal
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
[UMN]


Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 13303
Location: Desolation Row
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

should go into a shoot-out.

and by shoot-out I mean a game of HORSE by the kickers.
_________________
From the fool’s gold mouthpiece the hollow horn,
Plays wasted words, proves to warn,
That he not busy being born is busy dying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MathMan


Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 21858
Location: wisconsin
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

howabout a shootout of hailmary's from the opp 40
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mozwanted


Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 17071
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MathMan wrote:
howabout a shootout of hailmary's from the opp 40


how about they just go 6 on 6 rugby mode? that would be crazy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL General All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 4 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group