| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should ties be abolished? |
| Yes |
|
52% |
[ 89 ] |
| No |
|
47% |
[ 80 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 169 |
|
| Author |
Message |
biggio7
Joined: 18 Feb 2007
Posts: 6690
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:52 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
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.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
diamondbull424
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 10018
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
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.
_________________
Blind arrogance sows the field of it's own destruction. - Commander Greil, Fire Emblem |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CrashMan510
Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 2719
Location: Bay Area
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
the poll would be a tie 
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikingsrule
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 39527
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CrashMan510 wrote: | | the poll would be a tie |
Sorry, i just killed the tie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MathMan
Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 16024
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CrashMan510 wrote: | | the poll would be a tie |
Lock it up, mods
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FirstDownFaulk
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 2993
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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.
_________________
Stevan Ridley, Att: 225, Yds: 1010, Y/A: 4.0, TD:9
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 8656
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
geeknhard
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 166
Location: NW Iowa
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
MathMan
Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 16024
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
FirstDownFaulk
Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 2993
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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.
_________________
Stevan Ridley, Att: 225, Yds: 1010, Y/A: 4.0, TD:9
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justo
Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 9105
Location: Hood River, Oregon
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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 |
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 
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:
_________________
| jfinley88 wrote: | | Woke up in the shower wearing a frog costume with the nipples cut out and my face painted like a tiger |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MathMan
Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 16024
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
[UMN]
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 11830
Location: Desolation Row
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
should go into a shoot-out.
and by shoot-out I mean a game of HORSE by the kickers.
_________________
[UMN]'s 2013 Vikings' Offense Tracker |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MathMan
Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 16024
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
howabout a shootout of hailmary's from the opp 40
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mozwanted
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 16720
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
