We should go back to using ties...

[theSabanator20]

If you can't beat a team by at least 1 pt in a 60 minute span, you don't deserve any more of a chance to win than the team you're tied with. Think about it. What if we still used ties in the BCS? Ohio State and Notre Dame would have been 10 win teams, definitely not championship caliber. They sure wouldn't be undefeated. If you can't out coach and outplay a noticeably inferior opponent, you don't deserve to win. Simple as that. I think the tie should be reinstated into college football. It would change the perceptions of teams SOS and records dramatically. Alabama and LSU would have been 11-0-1 in 2011. No losses. LSU in 2007, 10-0-2. Notre Dame in 2012, 10-0-2. Wisconsin 2012, 7-2-3. Looks a lot different, doesn't it? You could judge a team less subjectively by using ties. You think Notre Dame gets to Miami last year with a 10-0-2 record? I don't think so. Overtimes should only be used in conference championship games. And semi final games. If there is a tie for the national championship, split it. Can anyone back me up on this?

[theSabanator20]

It's either this or change the overtime rules, because its too easy to scheme for. Win the toss, pick defense, hold opponent, now you know what you HAVE to do. Anyone can win that way.

I think if you do OT, it should be

1. flip the coin, choose offense or defense, choose side to defend
2. Offense starts at 50, must go for it on 4th down. Score, must go for 2. Don't score, reset the ball at the 50, give other team a shot. If they score, go for 2 and get it, flip the field and repeat until the second team fails to gain advantage.

[HUNKERED DOWN DAWG]

It's either this or change the overtime rules, because its too easy to scheme for. Win the toss, pick defense, hold opponent, now you know what you HAVE to do. Anyone can win that way.

I think if you do OT, it should be

1. flip the coin, choose offense or defense, choose side to defend
2. Offense starts at 50, must go for it on 4th down. Score, must go for 2. Don't score, reset the ball at the 50, give other team a shot. If they score, go for 2 and get it, flip the field and repeat until the second team fails to gain advantage.

How we did it back when I was playing was pretty decent ot scheme. Basically each team gets five minutes. Ball spotted on your own 20. One time out per "half" and basically whoever scores the most wins. If no one scored by the end of the ot, 1 point was awarded to the team who made it further into the other teams half of the field.. Basically, if team A made it to team B's 30 and Team B made it to team A's 20, then team B wins.

[theSabanator20]

It's either this or change the overtime rules, because its too easy to scheme for. Win the toss, pick defense, hold opponent, now you know what you HAVE to do. Anyone can win that way.

I think if you do OT, it should be

1. flip the coin, choose offense or defense, choose side to defend
2. Offense starts at 50, must go for it on 4th down. Score, must go for 2. Don't score, reset the ball at the 50, give other team a shot. If they score, go for 2 and get it, flip the field and repeat until the second team fails to gain advantage.

How we did it back when I was playing was pretty decent ot scheme. Basically each team gets five minutes. Ball spotted on your own 20. One time out per "half" and basically whoever scores the most wins. If no one scored by the end of the ot, 1 point was awarded to the team who made it further into the other teams half of the field.. Basically, if team A made it to team B's 30 and Team B made it to team A's 20, then team B wins.

Back in the day, people played hard nosed football. That's a dying culture in football today... Game has changed a lot since they got rid of the tie.

[FuckESPNdotCOM]

If you can't beat a team by at least 1 pt in a 60 minute span, you don't deserve any more of a chance to win than the team you're tied with. Think about it. What if we still used ties in the BCS? Ohio State and Notre Dame would have been 10 win teams, definitely not championship caliber. They sure wouldn't be undefeated. If you can't out coach and outplay a noticeably inferior opponent, you don't deserve to win. Simple as that. I think the tie should be reinstated into college football. It would change the perceptions of teams SOS and records dramatically. Alabama and LSU would have been 11-0-1 in 2011. No losses. LSU in 2007, 10-0-2. Notre Dame in 2012, 10-0-2. Wisconsin 2012, 7-2-3. Looks a lot different, doesn't it? You could judge a team less subjectively by using ties. You think Notre Dame gets to Miami last year with a 10-0-2 record? I don't think so. Overtimes should only be used in conference championship games. And semi final games. If there is a tie for the national championship, split it. Can anyone back me up on this?

Ties aren't good. They screw up records and perceptions, and add to the mess of choosing teams for bowls. If you're the better team, you'll win in OT. Ties are more often than not unsatisfying, unresolved games. Being undefeated means less. I mean you could go 0-0-12 and be undefeated. Do they get a bowl game? Are they horrible? Are they good? Are they 6-6 and should go to a bad bowl? Did they play and tie a couple of 10-1-1 teams?

I mean the Choke at Doak was awesome, because the Gators got their hearts stomped on in the 4th. I still would have preferred a win because the record book doesn't show whom the real winners of that game were.

I mean the mere fact that you say certain games should be allowed OT and others not just shows how flawed your thinking is.

[ericberry14]

It's either this or change the overtime rules, because its too easy to scheme for. Win the toss, pick defense, hold opponent, now you know what you HAVE to do. Anyone can win that way.

I think if you do OT, it should be

1. flip the coin, choose offense or defense, choose side to defend
2. Offense starts at 50, must go for it on 4th down. Score, must go for 2. Don't score, reset the ball at the 50, give other team a shot. If they score, go for 2 and get it, flip the field and repeat until the second team fails to gain advantage.

How we did it back when I was playing was pretty decent ot scheme. Basically each team gets five minutes. Ball spotted on your own 20. One time out per "half" and basically whoever scores the most wins. If no one scored by the end of the ot, 1 point was awarded to the team who made it further into the other teams half of the field.. Basically, if team A made it to team B's 30 and Team B made it to team A's 20, then team B wins.

Back in the day, people played hard nosed football. That's a dying culture in football today... Game has changed a lot since they got rid of the tie.

Are you even old enough for to have seen a tie?


It was interesting until your dumbass overtime system for championship games.

[JdPat04]

If you can't beat a team by at least 1 pt in a 60 minute span, you don't deserve any more of a chance to win than the team you're tied with. Think about it. What if we still used ties in the BCS? Ohio State and Notre Dame would have been 10 win teams, definitely not championship caliber. They sure wouldn't be undefeated. If you can't out coach and outplay a noticeably inferior opponent, you don't deserve to win. Simple as that. I think the tie should be reinstated into college football. It would change the perceptions of teams SOS and records dramatically. Alabama and LSU would have been 11-0-1 in 2011. No losses. LSU in 2007, 10-0-2. Notre Dame in 2012, 10-0-2. Wisconsin 2012, 7-2-3. Looks a lot different, doesn't it? You could judge a team less subjectively by using ties. You think Notre Dame gets to Miami last year with a 10-0-2 record? I don't think so. Overtimes should only be used in conference championship games. And semi final games. If there is a tie for the national championship, split it. Can anyone back me up on this?

Ties aren't good. They screw up records and perceptions, and add to the mess of choosing teams for bowls. If you're the better team, you'll win in OT. Ties are more often than not unsatisfying, unresolved games. Being undefeated means less.I mean you could go 0-0-12 and be undefeated. Do they get a bowl game? Are they horrible? Are they good? Are they 6-6 and should go to a bad bowl? Did they play and tie a couple of 10-1-1 teams?

I mean the Choke at Doak was awesome, because the Gators got their hearts stomped on in the 4th. I still would have preferred a win because the record book doesn't show whom the real winners of that game were.

I mean the mere fact that you say certain games should be allowed OT and others not just shows how flawed your thinking is.

Bowl game rules are based on wins, not on "non losses"