The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Last night's game got me thinking.  Why not just get rid of overtime in preseason?  If the 2 teams are tied at the end of regulation in preseason, so be it.   It's not like effects the standings or anything.

Then maybe we would have seen a 2 point conversion attempt last night like a real game rather than an extra point attempt.  Don't get me wrong, I love they kicked the extra point instead of tieing it up because no one wants overtime, but why force the teams to do this to guarantee no overtime?  Just put it in the rules.  Makes sense to me.

Purest would argue that it would make the preseason games "different" than the regular season games. 

Personally I couldn't care, which way they do it, but the the current system makes it MORE likely, not less likely that there will be exciting plays in the fourth quarter.  Granted in this case Jax, down by 2 took the boring PAT instead of going for 2.

But very often in the fourth quarter a team will be down by 3 and go for it on 4th down (instead of kicking a FG) to avoid tying the game.  Likewise if down by 1 after scoring a TD teams will often attempt the 2 point conversion instead of the PAT so that the game ends. 

I agree.  No overtime. 

But they ARE different, they don't count.

And I'm not saying change it so that teams go for TD's as opposed to FG's or whatnot late in the 4th quarter, I dont' care about that really.  I'm saying change it so that if the score is tied in the 3rd quarter and no one scores in the 4th quarter no one is worried about going to OT and risking injury in a meaningless game.  The 4th quarter antics that coaches play so they don't go to OT is just a side benefit, they can still do that if they want.

If a coach really doesn't want overtime it can easily be avoided.  Even if the score is tied at the end of the fourth.  If on defense for the final play just tell your team not to do anything.  If on offense for the final play of the fourth tell your QB to throw an int and the let the other team run it in. 

OTOH a coach might want a longer scrimmage to give his 2nd/3rd stringers more opportunity to impress.   

I seriously doubt any coach would dare throw a game like that. It's one thing to "go for the win", even if it's likely to result in a loss, but deliberately giving the game away would not be tolerated by the league (fans, Vegas, whatever).

^^^ there is a vegas line on pre-season games ???

^^^ I thought the same thing, but then I thought it might just be a possibility. Gamblers have been itching for football to start I'm sure.

No one wants to lose even a 2nd or 3rd stringer to injury in OT.  Find me a coach who WANTS OT in preseason and I'll find you a coach who's gonna be looking for a job soon.

Does Vegas take bets on Preseason Games?

i know online sportsbooks do, but there isnt a very high max bet.  Of course they also take bets on the little league world series, lol.

The large sports books certainly do, and with all the usual max bets. They do tend to up the juice, though, so that increases their cover.

I don't understand this logic at all.  Team has 80 players competing for 53 spots.  Odds are before the first pre-season game you already have 30-50 of those players figured out, depending on the talent of the team. 

Lets say it is I have 45 players that are locks to make the team.  That leaves 35 players competing for 8 spots. 

As a coach, I am not playing the 45 locks to make the team during the pre-season overtime.  I am playing the other 35 players.  If the end result of an overtime is one player that I wind up keeping gets an extra 15 mins of playing time and I lose a player I wasn't planning on keeping anyway gets hurt (allowing me to bury him on the IR and kick the can to week 6) this is not the end of the world.    Plus it gives me a chance to evaluate who I want on the practice squad.

And injury to players #1-53 is bad, an injury to players #54-80 just makes my job easier comes cut time.

^^ There is no way that you have a complete football team with those bottom 30 or 35 players on your team, you'll have to stick at least a couple 2nd teamers in there to fill out positions and those guys are just as likely to have an injury as the 30 or so are.  Besides you already have a 4th preseason game where most of the toughest decisions are made for the final 53 as most of the starters play a quarter or less.

Now perhaps if they go to 2 preaseason games, then maybe OT will be welcomed by some, but as it is now, there's more than enough time to see all 80 players in game like conditions.  There's no need for OT and all the coaches know it.  I've seen teams go for 2 point conversions in the 3rd quarter in order to avoid ties.  It probably doesn't hurt to see that anyway, but like I said if you want to work on that you still can, you just don't have to worry about the score being what you want it to be.

OT helps nobody.

The teams don't want it.
The fans don't want it.
The players risk injury (and don't want it).
No additional money is made.
They have to pay for injuries, so the cost is high.

Just get rid of it altogether.  You get nothing by keeping it.

Tom Caughlin is not a member of the Pappy school of avoiding OT in the preseason at all costs.  Either that or he has complete trust in the idea that BB is a member of such a thought.

With under 2 mins left in the fourth the Giants score a TD  ahead 18-17.  Under normal circumstance at this point you need to go for 2, as a 3 point lead is significant but there is no real difference between a 1 or 2 point lead.  The Giant are successful bring the score to 20-17, which now means a FG by NE will score the game.  NE's 3rd string QB never gets the team into FG range anyway.

But I was kinda surprised by TC's decision to go for 2. 

Maybe he just felt like he wanted to work on the 2 point conversion.  I'd be more convinced if going for 2 would have tied the game rather than put them up by 3.

Coaches probably have lots of reasons.  I think that there is something to winning a game, even if it's just preseason.  It gets morale up.  Losses also can act as a wake-up call.  Maybe he thought that team chemistry needed the win, so they actually played for it. Who knows?

Actually I think he was playing for the win.  If he had gone for a PAT, NE would have needed a FG to win.  By going for 2, it meant NE need a FG to tie and a TD to win.  He knew there is no way BB would kick a FG to create a tie, thus forcing NE to go for the first down/TD, if NE was on fourth down and in FG range.