One of the big headlines in this year's NFL offseason was the NFL owners' approval of a rule change to the overtime regulations. The new rule was that NFL teams would both get a chance to possess the ball during the overtime period, regardless of whether the first team scores a touchdown first. This rule was adopted in the 2021/2022 offseason for playoff games during a sort of experimental trial period. With the approval of the rule this offseason, this rule is sure to become part of the game for good, in all games, the playoffs and the regular season. This permanent rule change has many implications for the direction that the league is heading. It also serves as an indicator of the ways that the league has already changed. To understand this rule and what it represents, the reason for its existence must be understood. 

 

On January 23, 2022, the Buffalo Bills played the Kansas City Chiefs in the Divisional Round of the playoffs. Some remember this game as ‘13 seconds’ (the amount of time left on the clock in the fourth when Patrick Mahomes got the ball back, down by three points), some remember it for the insane fourth quarter in which 28 combined points were scored, some may even remember this game for the performance of WRs Gabe Davis (201 yds, 4 TDs) and Tyreek Hill (150 yds, 1 TD). How I remember this game was watching the Chiefs win the OT coin toss and knowing, all the way to my bones, that this game was over. After watching Patrick Mahomes play the way that he did throughout the game, and then at the end get in field goal range in 13 seconds, I knew that the outcome of the game was a foregone conclusion before the Chiefs even took the field. This was where the controversy kicked in. Dismayed Bills fans led the charge, but the rest of the football world was right behind them. There was much anger as well as confusion about why, in a game with such a high level of offensive performance, both teams didn’t get the chance to possess the ball. In a game where scoring a touchdown seemed like a certainty, why should the outcome be decided, essentially, by the toss of a coin? With the NFL world upset, owners agreed on an update to the overtime rules in the playoffs that ensured that, in games like the Chiefs-Bills in 2022, both teams would get a chance to possess the ball, no matter if the first team scores a touchdown. What started out as a playoff rule has now, as of April 1st of this year, become the protocol for every game. Owners figured that they would give fans what they wanted: a seemingly ‘more fair’ solution to overtime football. This trend of changes to make things ‘more fair’ seems to be increasing every season. Starting in 2021, the NFL has been gradually making the replay process more extensive and invasive. Replay Assistance has been established as a way to either confirm or contradict calls on the field by the officials. Instead of allowing the officials' rule to be law, technicians off the field are employed to make certain calls that are deemed ‘questionable’. The expanded playoff (agreed to in 2020) follows a similar theme to the new OT and replay guidelines. An increase from two to three wildcard teams from each conference now earn a trip to the postseason. A total of fourteen teams, close to half of the entire NFL. Do all these changes inspire a fresh competitive edge to the sport? Does the extended replay ensure teams are ultra locked into the game so that they win beyond the margin of a technicality revealed by the new replay procedure? Does the expanded playoff make the postseason mean more, as more teams are fighting each other to get the title that they each want desperately? And do the new overtime rules require each team to dig deeper to eke out a win against a team that has the same opportunity to win as they do? Or is it more realistic that these recent changes hurt the integrity of this sport that has such a rich tradition? Does finding out the “technically correct call” matter more than preserving the authority of the officials and expediting commencement of gameplay? Does adding extra playoff seeds foster greater competitiveness in the postseason, or does it take away the significance of earning a playoff seed and dilute the prestige of making it to the playoffs? And lastly, consider if giving each team a chance to possess the football during overtime helps the sport to be as fair as possible, or if it deteriorates the tradition of ruthlessness and toughness that has defined the NFL since its inception

 

I am all for change as long as it is for the right reasons. The banning of the hip-drop tackle and certain hits with the helmet helps to ensure player safety. These changes help make sure that these athletes get to continue playing the game that they love without unnecessary added risk. The implementation of the dynamic kickoff was added to help encourage the frequency of the most exciting play in football. This change adds excitement and helps to preserve the competitive spirit of the game. Unlike the qualities of the new dynamic kickoff, the newly instituted OT rules gives the competitive spirit of football a crutch and leans into the same vices that resulted in the expanded playoffs and Replay Assist. Football is meant to be hard-nosed, mean, and unforgiving. The physical nature of the game itself proves this. The uncontrollable hurt that players and fans feel proves this. The rules of the game are gradually drifting away from these attributes that make football football.