Clay Matthews: NFL should 'go to college rules' in OT

CRM 114

Premium Member
Donator
Joined:
Dec 9, 2013
Posts:
13,087
Liked Posts:
3,294
BJ Raji "a game we should have won"... riiiiight, because a team that needs a hail mary was the better team.

Anyways, the rules are just fine. Just get a stop for once, Packer D.

Green Bay was lucky they were still in it at the end. If Arizona plays to the best of their ability, it's a repeat of Week 16. Palmer insisted on keeping the Packers in it.
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
33,041
Liked Posts:
17,086
Clay Matthews: NFL should 'go to college rules' in OT



For the second straight postseason the Green Bay Packers were bounced from the tournament in overtime without touching the football.

After a double Hail Mary drive by Aaron Rodgers to tie the game, the Packers lost a bizarre coin flip, then watched Larry Fitzgerald dominate his way to 80 yards in three plays for the winning touchdown.

Count Clay Matthews among the many who think Rodgers should have gotten a chance to match Fitzgerald.


"Let's go college rules. Just put us on the 25 or whatever it is and let us go at it," the linebacker said when asked if the rule should be reexamined, via USA Today's Tom Pelissero. "But I don't know. I'm sure it'll be talked about. It sucks that we don't have an opportunity. But those are the rules right now. We've got to play by them. We had an opportunity to stop them on their side of the field and force a punt and kick a field goal to win, and we didn't do that."

The current overtime format was permanently modified in 2012 to allow both teams to receive the football in overtime, unless the team that receives the football first scores a touchdown. The modified rule has made some coaches consider kicking off to start overtime, much like Patriots coach Bill Belichick opted to do in a Week 16 overtime loss to the New York Jets.

Some believe the rules should be extended to allow both teams to touch the ball regardless of who receives the first kick, which would render the coin flip less vital.

Matthews admitted his opinion is skewed by the outcome of Saturday's game.

"It sucks that a coin toss can determine that," Matthews said, "but if that was us on the other side of the coin, we probably wouldn't be complaining."

Other Packers weren't calling for change, despite the brutal ending.

"Change the rule?" Julius Peppers said. "Nah, the rules are the rules, man. Play by the rules."

Added B.J. Raji: "That's sucker stuff, man. We lost the game. We should've won."

In the end, the Packers' defense had a chance to keep the Cardinals out of the end zone. It failed.

Well, that would be the absolute worst thing they could do - but given that the beloved, spoiled Packers were "victimized", the NFL may make rules changes.
However, the NFL is smart enough not to do what Clay Matthews wants. They won't go to the college rule.

Hey, Clay, here's an idea if you want your QB to touch the ball: TACKLE. You ran full speed at Fitzgerald, had a clean shot at him, and fell right off and failed to make the tackle. Had you not failed at that, you might have seen the ball in OT.

Mirror, dude. Mirror.
 

Packer Fan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
6,865
Liked Posts:
2,230
Location:
J'Marcus Webb's Face. His Fac
The assumption that the team that gets the ball first will win is stupid and illogical but I am of the belief that both teams should touch the ball at least once in OT.

There can be an advantage to kicking (Belichick at least thinks so). I think both teams should get the ball as well but I don't think shrinking the field is the answer. I think the NFL world is too impatient for a good solution. Probably why most people aren't tuning into and sticking with 6 period playoff hockey games.
 

L GUAPO

New member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
3,754
Liked Posts:
1,442
Location:
Newport Beach, CA
Haahaha.....the cheap shot artist crying again after choking. Can't just accept the usual choke job. Looking pretty pathetic:smug2:
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
33,041
Liked Posts:
17,086
There can be an advantage to kicking (Belichick at least thinks so). I think both teams should get the ball as well but I don't think shrinking the field is the answer. I think the NFL world is too impatient for a good solution. Probably why most people aren't tuning into and sticking with 6 period playoff hockey games.

Who isn't watching playoff OT hockey? No better sporting event!
 

Packer Fan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
6,865
Liked Posts:
2,230
Location:
J'Marcus Webb's Face. His Fac
Who isn't watching playoff OT hockey? No better sporting event!

Most people. Not me. I'll watch Canuck playoff overtimes until 3:00 am.
 

JZsportsfan

New member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2013
Posts:
2,503
Liked Posts:
674
Location:
Chicago
The good things with the Packers is there is always next year. Don't have to wait 5+ years in between every playoff loss
 

wklink

CBMB refugee
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
2,551
Liked Posts:
1,537
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Seattle Sounders FC
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Never thought I would agree with Packer Fan about anything. I like the rules as set except it would be nice to let the other team the opportunity to match the score.

Each team gets one shot at scoring. Team one scores a TD, the other has to score a TD to keep the game going. None of this short field shit, go down and tie it up.

After that then the next score wins it all.

That way the coin flip team still has an advantage but it isn't a TD and done thing.
 

bearsfootball516

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 30, 2013
Posts:
2,096
Liked Posts:
969
As glad as I am that the rule hurt the Packers yesterday, I actually agree with Clay on this one.

The whole point of the rule is to allow both teams to touch the ball. If I remember correctly, the factor that pushed it over was Brett Favre and the Vikings not getting a chance to touch the ball in overtime against the Saints in the 2010 NFC Championship. The new rule was introduced during the offseason after that.

Except, the rule still doesn't work because it still doesn't guarantee both teams touch the ball. Overtime can still largely be decided by the coin flip, an action that's purely based on luck. If both teams have really good offenses and bad defenses and you lose the coin toss, well, you're pretty much screwed.

Wklink's idea nailed it. First team gets the ball and can either score a TD, FG, punt or commit a turnover. Then, the other team has a chance to match or pull ahead. If they pull ahead, the game ends and they win. If they fail to tie or pull ahead, the first team wins. If they tie, then it turns into sudden death. Not complicated, and it allows both offenses a chance to do their work without getting short changed.
 

L GUAPO

New member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
3,754
Liked Posts:
1,442
Location:
Newport Beach, CA
The good things with the Packers is there is always next year. Don't have to wait 5+ years in between every playoff loss

Enjoy the usual choke job. I'm sure you are used to it by now
 

da_bears6

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 3, 2014
Posts:
2,796
Liked Posts:
1,471
"there was a little protective case that might have been weighted in the heads favor." - Clay Matthews.

#conspiracy

refs hatez the packersz
 

mecha

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
12,877
Liked Posts:
8,601
it wasn't enough that if a team scores a field goal that the other team gets a possession? the old school rules where you could win off a field goal was more like a tough shit, you should've won in regulation thing. or, your team can defend and prevent the other from getting the field goal in the first place.

you people forget that it's just football, it was never intended to give everyone a fair chance to match the other team?

college rules are fucking stupid. I saw a game with Ball State and another team that I forget where they kept going back and forth scoring touchdowns in overtime. cause you know college, defense is non-existent.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,235
Liked Posts:
35,298
Personally I would just rather they alternate possessions using the full field until one team doesn't match the other teams scores. It would be interesting to see a few more ties in the regular season and I doubt teams would match each other score for score much anyways.
 

Wintermute

New member
Joined:
Sep 9, 2012
Posts:
1,975
Liked Posts:
1,333
Clay "Sour Grapes" Matthews.
sourgrapes.jpg
 

PolarBear

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 8, 2013
Posts:
4,711
Liked Posts:
2,801
I believe even if a TD is scored, the other team should get an opportunity to match it.

That should then just continue on until one team has scored and the other team hasn't on matching series.
 

ijustposthere

Message Board Hero
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
33,397
Liked Posts:
24,918
Location:
Any-Town, USA
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Purdue Boilermakers
I had a feeling this was coming. At least the FG rule, I understood why people got upset. I didn't agree, but it was understandable. People pissed and moaned for this, now they moan more after it happens. Leave the rule as it it. Pretty perfect for the professionals if you ask me.
 

vabearsfan15

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 12, 2013
Posts:
7,451
Liked Posts:
4,838
NFL Rules are the most fair IMO. All the defense does is have to make sure the other team's offense doesn't drive the WHOLE field on them and then their offense receives the advantage of playing with 4 downs.
 

redgrange19

Eater of Ham
Joined:
Nov 4, 2012
Posts:
8,543
Liked Posts:
6,695
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bears
Because the better team wins every single game right?

Packers won the Super Bowl as the 6th seed, but they were supposed to do that right?

Why play the game if the better team wins every time?

Lol, not even the point I was making. The "better team" doesn't usually need a hail mary to win and/or tie a football game. Are you trying to insinuate the Packers are better than Arizona? Not at all, they destroyed them in the regular season, and had good control of last nights game.

No need to use the Superbowl run as an illogical point of reference. I firmly understand underdogs can win, however, last night, no way in hell were the Packers a better team. NOR at any point in the season.
 

JZsportsfan

New member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2013
Posts:
2,503
Liked Posts:
674
Location:
Chicago
Enjoy the usual choke job. I'm sure you are used to it by now

Losing in the playoffs isn't a choke job lol

But whatever helps you tolerate another losing season, go with it

Lol, not even the point I was making. The "better team" doesn't usually need a hail mary to win and/or tie a football game. Are you trying to insinuate the Packers are better than Arizona? Not at all, they destroyed them in the regular season, and had good control of last nights game.

No need to use the Superbowl run as an illogical point of reference. I firmly understand underdogs can win, however, last night, no way in hell were the Packers a better team. NOR at any point in the season.

No, Arizona was far and away the better team. That doesn't mean the Packers shouldn't have won the game. They were in a position to win, and it is more than right for a player on the team to be upset that they let that opportunity to slip away.

And also,what relevance does a regular season showdown have on a playoff game? None, different styles win in the playoffs and guys get healthy which played a huge role in yesterdays game. If Shields was out, and the GB Oline was in shambles like Week 16, then GB would have been blown out, but that's why people watch the NFL. Things change week to week, especially this GB team, they were awful this year. The most frustrating team to watch in my lifetime tbh, can't believe they won a playoff game.
 

Top