I'll be honest. The only thing I don't like is the concept of games ending in a tie. College football has been so much better off without it. Why does the NFL still need it?
The overtime rules are fine. They are whatever. It basically is similar to NHL where they start a whole new period. Of course, in the NHL the next goal wins it, which is how the NFL use to be, but since it is much easier to take advantage of the rules, especially nowadays, it makes for very anti-climactic wins like the 2009 Vikings-Saints game, which was marred by two very questionable pass interference penalties which allowed the Saints an easy opportunity for the game-winning field goal.
That game is what spurred the change to where both teams would get one possession, unless the first team scored a touchdown, which was a very nice, albeit indirect, old school nod to the first overtime game ever played between the Giants and Colts in the 1958 NFL championship.
If we just focus on the overtime itself, and not how we got to overtime, what would've been so wrong had the game continued into a 2nd overtime period, after Carlson f***ing missed his 3rd f***ing field goal?
.........................................Okay, I'm calm now.
Is it the way we determine a winner that really bothers people, or just that the game can still end in a tie?
Because both teams had their chance to win yesterday. Minnesota got two chances and their f***ing kicker f***ing missed both f***ing kicks!
...............................Err-hem sorry.
And Green Bay had their shot, and Minnesota's defense held them. Is there anything wrong with that, other than it resulted in a tie?
