Packers' Matthews wants rule change

Right on cue, someone's calling for a rule change. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... ules-in-ot

Probably he's just speaking out of frustration in the heat of the moment, so I don't want to come down too hard on the guy, but I assume many more people are calling for a similar treatment this morning. Sour grapes, the way I see it. They had 4 quarters to win that game, then a miraculous overtime for a second chance to stop Arizona and still couldn't get it done (props to Fitz, of course).

It must suck to get bumped like that two years in a row, but I wouldn't want to see them change the overtime rule. I like the new system.

Well, Clay, if you want your guy to get the ball, try tackling in OT. :229031_shrug:

Oh, and the college rules for OT suck. I like the new NFL way pretty good, and it cost us at least one game since it has been implemented. Too soon to tinker with it again.

I've always hated the OT rules. Each team should get a possession no matter what.

Not so sure about starting deep into an opponents zone though.

I brought it up in the game thread so not at all suprised. The sad fact is they did play in OT and they played poorly. The reason that Rodgers didnt get the ball is because the part of your team known as defense crumbled. The Packers,Pats and Steelers are some of the worst teams at whining and expecting rule changes to benefit them.

You always get a possession, so long as you actually keep them out of the end zone. If you give up 80 yards and a TD in 3 plays, I don't see why you deserve a possession.

If they change it so each team gets a possession no matter what, you're going to start seeing more and more ties. I don't want that. Pretty sure players won't like that either.

And instead of doing it, you complain about the rules.

If they are going to change OT rules, I prefer they go to a timed period. None of this "You get a possession, you get a possession, everybody gets a possession" junk.

Maybe take a page out of hockey... 8 man OT football anyone?

-bsd

Oh, he wants a full length mirror?

That team and fanbase needs to quit whining. Don't give up a TD like you have in the last 2 years and your offense does get the ball back. If Clay Clay wants his offense to get the ball back he has the power to do something about it, and he's failed both times.

It's just fine the way it is. Better than the old way in my opinion. Regardless if it isn't a designated amount of time played, it will always come down to sudden death.

If they can complain about this then I can complain that these games should be 5 quarters. If the Seahawks had more time, they could of had won the Carolina/Seahawk game. :sarcasm_off:

Pretty pathetic for a defensive player whining about it (but he is on a team full of them though). Do your job and your team wins. At least he was out there this time though. Last time he watched from the sidelines.

If they didn't like the outcome they should have called tails...........................

jkitsune":3qq0189i said:

You always get a possession, so long as you actually keep them out of the end zone. If you give up 80 yards and a TD in 3 plays, I don't see why you deserve a possession.

Click to expand...

I never really got this argument about teams not "deserving" a possession if they can't keep the other one out of the possession. The goal of the game shouldn't be to make one team be tested in a way the other team hasn't. That is the definition of being "unfair" So you can say that the Packers should have stopped the Cardinals from getting in the endzone that's a valid point. But if you can't turn around and say the Packers were also given a chance on offense but the Cardinals stopped them how can you say the end result was decided in a fair manner.

Obviously I'm not a Packer fan but the OT rules have bugged me for a long time. Just my two cents

massari":3hyjpoui said:

I've always hated the OT rules. Each team should get a possession no matter what.

Not so sure about starting deep into an opponents zone though.

Click to expand...

Just hold them to a FG and you get another possession. The only teams complaining about the rule are the teams that blew the game with bad Defense.

I would too, if my team kept losing overtime games without ever getting the ball. They had a chance to go for two at the end of regulation if they didn't like the overtime rules.

rideaducati":6poe3lcb said:

I would too, if my team kept losing overtime games without ever getting the ball. They had a chance to go for two at the end of regulation if they didn't like the overtime rules.

Click to expand...

Another solid point.

Packers never should've won that game.

Of course, from their perspective it's now happened in two straight years; once in a game they should've won and once in a game they should've lost.

Either way, the better team won that game. And if you actually read the article, Matthews' isn't really complaining that much. He acknowledged that they should've stopped them.

When they didn't go for 2 I knew they were going to lose. They had a chance to literally put the game in their best players hands and they didn't.

Ramfan128":2wn3k6xd said:

When they didn't go for 2 I knew they were going to lose. They had a chance to literally put the game in their best players hands and they didn't.

Click to expand...

Masthay???

jkitsune":d78x3quk said:

You always get a possession, so long as you actually keep them out of the end zone. If you give up 80 yards and a TD in 3 plays, I don't see why you deserve a possession.

If they change it so each team gets a possession no matter what, you're going to start seeing more and more ties. I don't want that. Pretty sure players won't like that either.

Click to expand...

To add.....There will be NO TIES in Playoff OT's.
Matty is a punk, & a sore loser.