I dislike the two possession rule and the alternating possessions rule. If they have to change the system then I would prefer they just play an extra 15 minute period and end the game - win, lose or draw.

Some games need a winner (playoff games) and some would be better with one (last day of the season). Perhaps a fifteen minute period, in which scoring gives the other team one possession to retake the lead (not tie)?

There two possessionis bogus, b/c in two years everyone will be crying same story again. If the score is still tied after each teams possession, then the unfair advantage is the same as it is now. I think Jason has a good idea just play an extra quarter, maybe just reduce the time to half a regular quarter 8 minuntes.

Another idea is the college way, but modify it a bit. 1) Make each team kick off, make them travel the field to win. 2) No field goals/extra points, they have to go for it all and the two-point conversion on all TDs.
3) This ones a bit random, but if they are still tied after four tries, then the cheerleaders have to mud wrestle for the win battle royale style on the fifty yard line!!

Be consistent & move all kickoffs to the 35. Multiple overtime possessions only enables weak defenses. When the game's on the line, the boys gotta play.

One alternative would be to have the overtime period pick up where the regulation game left off--that is, make the regulation-to-overtime gap just like the break between the first and second (or third and fourth) quarters.

That would potentially change some fourth-quarter tactics when the game is tied--instead of hurrying and trying a long FG, a team would be more patient and just work to move the ball down the field. But any advantage at the start of overtime would be an advantage that was fairly gained on the field of play.

I think the most important thing is to keep the rules of OT consistent with those of regulation, and to keep the nature of the game the same in both circumstances.

The college system is a travesty, as is the NHL's regular-season four-on-four approach. Don't change the nature of the game just because it's overtime.

Call me retro, but why have overtime at all during the regular season? (I don't think there's a monetary reason.) A tie counts as 1/2 win, 1/2 loss, or whatever. Let's find out which teams play to win and which play to tie.

I think the easy way is to just keep everything the same with the exception of no kicking points in OT. First TD or safety wins.

Maybe we can avoid the need for overtime if the players have to make plays - no kneel down allowed during the game. You must try and advance the ball.

That gives the defense a chance at a turnover too.

My choices, in order of preference, are:

1) The college system
2) Continue where the game left off
3) No overtime...ties are okay.

Why not have the game end in a tie? The current statistical determinations for playoff seedings take into account ties. Every year we read it "So and so team needs such and such team to win or tie to get into the playoffs." Yet, there are never any ties becuase of the current idiotic sudden death overtime. Plus, no OT means the games don't runover as much.

They should just play the entire OT period to determine a winner. Simply moving up the kickoff solves nothing. If the winner of the coin toss wins 50 percent of the OT games rather than 60 percent, that's still too high a percentage. It's inherently unfair to have a sudden death OT period in football because wins are so precious in a 16-game season. Ties worked fine in hockey because teams play 82 games, so in due time, the wheat separates from the chaff. That doesn't always happen in the NFL, so awarding a winner based on one possession of football is ridiculous.

How about a 15 minute sudden death kickoff from the 30 yard line in the regular season and a two possesion period in the playoffs or vice a versa?

An extra 15 minute period? Give me a break. These games are long enough as it is. I like the current system just fine.

I always say, if your special teams gives the opponent good field position and your defense can't get a stop, then you've lost 2 of the 3 phases of the game and you deserve to lose.

Also, Mark Maske, it doesn't matter if 60% of the teams that win the toss win the game. It matters how many win it on the first possession.

Anybody have the stats on that?

On the team winning the toss winning on the first possession... that was 45.5 percent last season. Over time, it appears to be about 35 percent. But I think you're wrong in saying it doesn't matter the percentage of teams that win in overtime, period, after winning the coin toss. If that number is a little over 60 percent and you could reduce it to 50 percent just by moving the kickoff five yards, it seems to me that you should do that. On some of the other things being thrown around here, anything that lengthens the game too much (like playing a full, non-sudden-death overtime) will never pass. Picking the game up where it left off in the fourth quarter will never pass because the league wants coaches to have incentive to try to win in regulation. I'm surprised a few people have said they're okay with ties. Dropping overtime during the regular season would never pass because the league thinks you would have too many fans upset about tie games.

I would change the clock rules in regulation that has dropped the number of total plays by 14-18 per game maybe more. This had made that the team that has gotten ahead by more than 10 points with a demonstrative advantage. I love "fantastic finishes" and comebacks. I would also stop the clock for the referee to place the ball in under a minute situations. I have seen too many times a slow officiating crew or a dropped ball cause lost seconds.
People complain about the games going too long, so the NFL changes its rules but does not go after the big offender 'too many TV timeouts' I'm sick of seeing the following; TD,3 minutes of commercials, kickoff, another 3 minutes of commercials.

Thanks for the knowledge, Mark!

I would love to see a full Quarter of play. And no coin toss, either; the team that get's the ball first is the team that STARTED with the ball first (you've already done the coin toss before the game!).

I don't CARE about "The game is getting too long"... I like watching the game.

I also agree with Daemon that we need to go back to the clock stopping for EVERY out of bounds or incomplete pass.

If folks are worried that the games will "run over" the simpler solution is this: SPACE THE GAMES OUT MORE. Start at 12:30 and 4:45 for the games! That would give the networks "Free Program time" (which means more time they can sandwich commercials in) and would give us more Football to enjoy. It would also bring back the Chess Match approach of good offenses, where the QB could methodically squeeze out longer drives.