Yes and no, because without fans, there are no pro teams. Probably not college either. The argument of players health is a weak one IMO. At most a team might go to OT 3-4 times a season. They likely don’t all go the distance, which means they’re playing an extra half a game or 3/4 of a game. If you drop a game from the schedule, you have done more to help prevent injuries and yet kept the integrity of the game. Again, IMO. Agree with you on that one. It is a matter of preference and taste. But the health argument isn’t a great one.
Just throwing out another option that I don't think anyone else has brought up. I am showing my age here but how about we bring back the old MLS shootouts....for those of you who weren't around for them...HERE YOUR GO They were exciting to watch, they don't exhaust the players the way OT does but adds an element of soccer skill to the mix (or GK bravery depending how you look at it) TBH I haven't thought it out at all---just throwing some more wood onto the fire here
Don't know whether it is still done, but about 10 years ago I was told that Texas high schools (girls, at least) were doing a similar procedure.
LOL careful what you wish for. It was almost brought back for the MLS NEXT pro league https://www.espn.com/soccer/major-l...awsjust-penalty-shootouts-in-inaugural-season A penalty in the shootout resulted in a normal PK. And it looks like rock hard Astroturf will have to make a comeback. i think FIFA also permitted it on an experimental basis in the Netherlands. next up, return of the 35 yard offside line. http://refereetales.blogspot.com/2017/01/letter-to-ifab-part-4-35-yard-line.html
Well, there is always the good old fashioned ultra-fast option.... the coin flip! Don't laugh, Italy men's NT won a semi-final of the Euro with it, and went on winning the whole thing.
If you like Thunderdome, there is the Stampede shot. https://theathletic.com/1780920/202...-10-changes-to-the-game-before-launching-mls/
I'm disappointed to see two more pages of replies, and not a single one saying my ideas are ridiculous
Actually, at first sight I indeed thought that the shootout before the game was just crazy nonsense. Then, on second thought, I found myself musing on it with a strange "Hey, why not, after all?" expression on my face. Basically, you'd know in advance who's going to win if the game ends in a draw: quite a motivator for the team who lost the shootout! Unfair tactical advantage for the other team? Sure, but they earned it by winning the shootout itself! Ok, craziness! But food for thought anyway.
In either of my options, an additional rule could be that a true match winner would get 4 points and the loser 0, whereas a tiebreaker winner would get 3 points and the loser 1.
Here is a bit of trivia related to the change to no overtimes. At the beginning of each season, the coaches in each conference do pre-season in-conference rankings of their teams. Likewise, Chris Henderson does them using his metrics and I do them using team trends. Here is a little table that shows how far each of us was off from the actual final regular season rankings, on average, for the years for which I have kept the data: Of interest is that we all did more poorly with no overtimes. Perhaps the change has added an element of uncertainty to where teams will end up? The sample probably is too small to have much meaning, but it will be interesting to see how we do the next couple of years.