quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by kenntomasch Yes. But this is not something the NFL is "moving towards". There have been several ties in the NFL since overtime was instituted in 1974 (and your Steelers were in the first one, against Denver if memory serves). The point was, this is not a new thing in the NFL. And NFL teams actually try to win in overtime. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Moreover, tie games in the NFL are rare, very rare. Last year's tie was the first one in several seasons. I don't see any evidence that ties are somehow becoming more accepted in American sport. College football got rid of the tie game in the mid '90s with its equivalent of the shootout. The NHL has been trying its best to wipe out regular-season ties (and in the postseason, ties have been outlawed for so long, it's not even worth considering). Basketball and baseball have always played unlimited overtimes by rules. ////////////////////////////////////////////////// I feel exactly the same. Tie is not acceptable to the AMerican Sport Culture. MLS has got to do something about the tie. If OVertime is not enough, then change the Overtime. If we are in Europe, it is a different matter, but we are in America, soccer have to conform to the mainstream. (as much I hate to admit it).
The MLS draw rate after 90 minutes is basically identical (25%) to the draw rates in England, Spain, and Italy, so there is no evidence to support the argument that teams don't press for a regulation winner due to OT. One could also make the argument (probably equally false in reality) that OT makes the trailing team work harder to equalize, because in MLS if you can equalize you can win.
Sorry... no sarcasm. MLS tried to appeal to the "purists" and they still didn't show up. Fack em. If they don't buy season tickets, their votes are worthless. Sachin
Are you talking about DC/New England? Granted. But it was the first one I saw all year that didn't make me think I'd developed narcolepsy. Which isn't to say that they've all sucked, just the 5 or 6 I happened to catch so far. As far as attracting the "purist" (defined in this case as the person who owns Manchester United and Real Madrid shirts, watches matches in a faux-British pub, and dismisses MLS because "the quality isn't up to European standards, and besides, they play overtime," ... yeah, those people are pinheads and they're not flocking to stadiums. Neither are the people who reflexively say "a tie is like kissing your sister," either.
Right, but you've got a better shot with the "tie is like kissing your sister crowd" than you do with the "yesterday it was the rules, today it's the level of play, tomorrow it's the stadium" crowd. Where do you think the increase in MLS attendence has come from? Certainly not the "purists". Sachin
As far as 'making the game American': A little tinkering is ok, even good. The game here SHOULD be uniquely american, just like the Spanish league is uniquely spanish, just like the EPL is uniquely english. Generally, though, the way leagues around the world make the game their own is not by rule changes or tweaks, but by the style of play and how they dress up the league (names, uniforms, atmosphere, etc.) and sometimes format (conferences, divisions, promotion, playoffs, etc.). Me? I love overtime and playoffs. I also love the ways many other countries tend to do things, but that doesn't mean I'm going to force them upon our league. At the same time, don't want MLS to become a land of 3-point goals, kick-ins and shootouts. There IS a happy medium, and I think MLS has already found it, for the most part. Ties aren't great, but they aren't bad either. While keeping them won't keep the eurosnobs (or latinosnobs) from complaining, getting rid of them won't suddenly bring John Q. Nascar to a game. I think MLS is pretty uniquely american as-is. Ideally, I'd like to see 30 minute OT every game, and unlimited OT in the playoffs, but that's about it. I don't see why we need to do anything else. There's a difference between making a game your own, and making a whole new sport. Games should never have to be decided (soccer or whatever) with unrelated sideshows like the shootout. Stick to OT. It's much more entertaining and fulfilling with a golden goal than a missed shootout attempt or penalty. Plus you reach a result actually playing the game. What a novel concept.
Americanization taken to the extreme = Indoor soccer. I actually love indoor soccer for what it is all by itself. It's more sportainment than true soccer, and that's fine. There's room in my circle of things I like for all sorts of different things, and they don't have to be mutually exclusive. I like overtime, too, even if it only works 5% of the time (which is an aberration).
I agree with this sentiment 100% The thing with OT is this.... a league... ideally.. is not decided by who wins ONE game. it is decided who is best over the course of a season. if a team EARNS a draw then that is what they get stuck with. forcing them to play longer is pointless, and boring. you notice how many people went home after the 2nd overtime in the NHL playoffs??? be realistic. forcing them to penalty kicks is also pointless, might as well do a coin toss. i'm in favor of draws, esp. because the supporters shield winner gets into the CCC, which should in theory at least lessen the feeling that the 'regular season is meaningless'. i'm also aware that the current OT is USELESS. make it longer. or get rid of it.
Bad analogy Think that had anything to do with NHL OT periods being 20 minutes each, taking about 50 minutes to play, and having intermissions between? Oh, and the fact that some of those playoff games were weeknights and started kinda late?
Does it strike anyone else as odd that hardcore fans would be so opposed to the concept of one big money shot? Thank you. I'll be here all the week.
wow what a great idea......... Not really!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I say play your ten minutes and if you can't score pk's. Every major tour. ends with pk's why not our little league. Practice wide right and great saves put more pressure on keepers to stop pk's. At least the fans can talk about something on the three hour drive home.
PK is another option to improving the MLS OverTime. But it was abandoned by MLS. How about the most radical, most outrageous IDEA yet (I know I am going to get creamed for this, but people, it is just an idea, and it WILL NEVER happen) I just want to read some opinions regarding this. How about widening the goal post in overtime, just for overtime. 20 minutes of OVertime with the goal post widden about 1.5 to 2 feet or so, or whatever is appropiate. (remember in WC 94, the goal post was broke, they replaced it in about half an hour...Amazing...I thought the game was going to pospone for at least 2 hours or so. ) during the regulation and OT, the new post can be set up relatively easy in about 15 minutes or so. ) So it is doable, changing the now goal post to one that is 2 feet or so wider. The widdened goal would increase goals (duh) during overtime. It would attract more viewers and audiences. During regulation, MLS plays like the rest of the world (which would not be detrimental to our World Cup drive, it could attracts more people to it, increase revenus which produces better players). Thus this would keep some hardcore fans happy. For them they have the regulation (they can ignored the OT if they want). For the mainstream audiences, they have the regular REgulation and the widdened goal in OVERTIME which would add to the excitement. For the regulation, it is the international version, for overtime, it is the American version of the world game. It is still soccer, though not 100% pure soccer. IF FIFA had decided that the goal posts would be 9 yards apart instead of 8 yards, right now SOCCER would definately be more popular than it is already is, especially in AMerica. Anyway, here's how the points thing works. 1 points guaranted for each team as they headed into OT, the winning team in OT receives an extra point. If in 20 minutes, and it is still a draw, no one would receive the extra point. This is FANTASY MLS. It would never happened. HOwever, if it does. I would support it. People, voice your opinion. Just like a survey poll thing. Take like 5 seconds. Just reply and say you would support MLS or not if that took placed. (I am expecting more NO than YEs, but we'll see how much more). Please do this survey.
Posted by HalaMadrid Since when? If the teams are tied after 30 minutes of OT in the playoffs, they'll go to penalties. .................................................................... I am talking about OVERTIME in the regular season, not Overtime in the playoffs. Sorry, I didn't make it clear. MLS does have PK in playoff, but not in the regular season. They abandoned that idea (the idea of PK in regular season games).
pc4th - I sent you a private message a couple days ago. Please check it. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/private.php?s=
Idea to improve MLS OT... Have Ante Razov strike a ridiculous bender breaking a window on the league's best keeper to take over first place and set a new strike pair record. Other than that, it's usually pretty shabby.
Be fair, now. . . The "improvers" are just trying to make that type of result a little more common. I will sy this, though. That Razov strike did a lot to redeem the OT concept. One game that ends this way is amply worth three that stay tied.
Put me in the group who enjoys overtime in MLS. The only change I'd reccomend is to have ONE additional sub for extra-time... Actually, I'd rather the playoffs be singe-elimination or double-elimination. Lot's of "bonus soccer" is fine with me (of course it makes the TV deal more difficult)...
Although I don't care for it, if OT is proven to be a necessary "concession" to the "American" sports mentality, then it's for the good of MLS. MLS already has playoffs, all-star games and no promotion/relegation as other "concessions". But still there should be one or more additional subs allowed for OT. Especially if a team plays OT on Sat and has games following on Wed and Sat. Or suppose a team used up their 3 subs in reg time but suffers an injury in the 1st minute of OT. They should not have to play the rest of OT down a man.
You've missed the whole point of having limited substitutions. If a coach blows them all, then he has to deal with that decision in the event of an OT injury. One of the biggest problems with regular season OT in MLS is its duration. MLS Cup 2002 showed us how OT can be effective in deciding a winner. In the end, LA simply wore down NE, forced a silly decision--a long shot from an out of position left back--that was likely due to fatigue, and capitalized to win. It took nearly a whole half hour to wear NE down, but the fitter team won the game. The current 2X5 format doesn't allow for this attrition factor all that often. Allowing extra subs violates a major principal of OT. If you can't win in 90 minutes, play longer and more tired. As for suggestions to play a different game to decide OT, like a game with goals that are 30 ft X 10 ft, or nine-a-side, how about a hand of five card stud dealt by the ref and played by the respective captains? It would certainly involve less change of hardware, and the potential for injury would be very small. And a winner would always be decided within the time frame that fits on TV.
Winning by attrition? Is that what it is all about? If you like attrition go watch espn classics where they sometimes show the old 45 round boxing matches with Jack Johnson. I'm not for free substitution with re-entry, but I want to see that players are not abused so that they can play the next game.