Only 33% of the teams since 1994 that won the toss won on the first possession. It wasn’t a problem that needed to be fixed. The other team had the chance to stop them and failed. It’s not about the “arbitrary” coin toss, it’s about execution. And it’s not about “manly” it’s about execution. Make the stop. The Chicago Bears won 2 games in a row by INTs run in for TDs in OT, the idea that the coin toss winning team had some unfair advantage should have died that day. Then Brett Favre blew a 4th quarter chance and lost in OT and the whole stupid argument came back.
The new rule is beyond idiotic. Not only is it “fixing” a problem that never existed, it fixes it in a dumb way. I guarantee at some point (probably not soon because so few playoff games go into OT) the game will end on 3 FGs, the team winning the toss will go get one, then give one up, then go get another. Resulting in exactly the situation you’re complaining about. That’s the big reason why it’s a painfully stupid rule. All it does is delay the same sudden death OT we’ve always had, if the teams trade field goals we’re back to the “arbitrary” and “automatic” field goal.
I realize that if both teams get a FG, it will be right back to where we started, but at least in that case, it cannot be argued that the other team never had an opportunity.
Also, I think both of us are missing what might be the real reason for the rule changes. Longer overtimes will result in additional TV commercials that networks can charge a premium price for - hence additional revenues to the NFL and to the networks that televise the games.
Calling TAILS on a coin toss is always wrong.
Yes, the 'powers that be' were upset that the almighty Favre didn't get into the SB that year.