If John Harbaugh has his way and the Baltimore Ravens are able to push through their blueprint for revolutionizing National Football League overtimes, we’ll soon see pro football games adopt a procedure that began life by the name of “cut the cake.” “Yeah, that wasn’t going to fly,” Harbaugh told me during an entertaining telephone call this week. “We were going to have to call it something else.” Instead, the Ravens coach is presenting “spot and choose,” a formula he believes can and should make overtime games fairer, more exciting and less dependent on the cruel vagaries of a coin toss. Baltimore has pushed two versions of the concept for inspection by the NFL’s rules committee and needs the backing of 23 other organizations during the annual meetings on March 30-31 if the idea cooked up by Harbaugh and his analytics department is to become a reality. Here’s how it works. When overtime commences, there is no longer a kickoff. Instead, one team selects where on the field play will resume. The other gets to pick whether they will start on offense or defense. Harbaugh loves it, even if, by its very nature, “spot and choose” will add stress, scrutiny – and potentially another way to get fired – onto the plates of head coaches. “I just want to be on the right side of history, at least talking about these good solutions,” Harbaugh added. “Let’s be the ones to put them out there early on.” Harbaugh imagines the thrill of seeing, say, Bill Belichick and Andy Reid both striding out to midfield ahead of an OT period and making their choice. For a league that knows how to monetize to the maximum, you have to imagine it wouldn’t be long before such a showdown became a sponsorable element. Harbaugh and his staff have been talking about this for a long time, first taking an interest as far back as 2012, when the old version of sudden death was finally scrapped (it had been changed for playoff games two years earlier) and replaced with the current system, where a field goal allows for a right of reply but a touchdown wins the game. One member of the Ravens staff suggested an extra element of theatrical flavor for “spot and choose,” namely having the coaches walk the ball down to the chosen spot on the field themselves, with the crowd screaming along – begging for more or less yardage. All the Baltimore thinkers agreed the spot choice must be made by the coach, as it would confer an unfair weight of responsibility to the captains. Walking to the spot probably won’t happen, but if this rule change is indeed adopted, the coach’s selection itself will naturally be debated and discussed, sometimes ridiculed, and provide an irresistible boost to the sort of controversy and chatter that football thrives upon. Let’s get pretense of impartiality out of the way swiftly. I loved the idea before speaking to Harbaugh and heard nothing to dent my enthusiasm. The current overtime protocol had the best of intentions but contains too many inequalities. The stats bear that out. Since 2017, when overtime was shortened to 10 minutes, the team receiving the ball has gone 28-20-4, a 15% advantage. In the playoffs, with better offensive play, the receiving team enjoys a far more lopsided edge – of 9-1. Harbaugh actually thought old rules of sudden death had a certain simplicity and “elegance” but asserts that the present method has become cumbersome and is prepared to defend his stance. “I enjoy a good intellectual argument,” he said. “We always say if you have a better idea, bring it up, make your case. It’s an open mic. I’d encourage you to talk about your good idea but be aware everybody has the chance to say if it’s a bad idea. It gets everybody going back and forth.” The Ravens have given two options for the plan, either straight sudden death or a timed “half-quarter” of seven minutes and 30 seconds, after which the team scoring the most points wins. Harbaugh marginally prefers the former. Baltimore also put forward a separate idea for an eighth official – a booth umpire situated in the press box and able to view all television angles. The development of the proposals relied heavily on the Baltimore analytics group, and started with Matt Weiss, who is now QBs coach at Michigan. Daniel Stern, a 27-year-old Yale behavioral economics graduate, took up the project more recently. Knowing that getting big changes past the rules committee is no easy task, Stern went through endless renditions of the document, editing line by line with a view to making it as simple to understand as possible. The Ravens group knew their idea had little chance of passing unless it was squarely rooted in fairness. Trying to squeeze an advantage with this comes with the risk of having it all flipped on you. And yet, while early indications are that a spot around the 13-yard line would be a common selection point, and though the statisticians will arm coaches with plentiful information in advance, gut instinct is going to play a massive role. Preconceived ideas of a certain spot may shift if the QB just got drilled into the turf and got up limping, if a star wide receiver is out of form, or if a marauding defensive lineman looks physically spent. “There’s injuries, the wind, field conditions, how your offense is playing,” Harbaugh said. “The human brain will still account for more things than a computer can. “We joke the only downside is that it puts more pressure on the coaches. I have just separated myself from how I feel about it as a head coach – it is just a better message. I do see the fun of it, the fairness of it, but it could come back to bite us easily.” Talking of bites, let’s get back to talking about “cutting the cake.” That name came from a line of thinking that is a heavy part of game theory studies in analytics. What is the fairest way to divide a cake among children? Have one kid cut it and let the other choose which half they want. Sounds fair, right? Yep, so does this, and it’s essentially the same thing. Harbaugh cares about the idea for a simple reason, he thinks it makes for a better game. Call it what you like, but the Ravens are onto something here. Hopefully we’ll soon see it in action. Here’s what others have said … Seth Walder, ESPN analytics writer: “In my view, it’s a clear improvement to the game and think it should be adopted immediately. It helps from a fairness standpoint and from an entertainment standpoint — that’s as good as it gets. I’d be legitimately excited to see where teams think the right break-even yard line is, and how they would adjust if, say, Patrick Mahomes were standing on the opposite sideline.” Mike Florio, NBC Sports: “The ‘spot and choose’ approach replaces chance with strategy. It’s a fascinating wrinkle that would truly revolutionize overtime and — more importantly — make it fair to both teams. Count us as being in favor of the approach.” Mina Kimes, ESPN: “The number one reason the league should go for this is instead of getting mad at randomness, fans and analysts would focus on coaching and execution.” |
