Talk:List of NFL tied games

Links to Game Summaries
Are there any sources of Game Summaries for these games? KyuuA4 19:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * From on-line and book source, I took care of the two most recent. Doctorindy (talk) 03:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Nov. 16, 2008 tie game
Yes, I have heard of this from other sources:

"McNabb later stated that he was not aware that a game could end in a tie."

But immediately-preceding sentence says he threw a desperation pass as the overtime period ended. So when did he realize that a regular-season game could indeed end in a tie? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 18:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's possible that he thought an overtime game that finished the 15' scoreless went into another overtime, possibly with a coin flip to determine possession. Instead of risking losing possession on such a trivial thing, he went for it all as time expired. Achowat (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Another possibility is that the coaches, who probably knew the game could end in a tie, called for the Hail Mary and McNabb just ran the play he was told to run. 1995hoo (talk) 21:29, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Article name
Why is this not "List of tied NFL games", for a grammar pedant's sake? And why is "NFL" abbreviated? That seems a bit ... casual, I guess. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 11:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no qualms about placing NFL in front of 'tied games'; as for the abbreviation of 'NFL', that tends to be pretty common. Aside from reducing the length of the title, there are plenty of other featured lists that use abbreviations, like the entirety of the National Basketball Association awards featured topic.  Toa   Nidhiki05  14:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Need more on why teams don't play for them
Do ties give you zero points or is it just that they are so hard to get that playing for one isn't a viable option?Geni (talk) 19:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The NFL bases all of its tables off of winning percentage, not points; ties are worth a half-win and half-loss towards that percentage, which immediately reduces the value of them because it basically hurts you as much as it helps you. You are correct in regards to it being so hard to do that it isn't viable; you basically have to go a whole period of play without letting the other team score, which is very difficult to do in football since there are multiple ways to score. As another factor, players, coaches, and fans of football do not like ties, and prefer a conclusive result either way over them. Actively coaching for a tie in overtime is basically unheard of in the modern era, although a tie could be useful in certain scenarios for playoff qualification.
 * So, to sum it up: ties don't give any benefit in most situations, it is rather hard to tie a game, and players, coaches, and fans frown upon them.  Toa   Nidhiki05  20:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes but this needs to be covered in the article.Geni (talk) 21:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The only time a team might "play for a tie" would be perhaps a game in week 17, when a "win or tie" (as designated by official NFL playoff scenarios) would clinch a playoff spot, and they had gone very deep into the overtime period, and a score by either team does not seem eminent, and they chose to sit on the ball to run out the clock and secure a playoff spot. This is extremely rare, and modern examples are almost non-existent. In 2005, Atlanta had gone deep into OT (against Tampa Bay), and they were trying to figure out if a tie would help their playoff hopes. The head coach Jim Mora Jr. was fined when he was observed talking on a cell phone on the sideline, he was talking to a team assistant who was trying to calculate if a tie would help the team's playoff chances, and whether they should just sit on the ball. Ends up it wouldn't have, and they lost anyway in the final few seconds. Either way, there really is no precedent for playing for a tie in the modern era of the NFL.  Doctorindy  (Talk)  15:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

"NFL teams never play for ties"???
"NFL teams never play for ties; the sudden-death overtime system does not provide for an easy way to finish in a tie. Instead, ties are almost always the result of mishaps or mistakes from the teams involved." This is, at least, poorly stated; and at best, inaccurate.

First of all, saying that teams "never" play for ties is false. A team can play for a tie if, for example, they're substantially through overtime in the last week of the season, and a tie assures them a playoff spot, as discussed elsewhere on this page.

Secondly, "never" implies that there was never a historical reason to play for a tie. This is untrue. Back in the early days of the league, games which ended in ties didn't count in the standings. AT ALL. A team with a record of, say, 7-0, which then tied a game, continued to have a record of 7-0. There was no such thing as a "7-0-1" record. In the standings, it basically was listed as if the game had never happened. So a team trying to maintain a "perfect" season and struggling in a close, low-scoring game, could play for the tie, as it didn't result in a blemish on their record. This is why it is technically incorrect to say that the 1972 Dolphins are the only team to have finished their season with a perfect record. Several teams accomplished "perfect" records back in the 20's and 30's, as defined by what was considered "perfect" at the time. It wasn't until 1972, when the league decided to retroactively add those ties to those teams' records, and unfairly (in my opinion) strip those teams of those perfect records, just to make the Dolphins claim to be the first to have done it sound better for PR purposes. This retroactive standings changing resulted in at least one case where the league champion--determined back then by regular season standings, there were no playoffs yet--was the team who had the best record at that time, but once the ties were added in several decades later, a different team was actually higher in the standings. (They didn't change who was the champion though.)

Thirdly, saying that, "...ties are almost always the result of mishaps or mistakes from the teams involved." is patently ridiculous. Ties can be the result simply of both teams' defenses getting stronger in the OT period. They can be the result of wind/weather/field conditions. They can be the result of all sorts of things. They're not mishaps or mistakes; they're part of the game as it's currently defined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.212.7 (talk) 17:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Tied games in AAFC and AFL
AAFC

AFL

AFL tie games might be reasonable to add. AAFC games don't count towards NFL standings, though.  Toa   Nidhiki05  02:35, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Ties in baseball
It is incorrect that “the NFL is the only one of the four major professional sports leagues in North America to have tied games in regular-season play, as Major League Baseball (in the modern era since 1900) …[has] historically played until there is a winner.”

As in football, baseball ties were particularly common in the early part of the 20th century and are now rare but still possible. Until 1918, roughly 2% of major league games ended in a tie. That comes to about 25 games per season. After daylight saving time was instituted in 1918, it became more common to finish games before dusk, and the number of ties dropped to roughly 0.5% into the 1960s. Still, that comes to around 5-10 ties per season, taking into account expansion and the longer season.

Somewhere around the 1970s, they made some changes in the rules so that a lot of games that previously would have ended as ties became suspended games instead, and only were ties if the game couldn’t be finished and had no effect on who qualifies for the postseason. Currently, baseball ties occur on the order of a couple per decade at the major league level but they still happen.

It doesn’t make sense to me to contrast NFL with baseball with regard to tie games. In both sports, ties were quite common in the past but now are much rarer. I know of only three major league tie games since 2000, compared with only 10 in the NFL. Of course, it is true that baseball plays a lot more games than football, but in both cases, I’d classify the frequency of ties as “not unheard of, but not very common.” Certainly, any tie games in baseball negates the claim that the NFL is the only major sports league to have ties.

Baseball ties are no longer replayed from the beginning. (The famous Merkle game of 1908 was declared a tie and replayed from the beginning when it turned out to affect the pennant winner, but that is no longer the rule. Now it would be a suspended game, to be completed if necessary, from the point of suspension.)

Baseball ties don’t substantively affect the standings, but they are official games. The league records will indicate that the teams had one tie game for the season. All runs, hits, putouts, steals, and so on go in the records. If you hit a home run, it counts on your record. Because suspended games are required to be finished if they affect the postseason, there is really no relevance to whether ties count in the standings. Counting ties in the standings would just mean that the 4th place team would finish behind the winner by a fraction of a game less, but still not go to the playoffs.

The status of ties in both sports is comparable. They were once quite common but now are rare but not unheard of. In both cases, the teams are recorded as having played an official game that ended in a tie, and all statistics (runs, hits, yards, field goals) are recorded as usual. It makes sense to say that football is different from hockey and basketball in having ties, but baseball and football are quite similar in the history, importance, and frequency of tie games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.94.139 (talk) 23:34, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The biggest difference and the reason baseball ties absolutely should NOT be included in this page is that baseball ties are not considered official games for the purposes in standings. Football games are.  For example, the 2016 Cubs had a tie against the Pirates.  The Cubs' official record was 103-58, not 103-58-1.  Had that game affected playoff seeding (which it did not), it would have been resumed from the point which it was suspended and at that point would have counted as an official game toward the standings.  As it stands now, the tie is not included in either team's record.


 * Also, baseball's ties have literally zero importance since they are not counted toward the standings since they are resumed if necessary. Frank Anchor Talk 01:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Of course I'm not suggesting that baseball ties be listed in an article that lists NFL tie games. I'm just suggesting that the article not make the false claim that football is the only major professional sport in North America that can have games end in a tie.  I'm not sure why that simple correction should even raise an objection.  Baseball games can end in a tie and they do go into the league records as an official game.  The rule book is quite clear on that point.  If you look at the official stats for 2016, you will see that both the Cubs and Pirates had 162 games played.  The official standings for 2016 don't waste a column for one tied game, but there is a note at the bottom indicating the tie.  The Cubs' official record for 2016 was indeed 103-58-1. That's the only way you can get to the 162 games officially recorded for them that season.


 * The fact that baseball standings are calculated without including ties does not change the fact that the tie games do go in the record books as an official game played, along with all their individual statistics. There are some baseball games that are completely wiped off the records (i.e., those that don't go the minimum 4.5-5 innings).  But tie games go in the books along with other completed games.  According to the present article, NFL ties before 1972 didn't count in the standings either.  But all those pre-1972 tie games were official NFL games, and they are all tabulated in this article despite not affecting the NFL standings for those years.  If a player scored or set a league record in one of those tied football or baseball games that didn't count in the standings, I would imagine he would disagree that the game has zero importance.  As a matter of fact, a couple of Ripken's consecutive games were ties, and they count in the total.  In any case, the issue of their importance is a different question than whether tie games happen.


 * Baseball games can and still do occasionally end in a tie. Why are we saying otherwise?


 * Okay, that is a valid point, so I added that games in other sports could end in a tie in "exceedingly rare circumstances" in which a tied game is postponed and can't be completed later in season. This could theoretically happen in basketball or hockey as well (for example, if a power outage at the arena halts a tied game and it can't be completed that day or later in the season).


 * Since 2000, MLB has had three ties in almost 49,000 games (0.0061%), so, while possible, it is very unusual and requires a lengthy list of circumstances to happen and IS NOT RECORDED AS A TIE IN THE STANDINGS. Football has had 10 ties in 5,120 games since 2000 (0.20%).  Much more frequent than MLB and ties considered by the NFL as a valid result of a game and included as such in the standings.  Frank Anchor Talk 10:58, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * One last point, to refute the false statement you posted, MLB officially recognizes the Cubs' 2016 record as 103-58, not 103-58-1, as seen here. Likewise, it recognizes the Pirates' record as 78-83, not 78-83-1.  Frank Anchor Talk 02:56, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The tied game is listed at the bottom of the page. The tie game counts as part of their season record (hence the 162 team games for the season, and all individual records), but not as part of the league standings (as indicated in the footnote to the 2016 standings).


 * I'm fine with the current result, but I would recommend changing "Major League Baseball (in the modern era since 1900) and the National Basketball Association have historically played until there is a winner." to something like: "Historically, both baseball and basketball have long avoided tied games by extending play if the score is tied at the end of regulation."  But you can make the call.


 * As noted above until a century ago, as many as 2-3% of baseball games (including a few World Series games) ended in ties. So "played until there is a winner" doesn't apply to a lot of historical baseball games.  I think more relevant in this context is the fact that baseball and basketball have (unlike hockey and football) a longstanding historical practice of avoiding ties by playing overtime, and that practice goes back into the 19th century, although perhaps not technically to the very beginning of those sports.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.94.139 (talk) 02:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Article title redux
Why does this article's title use the strange term "tied games," and why do portions of the text use that odd term, when even the very first sentence links the term "tied game" to an article called "Tie" that refers to "tie games"? I'm guessing most likely this is some semantical issue introduced by a soccer fan who uses the word "tie" in conjunction with two-game total-goals series or the like (in the sense of "two-legged tie"). 1995hoo (talk) 16:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Bengals-Eagles 2020
The description for the Bengals-Eagles game that insists on adding via edit war is far too long and has a lot of points that can be said about many ties. The "notes" section is designated for what makes this tie stand out, not a basic summary of the game or the overtime period. The appropriate place for such content is on 2020 Cincinnati Bengals season and 2020 Philadelphia Eagles season
 * 1) There is no need to explain they also tied in 2008. It may be useful to say this was the "second time in the OT era these teams tied/" as similar language is used for the three Packers-Vikings ties.
 * 2) No need to describe the offenses struggled in the overtime period.  This is a common theme in all OT ties since any touchdown ends the game.  Possibly a smaller description (i.e. "The Bengals and Eagles combined for just 45 yards of offense and six punts in the overtime period. " which was in place in 2020) will suffice.
 * 3) In many overtime games, the last play is a run or a kneeldown as a team is "content" playing for a tie (such as this case where the Bengals were at their own 11 yard line).  No reason to single this game out, as no other games describe such a final play.  Frank   Anchor  01:41, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Your first and second points, I'm ok with that. That last point is wrong. Taking the final play from each of the other 11 tie ball games from the last 20 seasons (using ESPN's play-by-play): Lions/Steelers this year: "J.Goff pass deep left to K.Raymond to 50 for 12 yards. Lateral to T.Benson to PIT 42 for 8 yards. Lateral to D.Swift pushed ob at PIT 40 for 2 yards", Cardinals/Lions tie 2019 "M.Stafford pass incomplete deep right." Packers/Vikings 2018: "D.Carlson 35 yard field goal is No Good, Wide Right, Center-K.McDermott, Holder-M.Wile.", Steelers/Browns 2018 "B.Roethlisberger pass incomplete short middle to J.Hunter", Redskins/Bengals 2016 "K.Cousins pass incomplete deep left to P.Garcon", Seahawks/Cardinals 2016 "C.Palmer pass incomplete deep right to L.Fitzgerald", Bengals/Panthers 2014 "M.Nugent 36 yard field goal is No Good, Wide Right, Center-C.Harris, Holder-K.Huber.", Packers/Vikings 2013 "C.Ponder pass short left to C.Patterson to GB 45 for 21 yards", 2012 Rams/49ers "S.Bradford pass deep left to B.Gibson to SL 49 for 24 yards (C.Spillman). Caught at SL 49. 0-yds YAC", Bengals/Eagles 2008 "D.McNabb pass incomplete deep left to H.Baskett", 2002 Falcons/Steelers "Tommy Maddox (PIT) pass across the middle complete to Plaxico Burress (PIT) for 50 yards." Literally not a single instance of "a run or a kneeldown as a team is "content" playing for a tie". Literally every single tie other than the Bengals/Eagles last year, the team that had the ball last either attempted a game winning field goal and missed or they passed on the final play, in a couple instances they even tried laterals. A team giving up and accepting a tie is rare and there is your evidence of it.-- Rockchalk 717 04:30, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, I guess I was mistaken. Thank you for your in-depth analysis, which goes a lot better than my memory  Frank   Anchor  04:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've got a weird memory, especially with football lol. I can tend to be a stereotypical guy when it comes to remembering random sports things but forgetting important things in my life and I knew that was something that is pretty rare. I also apologize for a getting a little worked up there. I have a bad habit of taking it too personally when someone disagrees with me on here and I'm trying to get better at it.-- Rockchalk 717 04:46, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Tied games per team
Should this be spun off into its own article? Right now it's not actually even fully comprehensive (it doesn't include ties from defunct NFL teams - which is a massive amount of ties!), but I think this could be noteworthy enough to have its own page. This would also allow AFL games to be separated, as they usually are for NFL statistics articles. Toa Nidhiki05 14:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I would support this. It would remove some of the clutter of all the tables/charts on this page, and it could allow for more detail on the new page.  Frank   Anchor  15:38, 4 October 2022 (UTC)