There is no easy fix when it comes to the NFL's overtime quandary | Opinion

INDIANAPOLIS — As fate would have it during a gap in his schedule at the NFL combine, John Harbaugh took a break from his videotape study of offensive tackles in the upcoming draft to catch a segment of "Jeopardy" as he worked in his hotel room on Friday night.

It was Final Jeopardy and the Baltimore Ravens coach decided to play along. The category was "Literary Characters."

Answer: Dostoyevsky wrote that this title man in an earlier European novel is 'beautiful only because he is ridiculous.'"

All three of the contestants on the show were stumped, but Harbaugh nailed it.

Who is Don Quixote?

This hit home with Harbaugh on another level.

"That's what this overtime thing is like, just ridiculous," Harbaugh told USA TODAY Sports, pondering the prospects of another tweak to the NFL's overtime rule. "You keep chasing all these windmills, but it's unsolvable. No way can you ever get it to be equal. This is like chasing fool's gold."

NEVER MISS A MOMENT: Subscribe to our NFL newsletter to stay informed!

Harbaugh, whose proposal last year to incorporate a "spot-and-choose" system was overwhelmingly dismissed by NFL owners, gets pretty worked up when the discussing overtime system that was a hot topic among coaches during the combine and is likely headed for another vote during league meetings in Palm Beach, Florida later this month. During four days of meetings at the combine, the NFL's competition committee vetted "at least four proposals" from NFL teams, a committee member told USA TODAY Sports. Any or all of the proposals could be tweaked and ultimately formalized or withdrawn before presented to the owners. And it's possible that the competition committee could endorse one of the proposals or craft its own in the coming weeks. Stay tuned.

Of course, the intensity of the issue has ramped up since the Buffalo Bills were eliminated from the AFC playoffs in the divisional round without getting a possession in overtime, sparking all sorts of cries that the current "sudden death" system allowing a team to win if it scores a touchdown is unfair (or, as some contend, stupid) — and often dictated by which team wins the overtime coin toss. Sure enough, one of the proposals comes from the Bills, who want an overtime rule for postseason that would scrap the sudden death (if it's a touchdown) concept and allow for a fixed amount of time.

"I feel there's a better way out there," Bills coach Sean McDermott said.

Sure, that was a painful loss for Buffalo. The Kansas City Chiefs won the overtime coin toss and Patrick Mahomes triggered an eight-play, 75-yard drive for the winning TD. One of the most thrilling games in NFL history — the teams combined for 31 points after the two-minute warning as neither of the gassed defenses could hold up — abruptly ended just like that.

Yet the purist in me (which I'm guessing may be overruled) suggests that this furor about changing the OT rule again represents a major overreaction.

I know about the coin toss stat, which is the best thing about the argument for changing the system. In 12 postseason games decided in overtime, 10 were won by the team that won the coin toss — seven in cases where the losers never got a possession.

Tough beans. A week after Kansas City won the toss and the game, the Chiefs won the overtime toss again in the AFC title game against the Cincinnati Bengals. But it did not result in an automatic trip to the Super Bowl. Not after the Bengals defense made a play (Vonn Bell's interception) that led to the game-winning field goal.

So there. Rather than tinker with another rule change, NFL owners should just let the OT system — changed in 2010 to prevent teams from winning on one possession with a field goal — remain as is.

"I'm a 50-50 shooter," Chiefs coach Andy Reid said. "That's about what it is in our league right now. I've gone the opposite way. Played the Patriots, lost in overtime. But the defensive guys will say, 'Just stop 'em.' So, that's part of the game. When you look at it, it's 50-50 across the board."

Reid’s 50-50 spin is close when considering the regular-season results. But 50-50 doesn't carry over to the lopsided playoff odds, the history including the AFC title game from three years ago that Reid alluded to, when Kansas City never had an overtime possession when it lost to New England three years ago.

Reid's position on tweaking the rule?

"I'm for whatever the league decides," he said. "It's not going to be perfect, no matter what. There's no perfect remedy for this."

Remember, the health and safety element that the league touts is part of this, too, which might be enough to douse a proposal to ensure a certain amount of time (maybe eight minutes) in a postseason overtime. And what happens if both teams score TDs in an allowed time? Another idea being floated would require teams to attempt two-point conversions after scoring TDs. And anytime this topic gets discussed, people tend to point to the crazy college system.

And you thought in the name of Dez Bryant that it was easy to settle the catch or no-catch debate.

"It's good that we continue to try to find the best way," Seattle Seahawks coach Pete Carroll told USA TODAY Sports. "The way it is, it's worthy of the time spent. Whether this is the right way to do it or not, I don't know that. I like that we're trying to fix it."

NFL FRANCHISE TAG RECOMMENDATIONS: What all 32 teams should do in 2022

NFL DRAFT: Hand-size hysteria no reason to downgrade Kenny Pickett

AMARI COOPER LANDING SPOTS: Eleven teams that could be fits if Cowboys release receiver

The answer, though, can't be with a system that could possibly extend games even more than the current system. Carroll knows.

"How do you make sure that the players survive?" he said, mindful that it would be even more problematic during the regular season, given the prospect that the next game could fall on Thursday night. "It gets hard. It's not just that game, it's the next game. The toll is obvious. We tied the Cardinals once and that kicked our ass for the next couple of weeks. The shorter they can make it, the better."

Buffalo general manager Brandon Beane said his team's proposal would keep the existing regular-season system (with the games ending tied if not settled within a maximum of a 10-minute overtime) intact. In making the case for a fixed amount of time for overtime in the playoffs, he pointed to other sports for context.

"Similar to in basketball, you play five minutes," Beane said. "Baseball, both teams get the top half and the bottom half. So, a time limit, and I'm talking about postseason only, to have to play it out. And that way, both teams will definitely have a chance and maybe even more than one possession."

Then again, a defensive stop would do the trick.

Typically, rules proposals stand a better chance of gaining the 24 votes from owners needed for approval if they gain the endorsement from the competition committee. As the history of instant replay illustrated, a competition committee endorsement doesn't always result in a rubber stamp from owners. But it does afford a certain amount of momentum, as the committee engages in deep vetting of various rules when it meets for several days before the league meetings. That's the period when proposals are sometimes combined, altered or even scrapped.

At this point, it's difficult to gauge whether there's enough momentum for any of the proposals.

"I do think there will be some changes," Beane predicted. "I don't know how many proposals, but a GM and I laughed at the Senior Bowl that there was going to be 32 different proposals."

Count Harbaugh in the large number that felt Buffalo's playoff loss was grossly unfair. Yet he's also adamant that he won't reintroduce his "spot-and-choose" proposal this time around because as much as he still believes in it, he maintains that he doesn't want to make a mockery of the process. Last year, the Ravens' proposal drew just three votes from owners.

"You've got to think outside the box," Harbaugh said. "You've got to do something different."

Before he went back to watching videotape of a prospect from UCLA, Harbaugh put me on the "spot-and-choose" meter.

He gave me the Chiefs offense with the "spot" at the 9-yard line.

"Are you going to take it or give me the ball?" Harbaugh asked.

With Mahomes, I'll take it at the 9.

"Now Mahomes takes it 91 yards and you score," Harbaugh continued. "You think that's fair?"

Fair enough. "We" earned it.

Harbaugh: "Or you give it to me with Lamar (Jackson) and we go 91 yards. Fair?"

Fair enough, especially with the attached possibility of forcing a punt that could get "us" the ball with a short field. And way radical.

"This whole conversation would be finished," Harbaugh said, alluding to his dormant proposal. "It's not in the hands of a coin toss."

Something's gotta give. Or not. One thing for certain: With no final answer better than the current sudden death system, this overtime conundrum is some kind of jeopardy for the NFL.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Fixing NFL's overtime problem doesn't have easy solution