The NFL world descended on West Palm Beach earlier this week for the league's Annual Meeting, which as always included the first discussion of potential rule changes for the new year. (More on that below.) Some of the proposals were passed, some were voted down and some were tabled for later discussion.
One rule that passed was making the overtime rules in the regular season mirror what was adopted just a couple years ago for the playoffs. Namely, both teams are guaranteed to possess the ball in overtime, even if the team with the ball first scores a touchdown. That might have come a year too late for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who lost overtime games to Atlanta and Kansas City last year without Baker Mayfield getting to touch the ball in the extra period. Those were two of the only six overtime games in the NFL in 2024 that ended in first-possession touchdowns.
Crucially, this rule change proposal, which was submitted by the Philadelphia Eagles, was amended during the approval process. The original proposal wanted the regular-season overtime periods to be 15 minutes long, to match what they are in the postseason. That clause was amended to keep the regular-season extra quarters to 10 minutes, as had previously been the case. The reason I call that "crucial" is because it throws a big wrinkle in how coaches may strategize in overtime.
Since the NFL first adopted overtime in 1974, it has always been the right thing to do for the team that wins the coin toss to elect to take the ball first. (Infamously, Ray Perkins' 1988 Bucs team won the overtime coin toss in a late-December game against the Patriots in Foxborough but chose to defend the North end zone because of very heavy winds and extreme cold and…it did not end well.) For decades, overtime was total sudden death – the first score, even a field goal, ended the game. Even when it was changed to require a first-possession touchdown to end the game, it was still obviously best to have the ball first.
But is that the case now? Note that in the college football overtime system, which works with alternating possessions, teams always want the ball second so they know what they have to do to win or extend the game. That could be the case in the NFL now. If you have the ball first and you are facing a third-and-15 at the opposing 20, you're probably going to kick the field goal. But if you have the ball second and the other team scored a touchdown on its first possession, you would know that in the same situation you had to go for it. In fact, if you had to get a touchdown, you would go for it on every fourth down. Alternately, if the first team had failed to score at all, you would know that a field goal was all you needed and you would kick.
However, don't forget about that 10-minute period. What if you defer the opening possession and the opening team uses eight minutes on its first drive to score a touchdown? Now your backs are against the wall in terms of driving the length of the field before time runs out. It's a tough decision, and the answer might vary from game to game depending on circumstances, such as how rested your defense is and how well it has been playing throughout the day. Personally, I would lead toward deferring and knowing exactly what I need on that second drive, but I can see both sides.
Now on to your questions.
A reminder that you can send questions to me any time you want on Twitter (@ScottSBucs) and they're easier to find if you include the hashtag #SSMailbagBucs. We are also now soliciting questions each week on our Instagram page and on the Buccaneers app; look for that on Wednesdays. As always, if you want to get a longer question into the mailbag and would prefer to email your question, you can do so to tbbsocial@buccaneers.nfl.com.
What was your favorite & least favorite rule that was approved at this year's league meeting?
- @tres.edit, via Instagram
Actually, there aren't a ton of choices. Counting proposed changes to rules, bylaws and resolution, I count a total of nine passed measures, and some are too clerical to be exciting. Those nine are:
- New regular season overtime rules, as discussed above
- Making permanent the "dynamic kickoff," but with the touchback spot moved to the 35
- Expansion of situations where replay assist can be used
- Expanding number of players who can be "designated for return" from injured reserve at the time of the roster cutdown to 53 from one to two
- Allowing playoff teams two more "designated for return" options
- Using point differential as the third tiebreaker for awarding contracts
- Allowing one video call with up to five players during pre-free agency negotiation period
- Allowing the preparation of "K-Balls" or kickers' footballs prior to games
- More scouting credentials allowed during playoffs
Numbers 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 are just common-sense changes that nobody had a problem with. I honestly don't understand number 6. That only leaves us the first three rules changes. If we were also discussing rules that didn't pass, then I would have a lot to say about the concept of removing the automatic first down from defensive holding penalties, but that's not the question posed above.
When I first heard what had passed, I thought my favorite one was the third one, with the expansion of what the replay assistant can chime in on. The new categories were hits on defenseless players, facemasks, horse-collar tackles, tripping, and roughing/running into the kicker. But here's the crucial part of the new rule: They can only be used on plays where a flag was thrown. In other words, if you and I see an obvious facemask on a play but the refs don't and don't throw a flag, that is not fixable.
And that bums me out. I can't help but think back to the Thursday night game in Atlanta last season when a blatant facemask on Bucky Irving was missed and the eventual result was the Bucs settling for a field goal and leaving the Falcons just enough time to tie the game and then win it in overtime. Given how well the replay assistant system seems to be working, allowing calls to be corrected quickly and with a high degree of accuracy, I'm glad it is being expanded but I don't think it's quite enough.
That just leaves the overtime rule and the kickoff rule. I will go with the former as my favorite and the latter as my least favorite. It's taken the league a long time to get to this point, and there had to be some dramatic postseason overtime outcomes to force the issue, but I think I'm in the majority when I say this just seems more fair. I think I would prefer a 15-minute overtime period, but that's easy for me to say when I'm not the one on the field playing the game. I know going with 10 minutes instead is in the interest of player safety. I remember when the Buccaneers played 13 minutes into overtime in a loss to the Raiders in 2016, with the defense on the field for nearly 45 minutes overall, and then had to play the next Thursday against Atlanta. The defense was wrecked and the Bucs gave up 43 points.
I'm fine with the new dynamic kickoff format, and I understand that the league wants to create incentive for kicking teams to not automatically go for touchbacks. The play is much safer now but return rates only improved from about 21% of kicks to 32% last year. The league would prefer that to be in the 50-60% range and thus has made touchbacks more punitive.
That said, I can't help but think how the 35-yard touchback, which will still happen plenty of times, makes scoring so much easier. With most NFL kickers now drilling 55 to 58-yard field goals with little trouble, a drive starting at the 35 only has to get one or two first downs to end up in points. That's what Dallas and Brandon Aubrey did to the Buccaneers to open their game late last season. I guess I'll be happy about it when Chase McLaughlin is nailing a 57-yarder, but overall I don't think I need more field goals in my viewing experience.
What is the likelihood the Bucs will play internationally this year?
- @sarahh.mcmahhon, via Instagram
Not very likely at all, I'm afraid. But the international efforts are going to keep expanding, possibly up to 10 games in 2026, and it's inevitable the Buccaneers will draw another overseas date in the very near future. Personally, I'm rooting for Madrid or Australia.
There will be seven international games in 2025, and we already know the host teams. They are:
- Los Angeles Chargers, São Paolo, Brazil (Week One)
- Indianapolis Colts, Berlin, Germany
- Miami Dolphins, Madrid, Spain
- Pittsburgh Steelers, Dublin, Ireland
- Jacksonville Jaguars, London, England
- Cleveland Browns, London, England
- New York Jets, London, England
So, you have to be on the list of home opponents for at least one of those seven teams to have a shot at playing overseas. The Buccaneers are not scheduled to play road games this year at the Chargers, Colts, Steelers, Jaguars, Browns or Jets. That leaves only the Dolphins as a possibility, but I wouldn't keep my fingers crossed. The betting favorites as opponents in that game are the Washington Commanders and Los Angeles Chargers, which haven't played overseas since 2016 and 2018, respectively. Of course, the Chargers are already hosting the São Paolo game, so they're presumably out here, making the Commanders the overwhelming favorite. The Buccaneers played an international game as recently as 2022 in Munich.
As for the Buccaneers, if they have a say in the matter they probably wouldn't sign up for this particular game. The Miami trip is the easiest possible one for the team in terms of travel, so giving that up for a long international flight is probably not preferable. There's a shot, but I don't think it's likely.
It feels like we are guaranteed to pick a CB in the first round, right?
- @whateverdante_ via Instagram
I'm not sure where you get that idea. I think it's a near lock that the Bucs take a defensive player in the first round, but I'm not sure cornerback is any higher on the list than linebacker or edge rusher, or probably even safety. Honestly, given how many really good interior defensive line prospects there are in this draft, I wouldn't even be shocked if that was the position the Bucs went with. You and I both know that Jason Licht likes to use his premium picks in the trenches, and that has served him well through the years.
Do I think a cornerback in the first round is a good idea and one of the most likely positions targeted? Absolutely. I'm the biggest proponent in the world of adding talented cornerback depth, no matter what the current depth chart looks like. I don't think this draft has a lot of true top-15 blue chip cornerback prospects, but after that, there is plenty of depth. If either Michigan's Will Johnson or Texas's Jahdae Barron were there at number 19 and I were in charge, I'd run to the podium.
There's also the possibility the Buccaneers trade back a bit and address the position with the likes of Kentucky's Maxwell Hairston, East Carolina's Shavon Revel, Florida State's Azayreye'h Thomas or Notre Dame's Benjamin Harrison.
If you were given the responsibility of the Bucs' first round pick, who would you choose?
- @bucs_uk
Well, I guess I already kind of gave that away, but if one of top two cornerbacks (not counting Travis Hunter) were there at 19, that's the direction I would go in. I certainly don't mind the idea of adding another edge rusher, but I think we could be okay there with the addition of Haason Reddick and the potential advancement of Chris Braswell. If neither corner was there but Alabama linebacker Jihaad Campbell was still available, I would go that route.
Honestly, I like the flexibility that Jason Licht has created with his signings and re-signings this season. I'm not sure a team ever truly goes "best player available," but the Bucs are in position to choose the best player available among a handful of positions. My dream scenario would be the Bucs trading down five to 10 spots, earning some extra mid-round capital and getting a cornerback at the lower spot.
What is your favorite Transformer?
- @taytayag, via Instagram
Don't have one. Couldn't even name one. That's not true – I know there is Optimus Prime and, I think, Bumblebee. Even though I'm a child of the '80s I never played with those toys or watched those cartoons. And I only needed to see a little bit of the first movie to know those weren't for me. I couldn't even tell what was going on in the action sequences.
Has that awesome pirate ship always been around throughout Bucs History?
- iamlukebailey_, via Instagram
Not all of it, but at this point the majority of it. The Pirate Ship in the north end zone was one of the most distinctive stadium features in the world when Raymond James Stadium opened in 1998 and it remains so today, some two and a half decades later. At this point, it's hard to imagine a Buccaneers home game without the ships cannons going off when the team gets into the red zone or scores points.
How many yards do you think Bucky will go for this season?
- @jackclaborn, via Instagram
I'll assume you mean yards from scrimmage and not just rushing yards, since you didn't specify. Well, the bar is set at 1,514, which is what he produced as a rookie and which, in retrospect, is pretty remarkable. That's the second-highest total in franchise history by a rookie to Doug Martin's 1,926 in 2012.
Keep in mind, Irving only gradually took over from Rachaad White as the lead horse in the Buccaneers' backfield. From Games 1-9, Irving averaged 11.8 touches per game (9.2 carries, 2.6 receptions); over the last eight games he averaged 18.5 touches (15.5 carries, 3.0 receptions). That's a pretty significant increase. Given that Head Coach Todd Bowles has clearly stated that Irving is the lead back heading into 2025, I think we can see usage totals more similar to the second half of the season.
Of course, Bowles also said that the Bucs still think very highly of Rachaad White, who helps keep himself on the field by being a great pass-catcher and excellent pass blocker, and that he wants to get Sean Tucker more touches. So let's assume Irving averages more like 18 touches a game but not get too far ahead of ourselves and predict 22-24 touches per game.
Irving averaged 6.0 yards per touch last year, and if you multiply that by 18 touches per game for 17 games you come up with 1,836 yards. That doesn't sound crazy to me. Let's put the over/under at 1,800 yards and go from there.
What fruit do you think you could throw the farthest?
- @bern_hurley, via Instagram
Well, I guess it's somewhere between a grape and a watermelon.
I need it to approximate a baseball, which is the object I've thrown the farthest in my life. Apples seem obvious, or avocados and tomatoes (both fruits!). I'm a little worried I would over grip those last two, though, since they can be a little mushy.
I'm leaning towards a lime. It's smaller than an apple or a baseball, but not by that much, and I feel like it's pretty solid and dense. I'm probably missing something obvious, but I'll go with a lime (and a bag of ice later since I haven't thrown an object with maximum force in years).
