Wacky end to NFL game

[Terrell]

It depends on how good the punter is at directional kicking. It's been a good long time since we've seen consistent "coffin corner" punts. I wonder if punters are still training to do it, since we mostly see members of the kicking team try to down the ball as close to the opponent's goal line as possible.

Yeah, I'm aware of the palpably unfair act clause. As you pointed out, that can be arbitrary. I don't think the officials want to touch that with a 10' pole for that reason if they can avoid it. The NFL would need to do something rules wise to define it a bit more specifically, and make sure they announce it publicly. They may need more than one rule to do this. ESPN, NFL Network, NBC, FOX, and CBS also need to be reinforcing said announcement. The officials need to know that the NFL and the networks have their backs on this one. I think they'll still be hesitant.

The main thing is I don't see the officials wanting to do more than call a penalty without further rules changes by the NFL. I don't see them stopping play except on pre-snap penalties, or other circumstances where they'd normally stop play under current rules.

TBH I don't think that the NFL will change this. It may be more of a PITA than a benefit, since that doesn't seem to happen very often.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It depends on how good the punter is at directional kicking. It's been a good long time since we've seen consistent "coffin corner" punts. I wonder if punters are still training to do it, since we mostly see members of the kicking team try to down the ball as close to the opponent's goal line as possible.

Yeah, I'm aware of the palpably unfair act clause. As you pointed out, that can be arbitrary. I don't think the officials want to touch that with a 10' pole for that reason if they can avoid it. The NFL would need to do something rules wise to define it a bit more specifically, and make sure they announce it publicly. They may need more than one rule to do this. ESPN, NFL Network, NBC, FOX, and CBS also need to be reinforcing said announcement. The officials need to know that the NFL and the networks have their backs on this one. I think they'll still be hesitant.

The main thing is I don't see the officials wanting to do more than call a penalty without further rules changes by the NFL. I don't see them stopping play except on pre-snap penalties, or other circumstances where they'd normally stop play under current rules.

TBH I don't think that the NFL will change this. It may be more of a PITA than a benefit, since that doesn't seem to happen very often.

Maybe an unsportsmanlike penalty assessed if three or more penalties on the same team are called in the same play. However, that doesn't change the outcome of the play here.

The funny thing about holding, the Dallas game was on, and I could hear it, but not see it. Someone broke loose, crowd cheers, but there is a penalty on the play. I say "it is offensive holding... it is always offensive holding". When you don't even need to see the play to know it is holding... they seriously need to just make that an ejectable offense to end holding. Or maybe a shot to the groin by the opposing kicker. But something! Ten yards or an automatic first down hasn't stopped it.

 

[ronburgundy]

It depends on how good the punter is at directional kicking. It's been a good long time since we've seen consistent "coffin corner" punts. I wonder if punters are still training to do it, since we mostly see members of the kicking team try to down the ball as close to the opponent's goal line as possible.

Yeah, I'm aware of the palpably unfair act clause. As you pointed out, that can be arbitrary. I don't think the officials want to touch that with a 10' pole for that reason if they can avoid it. The NFL would need to do something rules wise to define it a bit more specifically, and make sure they announce it publicly. They may need more than one rule to do this. ESPN, NFL Network, NBC, FOX, and CBS also need to be reinforcing said announcement. The officials need to know that the NFL and the networks have their backs on this one. I think they'll still be hesitant.

The main thing is I don't see the officials wanting to do more than call a penalty without further rules changes by the NFL. I don't see them stopping play except on pre-snap penalties, or other circumstances where they'd normally stop play under current rules.

TBH I don't think that the NFL will change this. It may be more of a PITA than a benefit, since that doesn't seem to happen very often.

I agree that the refs wouldn't and shouldn't be in charge of deciding what counts as "palpably unfair". Just make it something clear cut like 3 or more offensive holds on a single play with less than 2 minutes to go. I don't see how it poses a greater problem than existing rules that designate specific types of penalties and not others by an offense that lead to a 10 second run-off.

Maybe an unsportsmanlike penalty assessed if three or more penalties on the same team are called in the same play. However, that doesn't change the outcome of the play here.

They key that would have changed this outcome is that the offense not only gets the 10 yard holding penalty, but the clock is reset to before the play. Again, there is nothing unusual about that. The clock is reset or modified in other ways multiple times in every game, particularly to undermine team's attempts to use intentional penalties to manipulate the clock in either direction (an offense stopping the clock with an intentional grounding, a defense wasting the clock with defensive penalties).

 

[ronburgundy]

The opportunity for playing like this is limited. You can't give up too much ground with lots of time left because you'll cede valuable field position and give the opponent the ball back near their 50 yard line. Also, this play only works because they gave up possession of the ball in the end. Otherwise, the penalties accrue (obviously not on the same play). You could only in theory use this method not at the end of the game if you already had decent field position and could afford to move back 30 or 50 yards. As it is, you can already clean 40 or so seconds a play with just standing around. And why give up 30 yards when you can trap them back their own 10 yard line?

It can be used equally at the end of the first half and the end of the game. IF the other team has timeouts, then you cannot waste 40 seconds between plays, but you can waste 15 seconds during the play doing this. Any play that gives the other team the ball with any time left, no matter where on the field (including their own 1 inch line) is worse for the offense than a strategy that prevents them from ever getting the ball with time left. There are multiple games every single week where this strategy would be the safer strategy either at the end of the first or second half, or end of overtime. Like I said, if the other team has no timeouts, then this approach makes sense whenever there is less than 1:10 left in the half. Hell, if its the second half and you are ahead and they have no time outs, you could do this 4 plays in row and run out the clock with 2:55 left, despite the 2 minute warning.

Scenario: 2:55 left in game and the defense has no timeouts.
Down 1: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds between plays
2 minute warning
Down 2: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
1:05 left
Down 3: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
:10 seconds left
Down 4: 10 seconds of holding
Game over.

Why leave it up to refs to subjectively decide that is "unfair". Just make a specific rule, and if doing that why not make it so the offense can't get clock advantage by even doing it on a single down?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Scenario: 2:55 left in game and the defense has no timeouts.
Down 1: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds between plays
2 minute warning
Down 2: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
1:05 left
Down 3: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
:10 seconds left
Down 4: 10 seconds of holding
Game over.

You are giving up 30 yards in penalties and yards lost on the play, so maybe 50 yards. Why would you go about that? You'd be at mid-field, and you can kill two minutes from the clock by waiting and then the running plays. The benefit v risk isn't there. So you can play it safe with three running plays and burn 2:15 and give them the ball at their 10 yard line or you can get risky and hope something doesn't go wrong with the, 'scramble three times and hope nothing goes wrong idea'. What happens if you can't concede the safety? Then the opposing team has the ball with a few seconds left and a much better shot at the end zone they would have otherwise had (unless they were the Seahawks).

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

This kind of tactic could catch on and be used in almost every week. They don't even need to wait for 4th down to do it. If its 3rd down and 15, the odds of getting the 1st down are low, so they might as well use this same tactic on both 3rd and 4th downs, and use up an extra 30 seconds not counting the 40 seconds between the downs.

The penalties on 3rd down would stop the clock. That's why they just take a knee and let the play clock run down.

 

[ronburgundy]

Scenario: 2:55 left in game and the defense has no timeouts.
Down 1: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds between plays
2 minute warning
Down 2: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
1:05 left
Down 3: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
:10 seconds left
Down 4: 10 seconds of holding
Game over.

You are giving up 30 yards in penalties and yards lost on the play, so maybe 50 yards. Why would you go about that?

Because when the clock goes to zero, it doesn't matter where you are on the field, you win.

But also, there are no yards lost on the play with the current rules. The penalty means that the down doesn't even count. IF they accept the penalty, you only lose the 10 penalty yards and it stays first down forever, and if the decline the penalty you lose the down but only lose the yards retreated on the play with no penalty yards. In fact, until they accept the penalty on 3 down, it won't be 4th down, so the QB is the one taking the snap, and he can just give himself up each time and when any defender gets too close. If the defense gets wise and gets out of formation in a way to prevent being grabbed, then that means massive holes in the d-line, so the QB just hands it off or runs himself for an easy first down.

You'd be at mid-field, and you can kill two minutes from the clock by waiting and then the running plays. The benefit v risk isn't there. So you can play it safe with three running plays and burn 2:15 and give them the ball at their 10 yard line or you can get risky and hope something doesn't go wrong with the, 'scramble three times and hope nothing goes wrong idea'.

If the clock is at 2:55 on 1st down, using "safe" running plays (where fumbles still happen) that only last 3-5 seconds only gets the clock down to 1:15 before you have to punt it. You will use up 2 downs before the 2 minute warning that stops the clock. Thus, after the 2 minute you will only be able to take off 3-5 seconds plus the 40 seconds between 3rd and 4th downs.
That is plenty of time for them to get in field goal range, no matter where they start from.

With my way, you only run 1 play in the 55 seconds before the 2 minute, leaving 2 plays of 15 seconds plus the 2 40 seconds between downs, leaving 10 seconds on the clock at the start of the 4th play, which is still actually still 1st down, so your QB can be the one taking the snap, just giving himself up if anything goes wrong.
In fact, remove the QB entirely and use a wildcat formation where the running back takes the snap, replacing the QB with good blocker/holder.

"safe" running plays usually lose yards themselves, and are more likely to result in a fumble than the QB standing there 10 yards away from the holds, and just throwing it away if any defender gets free and gets close to them.

The odds in many situations would favor it over giving the other team the ball with more than a minute left.

 

[Tars Tarkus]

The opportunity for playing like this is limited. You can't give up too much ground with lots of time left because you'll cede valuable field position and give the opponent the ball back near their 50 yard line. Also, this play only works because they gave up possession of the ball in the end. Otherwise, the penalties accrue (obviously not on the same play). You could only in theory use this method not at the end of the game if you already had decent field position and could afford to move back 30 or 50 yards. As it is, you can already clean 40 or so seconds a play with just standing around. And why give up 30 yards when you can trap them back their own 10 yard line?

It can be used equally at the end of the first half and the end of the game. IF the other team has timeouts, then you cannot waste 40 seconds between plays, but you can waste 15 seconds during the play doing this. Any play that gives the other team the ball with any time left, no matter where on the field (including their own 1 inch line) is worse for the offense than a strategy that prevents them from ever getting the ball with time left. There are multiple games every single week where this strategy would be the safer strategy either at the end of the first or second half, or end of overtime. Like I said, if the other team has no timeouts, then this approach makes sense whenever there is less than 1:10 left in the half. Hell, if its the second half and you are ahead and they have no time outs, you could do this 4 plays in row and run out the clock with 2:55 left, despite the 2 minute warning.

Scenario: 2:55 left in game and the defense has no timeouts.
Down 1: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds between plays
2 minute warning
Down 2: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
1:05 left
Down 3: 15 seconds of holding + 40 seconds
:10 seconds left
Down 4: 10 seconds of holding
Game over.

Why leave it up to refs to subjectively decide that is "unfair". Just make a specific rule, and if doing that why not make it so the offense can't get clock advantage by even doing it on a single down?

If the clock isn't running on the snap when those penalties are committed, the clock would stop once the play ended. So, at best you kill 55 seconds(40 from clock winding if the clock was running and 15 from the play itself) and maybe 15 seconds on two more plays giving up 30 yards in he process, plus whatever yards lost trying to bleed time off during the play. The second and third down would only see those 15 seconds come off the clock. I'm sure some team tried this back in the 30's and the rules guys put a stop to it.