BB will do this at some point and everyone will lose their minds

[Lavictoire]

NFL might have called an audible on this ploy:

Remember the play last week where the 49ers intentionally held the Saints receivers with 8 seconds left in the first half so that the Saints couldn’t try for a touchdown from the 17-yard line and had to kick a field goal? The NFL has adjusted. If it happens more than once, the officials have been instructed to call a 15-yard, unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for a “palpably unfair act,” according to a league source and the time would be put back on the clock.​

NFL Week 10: Big storylines from Sunday's games

More than once doesn't help if it is done at a critical point at the end of the game.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

More than once doesn't help if it is done at a critical point at the end of the game.

Exactly. This "more than once" aspect makes no sense at all. Maybe got garbled in transmission.

 

[n6249c]

Actually, I think the team accepting the penalty should be given the option as to whether to put the time back or not. (If there are offsetting penalties, put the time back so it's a true do-over.)

Not sure putting time back always would be a good idea. Offense is trying to score at end of game, gets more time for taking a penalty? Penalties against the offense might better require a ten-second runoff instead of giving them another chance.

And perhaps have one option to be a true "do-over" with the clock and position both reset, just wiping out whatever happened. That seems appropriate in case of offsetting penalties but might be useful at other times as well (Hail Mary plays?).

 

[XLIX]

Maybe you missed the part about the time being put back on the clock.

Penalties and how they affect the clock is one of those things that never made any sense to me. If you ask me any accepted penalty should put the amount time back on the clock that the "cancelled" play took.

I've been advocating that for years now, only with the non-offending team getting the choice of putting the time back on the clock if they want (or, perhaps, being awarded an untimed down). Of course, I would only apply it during the final 2:00 of each half. No need to complicate things during regular play (just like there's no 10-second runoff for a false start in the 1st quarter).

 

[luuked]

I've been advocating that for years now, only with the non-offending team getting the choice of putting the time back on the clock if they want. Of course, I would only apply it during the final 2:00 of each half. No need to complicate things during regular play (just like there's no 10-second runoff for a false start in the 1st quarter).

Might as well sync it up with the out of bounds clock (2/5min). But yeah, I am puzzled nobody has proposed this yet. I wonder if I am missing some obvious way to exploit this.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Not sure putting time back always would be a good idea. Offense is trying to score at end of game, gets more time for taking a penalty? Penalties against the offense might better require a ten-second runoff instead of giving them another chance.

And perhaps have one option to be a true "do-over" with the clock and position both reset, just wiping out whatever happened. That seems appropriate in case of offsetting penalties but might be useful at other times as well (Hail Mary plays?).

???
That's why I said the choice of putting the time back should be at the option of the team accepting the penalty. That will guarantee a team cannot benefit clock-wise from committing a penalty.

Offsetting penalties are different -- there were penalties on both teams. So put the time back on always so it is a true do-over.

 

[XLIX]

Might as well sync it up with the out of bounds clock (2/5min). But yeah, I am puzzled nobody has proposed this yet. I wonder if I am missing some obvious way to exploit this.

I honestly can't think of any way to exploit it when, like the 10 second runoff, you give the non-offending team the *option* whether or not to accept the extra time.

It would be like the 10-second runoff. The defense can actually accept the penalty but refuse the 10 seconds being run off the clock if they want.

 

[The Brandon Five]

That's nothing new and a lot of people have argued in the SB thread during halftime that he/Patricia should have reminded his defensive backs about it when the Seahawks went for it with single digit seconds left on the clock. In fact if you watch some of the BB coaching clips that are out there on the web you will see that he constantly quizzes players about situational stuff like that.

I agree though that the media would lose their **** if he'd actually come out and say that they did this on purpose.

It also reminds me to some extent to how the Ravens took the safety and milked it for all its worth (including blatently holding opponents) against the 49ers at the end of the 2012 SB.

Yup, Ryan should have outright tackled Matthews there.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Not sure if this has come up in this forum, but I saw this this other week and filed it away. Given how BB has swiped other obscure strategies from teams like the Lions (leading to Harbaugh cryfests) my guess is he did too. (Especially considering they play SF this week so you know they reviewed this game.)

That clever Chip Kelly saved four points in an 18-point loss



Obviously this was inconsequential so it got no real coverage (I assume, I don't watch ESPN etc. but only saw this one mention on Twitter) but when BB does this the league will go berserk.

IMO this is a genius exploitation of rule loopholes and eagerly look forwarded to BB employing it versus the Ravens and then the crybaby boys club changing it at some point in the off season.

In SB 43, I thought the Cardinals should have outright tackled Holmes on the game-winning TD. There were not one, not two, but three defenders around him.