Possible ban on the leaping FG/XP block...

[XLIX]

Interestingly, the rule has a surprising loophole since it doesn't refer to which team actually commits the foul resulting in a retry. So by the letter of the rule you could have the following...

Scenario: Team A scores a TD to close the gap to 2 with no time left on the clock. Needs a 2PC to tie.

Team A attempts the 2PC, succeeds, but it called for OPI. The naive thing to do is attempt the 2PC from the 12 (the 2yd line and then the 10yd penalty).

However, this rule provides a better option -- elect to attempt the XP from the 25 (the 15yd line and then the 10yd penalty) and then intentionally false start. That gives the offense the option to try an XP from the 30 (previous spot of 25 and 5yd penalty) or a 2PC from the 7 (other try yard line of 2 and 5yd penalty) which is five yards better than where the naive approach would put you.

I think the "yard line for the other try option" remains shifted following the penalty. So for your above example:

Team A scores a TD. Their options are the 2 yard line (for 2 points) or the 15 yard line (for 1 point).

Team A decides to go for 2. They succeed but are called for OPI. Now the 2-point attempt is the 12 and the 1-point is the 25.

So if they say "OK now we will go for 1" then the LOS becomes the 25, but the "other try option" is still the 12. So if they had a false start, their 2 options now become the 30 (for 1 point) or the 17 (for 2 points).

Interesting to note is that you can still score 2 points if you select the 15 yard line and line up to kick it. I don't think we have yet seen an example of an offense doing such, but we have seen defenses get a block-return for 2.

Another interesting note is that this is the one play in football that can result in a 1-point safety. Either team can score 1 point on a safety (including the team on defense) and it is theoretically possible for that team to finish a game with a score of 1 point. Although I don't think such a thing would ever happen in a million years, it is *theoretically* possible.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I think the "yard line for the other try option" remains shifted following the penalty. So for your above example:

No, it doesn't. The Approved Rulings in the casebook make it clear that it does not.

Team A scores a TD. Their options are the 2 yard line (for 2 points) or the 15 yard line (for 1 point).

Team A decides to go for 2. They succeed but are called for OPI. Now the 2-point attempt is the 12 and the 1-point is the 25.

So if they say "OK now we will go for 1" then the LOS becomes the 25, but the "other try option" is still the 12. So if they had a false start, their 2 options now become the 30 (for 1 point) or the 17 (for 2 points).

No. The ARs make it clear the "yard line of the other try" is the "virgin" yard line for the other try, not any penalty-adjusted line.

For example, one of the ARs says:
TRY ATTEMPT—A FOULS ON SUCCESSFUL TRY—B FOULS ON RETRY On a 2-point Try from the B2, runner A3 scores, but tackle A8 is called for holding. Team A elects to have the 10- yard penalty enforced from the B15 and attempt a kick-try from the B25. Before the snap for the kick, B3 encroaches. Ruling: Retry from the B20 (kick) or B1 (run or pass).

Notice that the encroachment penalty either gets enforced from the 25 (previous spot) if Team A wants to stay with a kick or gets enforced from the 2 (and not the 12!) if they want to try a 2PC.

Another interesting note is that this is the one play in football that can result in a 1-point safety. Either team can score 1 point on a safety (including the team on defense) and it is theoretically possible for that team to finish a game with a score of 1 point. Although I don't think such a thing would ever happen in a million years, it is *theoretically* possible.

College has the 1pt safety rule and it has happened more than once. There are at least two of them available on YouTube. It is quite rare, of course.

 

[XLIX]

No, it doesn't. The Approved Rulings in the casebook make it clear that it does not.



No. The ARs make it clear the "yard line of the other try" is the "virgin" yard line for the other try, not any penalty-adjusted line.

For example, one of the ARs says:
TRY ATTEMPT—A FOULS ON SUCCESSFUL TRY—B FOULS ON RETRY On a 2-point Try from the B2, runner A3 scores, but tackle A8 is called for holding. Team A elects to have the 10- yard penalty enforced from the B15 and attempt a kick-try from the B25. Before the snap for the kick, B3 encroaches. Ruling: Retry from the B20 (kick) or B1 (run or pass).

That shows a penalty against the defense. I'd have to see the entire context and see it ruled that way in a game (with 2 penalties against the offense) before I would buy it. I find it impossible to believe that any team which commits a hold (losing 10 yards), could just decide to switch to the "other" yard marker, do a deliberate false start, then go back to their original option having only lost 5 yards.

College has the 1pt safety rule and it has happened more than once. There are at least two of them available on YouTube. It is quite rare, of course.

Yes college has several examples on YouTube for anyone that wants to see one, but never has the team on *defense* scored the 1 point safety. It would basically involve the offense losing 98 yards on a play (or 85 yards if they were doing a kick).

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Still a BS flag on McClellin in the Super Bowl. If the refs calls that play right there is no OT.

I don't think that's entirely true. We would have just needed an XP instead of one of the 2-point conversions to tie, and I doubt BB would have went for 2 and the win trailing by 1.

It was a BS flag though.

 

[K. Dog]

Belichick alluded to another one today at the combine: after Mike Vrabel's fake timeout to distract kicker Neil Rackers in the 2004 Patriots-Cardinals game, the officials made that illegal.

What's the complete list of Patriots strategies the league banned? Off-hand:

- Patriots are good on special teams, so change the kickoff rules to make them less important.

- Patriots are good with complex strategies, so change the ineligible receiver rules to simplify defense task.

- Patriots can leap over line in field goals and PAT so ban those

- Patriots had a big, fast tight-end so change the way offensive pass interference is enforced to make it harder for him to play

Any others?

 

[fan345]

Bill Polian and his Competition Committee tried their best to neuter Patriot defensive backs about ten years ago.

Unfortunately for the Colts, Polian never considered that Belichick would simply update his roster management based on the new rules and 'points of emphasis'.

The Ty Law rule emphasis. BB was just discussing that recently.

 

[Ivan]

It's coming from the NFLPA so it will pass.

 

[Simpelton]

To be fair hurdling another player is a pretty risky play -- there's only so many players I'd ever want to see try this and I wouldn't be against making attempts to hurdle a player illegal to begin with. Biggest reason and the only one I need is the obvious risk of head contact. Someone's career is eventually going to be ended on a hurdling attempt gone wrong, and it could be the hurdler, the person being hurdled, or both. I'm all for the NFLPA getting ahead of that for once.

The problem isn't so much McLellin doing it because he knows how, the problem is the copycats with more enthusiasm than sense, who don't know how, but think it was awesome. There's a lot of people you'd trust just fine to do this if you're judging on a case by case basis, but if you do you risk letting it go mainstream, and then you're trusting the thickest-witted person in the world to handle a such high-risk maneuver responsibly, and I don't. We're begging for some pretty nasty head contact one of these days if you let hurdling become a mainstream maneuver.