Time to get rid of meaningless PAT - no time left

[1952boyntoncollector]

The NFL being so concerned about player injuries was the reason why most kickoffs now go through the end zone.

However, why if there is no time on the clock and a team is up by more than 2 points do they require everyone to go back on the field and kick a PAT. Teams are starting to take a knee on that play now as well.

Just treat it like an overtime Touchdown. Zero reason to risk injury and shorten the length the game, plus all the logistics of having to get everyone off and back on the field etc.

This has happened a few times this year including yesterdays Eagles/Raiders game.

I know it does not occur that much, but it does occur and a simple rule change.

[Cliff Bowman]

I would rather the NFL outlaw the opposing team calling a timeout just before an important field goal. I HATE that. Once the field goal unit is in formation and ready for the kick the opposing team should not be able to call timeout. Just my two cents.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I would rather the NFL outlaw the opposing team calling a timeout just before an important field goal. I HATE that. Once the field goal unit is in formation and ready for the kick the opposing team should not be able to call timeout. Just my two cents.

right but how you combat that is the kicker takes a practice kick. Any kicker will tell you that if they get a practice kick, they will be more accurate in the long run on the kick that counts.

[D. Bergin]

It likely has more to do with Gambling and the ramifications with the Point Spread then anything having to do with the actual game.

I think Points or a point differential, could also be used a some sort of a tiebreaker down the line, but the likelihood of that ever coming into play is almost zero.

I agree, they should just let them walk off the field, if the extra point has nothing to do with the outcome of the game................gamblers be damned.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

It likely has more to do with Gambling and the ramifications with the Point Spread then anything having to do with the actual game.

I think Points or a point differential, could also be used a some sort of a tiebreaker down the line, but the likelihood of that ever coming into play is almost zero.

I agree, they should just let them walk off the field, if the extra point has nothing to do with the outcome of the game................gamblers be damned.

They are also taking a knee on them now anyway. So why take the field. You can hit a 3 run homer down 1 bottom of the 9th and just make it a single in baseball..who would of thought baseball has rules to make the game faster versus football

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I would rather the NFL outlaw the opposing team calling a timeout just before an important field goal. I HATE that. Once the field goal unit is in formation and ready for the kick the opposing team should not be able to call timeout. Just my two cents.

Yea, that and the rule where you lose control of the ball while crossing the goal line and fumble OB for a touch back need to change. Give the ball back to the offense at the 1, or even the 5, instead of rewarding the defense for a fumble they didn't recover.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Yea, that and the rule where you lose control of the ball while crossing the goal line and fumble OB for a touch back need to change. Give the ball back to the offense at the 1, or even the 5, instead of rewarding the defense for a fumble they didn't recover.

well its about punishing the offense more than rewarding the defense. There would be counter arguments there that i think would be stronger that counters to my fact pattern.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I know it does not occur that much, but it does occur and a simple rule change.

You can't have first half rules and second half rules. The rules have to be the same throughout the game.

In other words, let's say the same scenario happened before half time. Do you not allow a team to kick the PAT just because they scored a TD with no time left on the clock? Of course you do.

And that's the same reason you let them kick the PAT even if there's no time in regulation play - whether the extra point is meaningless or not.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

well its about punishing the offense more than rewarding the defense. There would be counter arguments there that i think would be stronger that counters to my fact pattern.

I believe the rule was written to prevent players from intentionally trying to fumble the ball forwards into the end zone. But as often as the rule has come up this year I think it will be revisited in off season meetings and hopefully changed.

As for the extra point at the end of the game the solution is easy. Give the team the option to decline the try.

[ibuysportsephemera]

I know that if it is blocked and returned it only counts for 2 points. What happens if the exchange is not clean or the center snaps it over the holders head and it is returned the other way....is that still only 2 points?

Jeff

[buymycards]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You can't have first half rules and second half rules. The rules have to be the same throughout the game.

Why?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I believe the rule was written to prevent players from intentionally trying to fumble the ball forwards into the end zone. But as often as the rule has come up this year I think it will be revisited in off season meetings and hopefully changed.

As for the extra point at the end of the game the solution is easy. Give the team the option to decline the try.

They dont get credit for the additional yards (or stoppage of time) on a fumble forward and/or out of bounds anymore during certain point of the game and there is time runoff as well i believe.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by ibuysportsephemera

I know that if it is blocked and returned it only counts for 2 points. What happens if the exchange is not clean or the center snaps it over the holders head and it is returned the other way....is that still only 2 points?

Jeff

correct..thats why in my fact pattern i said if its more than a 2 more point lead..

[Peter_Spaeth]

The PAT should be retired. 2 point conversion only. If the complaint is that that takes a strategic choice out of the game, then have a 3 point option for something likely to succeed only say 1 in 10 times -- a 60 yard field goal, or a play from scrimmage from the 30, or whatever the statisticians calculate.

As far as kickoffs, I agree the sailing into the endzone is a total bore. What if the kicking team had to punt instead? Not many guys going to punt it into the end zone from 65 yards out.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The PAT should be retired.

I used to think the same thing. But now they've moved it back, it does make it more interesting. It's not so automatic anymore and you see a lot more missed PATs now than you did a couple years ago before they moved it back.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I used to think the same thing. But now they've moved it back, it does make it more interesting. It's not so automatic anymore and you see a lot more missed PATs now than you did a couple years ago before they moved it back.

Even so, it's still boring as heck.

[profholt82]

The Las Vegas Industrial Complex would never allow the NFL to ban the meaningless PAT because that meaningless PAT often has great meaning to sports books.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You can't have first half rules and second half rules. The rules have to be the same throughout the game.

The rules change for OT. Penalties are assessed differently in the last two minutes of regulation. There's no reason the league couldn't impart common sense to change the rules at the end of the game as well.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I used to think the same thing. But now they've moved it back, it does make it more interesting. It's not so automatic anymore and you see a lot more missed PATs now than you did a couple years ago before they moved it back.

5% of PATs are missed now i think

what you do lose is the fake PAT and go for 2..that you used to be able to do...

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by dgo71

Penalties are assessed differently in the last two minutes of regulation.

No, penalties are assessed differently in the last two minutes of both halves, not just regulation. So my point is still the same. Rules have to be the same for each half.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

5% of PATs are missed now i think

Correct, Jake. But before they moved it back, it was less than 1%. It's obviously made a difference and it's not so automatic anymore.

[celoknob]

Strange rigidity. I don’t understand why the rules couldn’t be different to end the game than end the half. That happens in baseball—once the home team has clinched the game in the bottom of the ninth or extra innings they don’t play three outs. The game is over. Not doing the PAT when up by more than 2 is exactly the same idea.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

No, penalties are assessed differently in the last two minutes of both halves, not just regulation. So my point is still the same. Rules have to be the same for each half.

Ah, true. That still doesn't address why they change in OT. Or why there is a need to force rules into a box when there is a clearly logical reason for them to differ based on the situation. I don't have a strong opinion on the PAT either way, but I don't like the idea of rules being so regimented that clear common sense can't allow them to change.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

No, penalties are assessed differently in the last two minutes of both halves, not just regulation. So my point is still the same. Rules have to be the same for each half.

If you're going to change a rule, you could change the rule that says rules have to be the same for each half just as easily. That being said, I don't see this one changing any time soon.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Correct, Jake. But before they moved it back, it was less than 1%. It's obviously made a difference and it's not so automatic anymore.

i think if you fake the long xp and get in the endzone it should be worth 3-4 points as well. If you just go for the straight 2 you have the ball much closer to the end zone.

[bdk1976]

If you think it's a waste of time, turn off the TV or leave the stadium. Those 1-2 points can mean a lot if you are betting against the spread or have a tight fantasy matchup.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by bdk1976

If you think it's a waste of time, turn off the TV or leave the stadium. Those 1-2 points can mean a lot if you are betting against the spread or have a tight fantasy matchup.

If they are taking a knee on the XP like they did in the raiders/eagles game and in the last game before than when it happened its a waste of time for the betters/fantasy people as well

[1952boyntoncollector]

glad they took everyone off the field in the minn game to kick the XP and delay the ending of game for 10 minutes

makes perfect sense...and crazy for me to question it


'most anticlimactic moment in history of nfl' joe bucks say..

they just down the ball anyway ..and saints had their punter on the xp blocking unit..

still everyone will disagree with me and I not make sense on this issue...

[Nunzio11]

The line was vikings -5.5

Had to have been some Vegas pressure to run the play.

[silvor]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

glad they took everyone off the field in the minn game to kick the XP and delay the ending of game for 10 minutes

makes perfect sense...and crazy for me to question it


'most anticlimactic moment in history of nfl' joe bucks say..

they just down the ball anyway ..and saints had their punter on the xp blocking unit..

still everyone will disagree with me and I not make sense on this issue...

I wouldn't be surprised if they change the rule for next year.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Nunzio11

The line was vikings -5.5

Had to have been some Vegas pressure to run the play.

some lines...many were -4 -4.5 etc..

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by silvor

I wouldn't be surprised if they change the rule for next year.

yeah story of my life..i too soon with my viewpoint...

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

If you're going to change a rule, you could change the rule that says rules have to be the same for each half just as easily. That being said, I don't see this one changing any time soon.

changed in one year lol..


check that one off my list.

still waiting for the clock to keep running when a team makes a false start or delay of game on purpose when have the lead so they can milk more time off the clock..

also need a 3 second or something violation if camping out at 3 point line and not moving so we dont have 40 3's a game etc

paying certain college athletes (i think this one is finally changing)

list goes on..

[Mark17]

The NFL is way too casual about changing rules. Imagine if they did this in baseball - 3 balls is a walk next year, the year after that move the mound back 5 feet, etc. Stats would soon become meaningless when comparing across decades, like football stats are getting to be.