TL-TwoWinsAway Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, childofpudding said: They probably should just change the runoff to 5 seconds. Can't see any team being able to get a play off in under that amount of time. Sounds reasonable. I don't think the Lions get another snap in 5 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said: 5 minutes ago, childofpudding said: They probably should just change the runoff to 5 seconds. Can't see any team being able to get a play off in under that amount of time. Sounds reasonable. I don't think the Lions get another snap in 5 seconds. yes but then the problem comes if the team has to run 25 yards to get the snap off, 5 seconds is an absurd amount of time and that I think is more unreasonable that what happened. Neither is ideal, but granting the impossible is worse to me than granting the implausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, childofpudding said: They probably should just change the runoff to 5 seconds. Can't see any team being able to get a play off in under that amount of time. I have a hard time seeing a team get a play off in 5 seconds, to be honest. But that's complete guess work. The NFL would have to do research into how long this could take, but there are a lot of variables in place as well including how long the team is moving (which obviously, the Lions didn't have to move far). I think if you take the minimum time that is somewhat reasonably obtainable consistently, it's probably closer to 7 or 8 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 47 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: You've been arguing that giving a team a free play with a stopped clock is unfair. This rule does that. And, no, there is no separate rule. The runoff is enforced only if the call on the field is reversed. Two seconds left. Called short. Reviewed and confirmed. Offense gets one more untimed down. That is this rule, yet you don't think it should be changed? No, this rule does not do that. This rule does not apply to that situation whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 1 minute ago, JBURGE25 said: yes but then the problem comes if the team has to run 25 yards to get the snap off, 5 seconds is an absurd amount of time and that I think is more unreasonable that what happened. Neither is ideal, but granting the impossible is worse to me than granting the implausible. Exactly where I'm at right now. Any option has to be better than ending a game from an incorrect call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
childofpudding Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 18 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said: yes but then the problem comes if the team has to run 25 yards to get the snap off, 5 seconds is an absurd amount of time and that I think is more unreasonable that what happened. Neither is ideal, but granting the impossible is worse to me than granting the implausible. That is true, in which case the 10-second runoff rule right now is already unfair in certain cases. Throw a 50-yard bomb in that same circumstance but with the play ending with 11 seconds left. No team would be able to get another play off in 10 seconds. It could get increasingly complex, where the amount of runoff depends on the distance of the play achieved. But that gets kind of crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 You can't really go below 10s, even that is a liberal value. Think of a hail Mary, same situation. No way a team sets up 50yd down field in 10s. Then that rule hugely benefits the offense. 10s seems as good as any other number. Really the *best* way to handle is to rule short, let offense try to get play off, if they are imminently about to snap, stop play for a review. If they aren't close, let time expire and then review. But that is nearly impossible to let happen with any consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scar988 Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 24 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: Which is more unfair: the game ending as a result of an incorrect call or one more snap being granted as a result of a correct call? If there were two seconds left, I get it. Still an incorrect call, but I get it. The Lions ran a play from a formation that allowed them to run another quickly. Preventing them that opportunity based on an incorrect call isn't right. The game ended because Golden Tate couldn't score a touchdown from 1 yard out after having the ball in his hands 18 inches away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scar988 Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 18 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said: yes but then the problem comes if the team has to run 25 yards to get the snap off, 5 seconds is an absurd amount of time and that I think is more unreasonable that what happened. Neither is ideal, but granting the impossible is worse to me than granting the implausible. Why not give the Lions 8 seconds, but the players have to be in the exact position they were at when the 8 seconds hit? Then see if they can get lined up. They were celebrating the touchdown. They would have never gotten lined up had it been ruled correctly. Or someone would have argued with the ref. All sorts of things could have happened had it been ruled correctly the first time. And almost every scenario but one has the Lions with 8 seconds running off the clock regardless of the ruling. That was their final play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 1 minute ago, incognito_man said: You can't really go below 10s, even that is a liberal value. Think of a hail Mary, same situation. No way a team sets up 50yd down field in 10s. Then that rule hugely benefits the offense. 10s seems as good as any other number. Really the *best* way to handle is to rule short, let offense try to get play off, if they are imminently about to snap, stop play for a review. If they aren't close, let time expire and then review. But that is nearly impossible to let happen with any consistency. That's an outstanding option. If they set back up and snap the ball before the game clock expires, the play is blown dead and the previous play is reviewed. If not a touchdown, they get one more snap. If ruled a touchdown, the time is reverted back to that spot and the game resumes with the extra point. If the team is not able to snap the ball, the play is reviewed. If short, the game is over. If ruled a touchdown, the game is reverted back, etc. Covers all bases. Outstanding suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 1 minute ago, scar988 said: They were celebrating the touchdown. They would have never gotten lined up had it been ruled correctly. Or someone would have argued with the ref. All sorts of things could have happened had it been ruled correctly the first time. And almost every scenario but one has the Lions with 8 seconds running off the clock regardless of the ruling. That was their final play. What? They were celebrating a touchdown because it was ruled a touchdown. If it was ruled short, the majority of the offense was still in position to run another play. Seriously stretching this man. It's so desperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said: That's an outstanding option. If they set back up and snap the ball before the game clock expires, the play is blown dead and the previous play is reviewed. If not a touchdown, they get one more snap. If ruled a touchdown, the time is reverted back to that spot and the game resumes with the extra point. If the team is not able to snap the ball, the play is reviewed. If short, the game is over. If ruled a touchdown, the game is reverted back, etc. Covers all bases. Outstanding suggestion. It is the clear best theoretical option, but impossible to implement consistently. Sometimes simple is better. Such as this 10s rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, incognito_man said: It is the clear best theoretical option, but impossible to implement consistently. Sometimes simple is better. Such as this 10s rule. How would it not be? If the team sets back up and covers their bases, they're good. If not, they did it to themselves. Has elements of the immediate recovery fumble rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLF54927 Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 Five seconds if the offense is in goal to go territory, and keep it at 10 outside of that. Still simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TL-TwoWinsAway Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 Just now, DLF54927 said: Five seconds if the offense is in goal to go territory, and keep it at 10 outside of that. Still simple. Also not bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.