Minneapolis Game.

[yarnnelg]

TD on the last play, clock expires during the run. Flag for the throw of the helmet.

Why would the point after be required? Minneapolis up by four, nothing that New Orleans can do to score any more than two on the try. Why put them through the exercise?

Simply because of the dead ball foul?

Something I missed in NFL Orientation?

Fortunately Minneapolis takes a knee and goes to celebrate. 

[Ralph Damren]

I like our (NFHS) rule better - many things can occur on a PAT try with the shocked/disappointed/ugly team out there - and not many are good.

After watching the ending to the UCal-Stanford game played last played last century ,I assume the NCAA is the same .

[Kalle]

The NFL rules seem to always require the try after the TD, even if the time expired on the 4th quarter and the score difference is more than two points. In NCAA such a try is attempted only if it could affect the outcome.

[Grant - AR]

The NFL rules seem to always require the try after the TD, even if the time expired on the 4th quarter and the score difference is more than two points. In NCAA such a try is attempted only if it could affect the outcome.

I was watching SportsCenter from the treadmill during lunch and they were talking about the impact this had on Las Vegas and the gambling community.  Evidently, Minnesota was picked to win by 5.5 points and they won by 5 with taking a knee on the try. 

Could this have anything to do with why they force the try when there is no time on the clock...no matter what the score is?

[bama_stripes]

Could this have anything to do with why they force the try when there is no time on the clock...no matter what the score is?

As a now-deceased friend of mine was fond of saying:
"The answer is 'money'.  Now what's your question?"

[Kalle]

Could this have anything to do with why they force the try when there is no time on the clock...no matter what the score is?

This actually creates a potential conflict of interest situation. If team A goes for the PAT, the RB might intentionally muff the handoff with no effect on the game (OK, he might get some statistical downgrade), and potentially giving somebody a huge monetary advantage. Especially these days with instant betting (not sure if there is any on football, but in soccer there's huge money in eg. "which team gets the next throw-in" style betting) this sounds really bad.

[Ralph Damren]

At one time, I believe, point spreads were included somewhere as a secondary tie-breaker for post-season seating purposes in the NFL. This would certainly make it understandable in regular season.

[Kalle]

Yup, net points scored is still a tie-breaker, so it can have an effect during the regular season.

[Ralph Damren]

Yup, net points scored is still a tie-breaker, so it can have an effect during the regular season.

As my murky memory recalls...
 (1) Pats vs divisional opponent ;
 (2) Pats down by a few with less that a few sec. left;
 (3) Brady tosses a Hail Mary from mid-field;
 (4) ball falls harmlessly in EZ;
 (5)  +  for DPI = 1st & goal;
 (6) Pats score TD with clock @ 0:00;
 (7)  opponents refuse to play on PAT;
 (8) kick-holder strolls in for 2 - Pats win by 5;
 (9) later in the season the same team beats Pats by 4;
 (10) teams are tied in standings > head-on results > split > total points in head-on games > Pats by 1;

IF the opponents had bothered to show up for PAT;
IF the Pats kicked;
IF the total pts. in head-on games were tied.....

I assume out would come the two-headed coin

 

[bossman72]

One of the more asinine NFL rules.  It's probably just something archaic that they've never bothered to fix.  But it causes more problems than it solves.

[BrendanP]

Sean McDonough once said it’s about Vegas spreads and nothing else. I like the NCAA rule myself, where if it’s 2 points or less, it must be attempted and if it’s 3 points or more, we forget about it and go home.

[bbeagle]

As my murky memory recalls...
 (1) Pats vs divisional opponent ;
 (2) Pats down by a few with less that a few sec. left;
 (3) Brady tosses a Hail Mary from mid-field;
 (4) ball falls harmlessly in EZ;
 (5)  +  for DPI = 1st & goal;
 (6) Pats score TD with clock @ 0:00;
 (7)  opponents refuse to play on PAT;
 (8) kick-holder strolls in for 2 - Pats win by 5;
 (9) later in the season the same team beats Pats by 4;
 (10) teams are tied in standings > head-on results > split > total points in head-on games > Pats by 1;

IF the opponents had bothered to show up for PAT;
IF the Pats kicked;
IF the total pts. in head-on games were tied.....

I assume out would come the two-headed coin

 

1998. Week 13. Bills (7-4) at Patriots (6-5).

Bills won first meeting 13-10.
Bills were up 21-17. Patriots scored with :00 making it Patriots 23-21.
Patriots ran the ball into the end zone for 2, making the final score 25-21. Bills defense refused to come out.

Video of the play:
https://imgur.com/a/nAMgX#mXq0b43

The Bills ended the season at 10-6, the patriots at 9-7. So tie-breakers  were not affected.

[TxBJ]

Sean McDonough once said it’s about Vegas spreads and nothing else. I like the NCAA rule myself, where if it’s 2 points or less, it must be attempted and if it’s 3 points or more, we forget about it and go home.

It’s about tie breakers. The spreads argument holds no weight because if a meaningless try swings the outcome vs. the spread you will have half the people happy and half feeling they got ripped off whether you play it or not.