Author Topic: Two point try requirement in OT question  (Read 987 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dammitbobby

  • *
  • Posts: 1181
  • FAN REACTION: +27/-8
  • I know just enough to be dangerous...
Two point try requirement in OT question
« on: August 02, 2021, 09:55:57 AM »
I can't remember if this has been discussed before, but I can't find it...

As I understand it, the reason why, in OT, we have gone to mandatory two-point tries is to get to the end of a game quicker.  Makes total sense - kicking field goals/tries is pretty straightforward, and most kickers at such a short distance will make, rather than miss, so it makes sense to make them run the ball, which is more challenging.

But that's for 11-man.  For 6-man - the wording of the rule (exception) is the same, they must run a two-point try.  Except, a two-point try in 6-man is a scrimmage down (i.e., running/passing play) from the 7.

Is this intentional?  To make 6-man run/pass while 11-man kicks, using the exact same rule verbiage? Or an oversight/assumption that both groups would do the same under the requirement to attempt a two-point try? I'm not sure I see how the intent of getting to the end of a game quickly is better served by having one group run/pass, and the other kick. 


Offline bctgp

  • *
  • Posts: 249
  • FAN REACTION: +6/-10
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: Two point try requirement in OT question
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2021, 10:11:02 AM »
For 11-man they have to attempt alternating 2-point try plays starting in 3rd OT period.

Offline dammitbobby

  • *
  • Posts: 1181
  • FAN REACTION: +27/-8
  • I know just enough to be dangerous...
Re: Two point try requirement in OT question
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2021, 10:32:12 AM »
Correct.  They must do the same in 6 -man.

Except, it's two different kinds of plays required - for 11-man, that means running/passing.  For 6-man, that means kicking.

Offline ElvisLives

  • *
  • Posts: 3426
  • FAN REACTION: +161/-143
  • The rules are there if you need them.
Re: Two point try requirement in OT question
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2021, 10:38:24 AM »
Here is the actual language:

(1-1-3) 2. When one team is 45 or more points ahead at the end of the first half or if a team achieves a
45-point lead during the second half, the game is ended immediately. The UIL Exception to the NCAA
tiebreaker system will be used when a game is tied after four periods. NCAA football-playing rules
apply, with these exceptions:
• First overtime period – each team has an opportunity to be on offense from opponent’s 25-
yard line unless a change of possession results in a score. Team scoring a touchdown can
attempt a 1 or 2 point try.

• Second overtime period – each team has an opportunity to be on offense from opponent’s
25-yard line unless a change of possession results in a score. Team scoring a touchdown can
only score on a 2-point try (place or drop kick).

• Third and subsequent periods – each team has an opportunity to be on offense for a 1-point
try (run or pass) from the 7-yard line.

----------

For the third and subsequent extra period(s), the thought is that they just need to try to end the game as quickly as possible. In both 6-player and 11-player, they are required to run a down played under rules for a Try, except that a field goal has no point value. They want teams to attempt to score a touchdown. Yes, a TD is easier to score in 6-player than a field goal, which is why the succeeding spot for this down in 6-player football the is the B-7 - to give the defense a decent chance to make a stop.

Offline dammitbobby

  • *
  • Posts: 1181
  • FAN REACTION: +27/-8
  • I know just enough to be dangerous...
Re: Two point try requirement in OT question
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2021, 11:09:50 AM »
That makes sense.  It is 6 of one, 1/2 of the other I guess, to make them try to kick a field goal, which would be more challenging (on its own), than backing them up to the 7 and trying to score.  As I read it, the change verbiage around 3OT clarified this, I was still thinking of the change itself this year, but with the language of last year, which is what was confusing me.