Matt Ryan, you idiot

kane

EOG master
They didn't want the kick blocked and ran back for 2

Correct. I didn't see the end, and don't know what happened, but when you score in that situation, you line up to go for two and have the QB take a knee. If that's what the Falcons did, they did the right thing
 

winkyduck

TYVM Morgan William!!!
The Niners were not kicking a fg at that point anymore.

So ATL didnt wanna take the chance on it returned for 2.

Correct move

100% agree. ONLY realistic way the Falcons lose is going for 2 and having it returned. Brilliant strategy, When Fullerton had a football team I asked the Coach, Gene Murphy, what he would do in this exact situation and he said he would take a knee or take the snap and throw it into the 20th row.

Jimmy: If Falcons got for 2 and have it returned and lose the game you would have ripped the Falcons to pieces saying how stupid it was. Can't have it both ways.
 

jimmythegreek

The opening odds start here
100% agree. ONLY realistic way the Falcons lose is going for 2 and having it returned. Brilliant strategy, When Fullerton had a football team I asked the Coach, Gene Murphy, what he would do in this exact situation and he said he would take a knee or take the snap and throw it into the 20th row.

Jimmy: If Falcons got for 2 and have it returned and lose the game you would have ripped the Falcons to pieces saying how stupid it was. Can't have it both ways.
Winky, that's not entirely true. I understand the concept, but if they truly had intentions going for 2 and thought they could run the clock out, that's why I initially reacted, and you never know what ensuing kickoffs would bring with deficits one possession or less. I mean those chances still exist if the kick is blocked or there's a fumble because I thought for sure they set up going for 2, bit playing it mathematically you're up a fg and still s point even if you don't. Nothing to lose either way with a team that can only play spoiler at best.
 
Last edited:

winkyduck

TYVM Morgan William!!!
Winky, that's not entirely true. I understand the concept, but if they truly had intentions going for 2 and thought they could run the clock out, that's why I initially reacted, and you never know what ensuing kickoffs would bring with deficits one possession or less. I mean those chances still exist if the kick is blocked or there's a fumble because I thought for sure they set up going for 2, bit playing it mathematically you're up a fg and still s point even if you don't.

They know the clock doesn't run on PAT tries. Kicking the PAT is dumb - no one would dispute that. Going for a and doing what they did or taking the snap and tossing it out of the stadium is the only smart thing to do. I know it didn't matter ATS wise here but even if Falcons were 2-point faves, doing what they did was the right move. If they give up a FG after scoring with 2 seconds left they deserve to lose for being that stupid.
 

jimmythegreek

The opening odds start here
That's why I reacted initially the way I did. But I m just weighing the uncertainty of all scenarios to happen if they did lose that game. I under stand the consequences but had they converted the 2 and somehow still lost, the ramifications would only be dafft related to Atlanta vs. playoff seeding to SF, which is much more important.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
The game should end immediately when the losing lateralling team loses control of the ball. It seems like the defense scores more often than the offense in these desperation, end of game scenarios.
 

winkyduck

TYVM Morgan William!!!
The game should end immediately when the losing lateralling team loses control of the ball. It seems like the defense scores more often than the offense in these desperation, end of game scenarios.

Why? What happens if the receiving team gets the ball back on the play and now has a chance to score?
 

Valuist

EOG Master
Why? What happens if the receiving team gets the ball back on the play and now has a chance to score?

This would only apply in cases where there is no time left, which is often the case as this nonsense only happens on the last play of the game.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
I did not get to see the final play, but apparently it was a kickoff return. Was it a squib kick? When was the last time anyone saw the receiving team on a kickoff return score on lateralling? The Music City Miracle comes to mind, but that was around 20 years ago. Yet we see kickoff returns for touchdowns every season. Niners would've been better off just trying for a long runback without the nonsense. Another rule I'd like to see is a yardage limit to how far a team can retreat for lateralling for an offensive play, or after receiving a kickoff. A 10 yard limit should suffice.
 

winkyduck

TYVM Morgan William!!!
I did not get to see the final play, but apparently it was a kickoff return. Was it a squib kick? When was the last time anyone saw the receiving team on a kickoff return score on lateralling? The Music City Miracle comes to mind, but that was around 20 years ago. Yet we see kickoff returns for touchdowns every season. Niners would've been better off just trying for a long runback without the nonsense. Another rule I'd like to see is a yardage limit to how far a team can retreat for lateralling for an offensive play, or after receiving a kickoff. A 10 yard limit should suffice.

STUPID rule. Why? Why limit a team as to how far they can go back? And if they go back 11 yards but score a TD you want it wiped out? If your team (Root for or Bet on) scored a TD that won the game (ATS and/or SU) but it was wiped out because they went back 11 yards not 10 you'd be one of the very first people here to bitch about it
 

IWishIWasAPro

EOG Master
You know how much Atlants underachieved this season? Some of these games this season you go, WOW, this is the best team out of the NFC. Other games you're just laughing....

It is quite remarkable.

Juat might be the best 5-9 team we have ever witnessed.
 

Valuist

EOG Master
STUPID rule. Why? Why limit a team as to how far they can go back? And if they go back 11 yards but score a TD you want it wiped out? If your team (Root for or Bet on) scored a TD that won the game (ATS and/or SU) but it was wiped out because they went back 11 yards not 10 you'd be one of the very first people here to bitch about it

When rules are in place, teams adjust. How often have you seen a team score who retreated more than ten yards? For me the answer is ZERO. Never seen it.

If teams in the league don't like the 10 yards, make it 15. There should be absolutely no reason to go higher than that.

I watched a replay of the Music City Miracle. Kickoff was caught by an upback,, one handoff then one lateral, about 2 yards (backwards) tops, to Kevin Dyson, who took it the distance.

And WTF are you to tell me how I'd react? I would react the same way. The outcome win/loss is already decided. No need to toss on bonus points to due nonsense at the end which did not have an impact on the straight up win/loss.
 
Last edited:

kane

EOG master
The game should end immediately when the losing lateralling team loses control of the ball. It seems like the defense scores more often than the offense in these desperation, end of game scenarios.

The thing that drives me crazy every time I lose on an end game lateral defensive score is, all the defender has to do is fall on the ball and the game is officially over, by scooping it up and running with it the game is still alive. What if that Eagles defensive player was running with it and a Skins player reaches from behind and strips him, now the ball is still in play and anything can happen. I get it, these guys never get a chance to score a TD, so when they see an opportunity for a scoop and score, they take it, but the smart thing would be to just fall on the ball and the game is over. I'm not positive on this, maybe someone can confirm if I'm remembering this correctly, but I seem to recall several years ago a playoff game Pats at the Chargers, at the end of the game a Charger defender picked off Brady which would have ended the game, but instead of falling down he ran with it, got stripped, and the ball was recovered by NE, who then went on to win the game. If anyone remembers this please post.
 

kane

EOG master
The game should end immediately when the losing lateralling team loses control of the ball. It seems like the defense scores more often than the offense in these desperation, end of game scenarios.

The "Miami Miracle" last year against the Pats is the only time I can recall the lateral play work
 

kane

EOG master
When rules are in place, teams adjust. How often have you seen a team score who retreated more than ten yards? For me the answer is ZERO. Never seen it.

If teams in the league don't like the 10 yards, make it 15. There should be absolutely no reason to go higher than that.

I watched a replay of the Music City Miracle. Kickoff was caught by an upback,, one handoff then one lateral, about 2 yards (backwards) tops, to Kevin Dyson, who took it the distance.

And WTF are you to tell me how I'd react? I would react the same way. The outcome win/loss is already decided. No need to toss on bonus points to due nonsense at the end which did not have an impact on the straight up win/loss.

One time I saw a team retreat more than ten yards and win the game on end game lateralling, it was a few years ago in college, Miami was at Duke and the Canes scored on the most amazing play you'll ever see. In the aftermath the officials got suspended since there was a couple of times when a Miami player's knee hit the ground, the play shouldn't have been allowed, but it was, and it was amazing to watch, I'll try to link it.
 
Top