Started By
Message
re: Curious situation in the FCS Title Game…
Posted on 1/6/26 at 10:03 am to GeauxtigersMs36
Posted on 1/6/26 at 10:03 am to GeauxtigersMs36
quote:
Well, Montana state could’ve backed them up 15 yards and tried to block it again. It’s the same on any play where a team is stopped. Do you give them another chance or take the ball?
The question isn't whether you would accept the penalty or not because, as you said, that's a no brainer.
The question is "Why wouldn't the offense always commit whatever foul is necessary to keep the defense from scoring on a turnover in OT?"
There seems to be no repercussions.
0
Posted on 1/6/26 at 10:05 am to Crimson1st
Been saying it for years. There's not a season that goes by when I don't learn some new obscure rule about football. Never fails!
Posted on 1/6/26 at 10:09 am to Crimson1st
Maybe enforce it half the distance to the goal on the next possession like the do on kickoffs??
Instead of the twenty-five MtSt starts from the thirteen yard line?
Instead of the twenty-five MtSt starts from the thirteen yard line?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 8:38 pm to llfshoals
quote:
It’s a post possession foul. You can’t definitely determine they would have scored so you can’t give them points, and the way OT works it’s single possession.
Well to me he was going to scoop and score on that play had it not been for the facemask. Again what is the deterrent to not foul in that scenario? In my opinion the best way is what I said, flag them and give the team that was running the conversion back a play from the 1 yard line. So they have to score on that play and it does actually penalize the foul committed. Give the ref discretion to do that if it is a foul that could have clearly stopped the conversion which that one falls in that category.
Of course the team that blocked the extra point would get their full OT possession as well. They still would have had to score a TD to win with a 4 point deficit BUT it would have meant they didn’t have to kick their extra point to win which seems like an appropriate penalty for what happened with the foul on the conversion return.
This post was edited on 1/6/26 at 8:43 pm
Posted on 1/6/26 at 8:40 pm to Crimson1st
I like some of the discussions and ideas being presented in this thread by the way! Thanks for participating folks!
Posted on 1/6/26 at 8:43 pm to Crimson1st
Thought the same when it happened. A penalty that benefitted the penalized team.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 8:46 pm to Bigbens42
quote:
There’s a rule in the books the refs could possibly invoke to award the points. A “palpably unfair” act.
Similar to the NFL refs being able to award a TD for jackass play by the defense (similar to DL over-jumping the line on the tush push that the Eagles were running against Washington in last year's NFC CG) for consecutive penalties.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 8:48 pm to DoctorWorm
quote:
Thought the same when it happened. A penalty that benefitted the penalized team.
Yeah I was trying to run through my mind about how they were going to assess the penalty when it happened and when they said it was automatically declined…I was like “What? That doesn’t sound right.”
To me the obvious thing was again that it encourages some potentially dangerous behavior to prevent returns by the defense.
For a later discussion I also have a problem with Pass Interference in the end zone, to me that should be a TD for the offense.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 8:52 pm to Crimson1st
PI in endzone kept Steelers from scoring going into half Sunday. They of course go for it from the 1, don't get it and the clock runs out
Posted on 1/6/26 at 9:16 pm to DoctorWorm
quote:
PI in endzone kept Steelers from scoring going into half Sunday. They of course go for it from the 1, don't get it and the clock runs out
Yes, again lack of true penalization in that case. I think it’s akin to committing a hold in the end zone by the offense, counts as a safety…why shouldn’t points go on the board the other way for DPI in the end zone?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 9:32 pm to Crimson1st
Even further consider if 15 yards would have been rewarded to Montana State on their possession (or half the distance I think being it’s coming from the 25. Anyway, point is like you said about the 2 points not really being significant, it would actually be a terrible idea to commit a penalty rather than let them score 2 in that situation. You’d actually rather them score 2 points than start with the ball at the 12 or 10 yard line - the latter being a much bigger deal. Thats what I was wondering in the moment. Though it would be hard to blame an action like that as it’s instinct almost. I hope that made sense. Crazy game all around.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 11:09 pm to mortgageman82
Two blocked kicks, a forth and ten touchdown pass. It was crazy as was the facemask call. During regulation 15 yards would have been tacked on to the end of the play. On an extra point it would have been assessed on kick off. I thought at the time the Bobcats would get the ball half the distance I.e. 12-1/2 yard line. Crazy to benefit from a personal foul.
Glad to see Bobcats beat Redbirds. I hate Cardinals.
Glad to see Bobcats beat Redbirds. I hate Cardinals.
Posted on 1/7/26 at 12:33 am to Lynxrufus2012
More good discussion guys! I like some of these ideas…I think ALL of the proposed penalty assessments are better than doing nothing like where it apparently stands now.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News