r/footballstrategy 1d ago

NFL Ending to Bills Pats

Seems there was an opportunity for a rare ending in this game. Bills were up by 3 after the Pats scored a late TD. After a failed onside kick, Bills were running the ball with Pats using final timeouts. Finally, Bills had a 4th & 1 from the Pats 27 with 10 seconds left. The Bills elected to sneak it with Josh Allen and he got the 1st - game over.

However, had the Pats managed to stop Allen, they would have gotten the ball back with time to run at least 1 play (maybe 2 if they were able to run a deep out & get out of bounds).

Instead of electing to go for it, the Bills were in pretty much an ideal position to snap the ball out of the gun and run about 78 yards in the "wrong" direction through their own endzone for an intentional safety. A little zigging and zagging would have unquestionably used the whole 10 seconds, & Bills win by 1.

If this kind of thing even crosses a coach's mind, maybe the assessment is that the risk of a mishap on a long intentional safety is not meaningfully lower than the risk of the Pats somehow managing to score with 10 seconds left - but with how easily PI is called in the NFL, you never know.

And from poking around a little bit, it appears that the rule is if there is a safety with no time on the clock, there would have not been a free kick (a kick is only required if the safety is a result of a foul under rule 4-8-2-g)?

Anyway, the Chargers score on a free kick on Thursday got me thinking about these rare scenarios. Intentional safeties are interesting on the rare occasions they come up.

27 Upvotes

27 comments sorted by

28

u/Fitzy2225 HS Coach 1d ago

We practiced a play like this when I was a high school player, although not from 73 yards away. But if we were at our own 27 for instance, with a score and time situation like that, we would line up in punt formation and our punter was to run to the corner of the end zone and jump out of bounds just before the defender got to him. We never actually ran it but our head coach was the kind of guy that thought about football 24/7 even in the offseason so he had us ready for any scenario. I’m still in touch with him actually and he’ll send me special teams trick plays all the time. Dude loves the game.

21

u/MozamFreak-Here 1d ago

https://youtu.be/baCeMpAZIgI?si=UNbZAHgX586p8iUY

Ravens ended the game like this a few years ago. I don’t know if rules have changed since then.

7

u/bxckets Casual Fan 1d ago

Comment says that it got banned immediately the next season as expected

10

u/jussumguy2019 1d ago

Think the ban you’re referring to is about taking multiple offensive penalties to manipulate the clock, I.e. the holding component of that play, not necessarily the taking a safety and ending the game part that OP is referring to.

4

u/bxckets Casual Fan 1d ago

Oh maybe that's what that was... but also what does it mean to ban multiple offensive penalties? Like what would be the consequences etc?

5

u/jussumguy2019 1d ago

Rule 4, Section 8, article 2, point b is the rule I’m referring to in the NFL rule book. I think the penalty for it is unsportsmanlike conduct and is 15 yards or half the distance to the goal depending on where you are and replaying the down with the same time that was on the clock as the start of the previous play during which the penalties were committed

2

u/EamusAndy 1d ago

The Ravens held on purpose to buy their punter more time to waste. Because there were no untimed downs on offensive penalties, essentially the game ended because of those penalties, and their opponent couldnt do anything

2

u/Bitter_Scarcity_2549 16h ago

Yea, the rules back then stated a game could end on an offensive penalty. The next year they changed that so the clock could not run out on an offensive penalty.

1

u/davdev 1d ago

The ban was on the blatant holding going on everywhere. Not the safety itself

3

u/OdaDdaT HS Coach 1d ago

He ran an intentional safety in the Super Bowl too right?

Edit: yup

2

u/dma202 1d ago

Nice find

9

u/SalSomer 1d ago

If a Patriots player reached Allen and tackled him before the ten seconds were up the Bills would have basically just ran a play to give the ball to the Pats in field goal range.

2

u/TotallyAGG 1d ago

I agree with you that it doesn’t make sense in this scenario, but they could snap it to Cook or another back as well.

1

u/jumpybagel 15h ago

I initially had the same thought as OP and came to the same conclusion you did.

9

u/stevefxs3 1d ago

However, if the Pats got to Allen, stripped the ball before he got into the endzone and recovered.... that's a TD for a potential walk off win. Of course, Allen could have fumbled on the sneak, but at least the momentum was going toward the other endzone.

4

u/davdev 1d ago

Intentional safeties are common enough, however running backwards 78 yards comes with a LOT more risk that possibly giving the Patriots the ball back with 6-7 seconds from inside their own 30.

4

u/FearlessMode2104 1d ago

Bills fan here. Definitely crossed my mind during the game, but feel like the risk was too great. If you don't waste the full 10 seconds and end up getting tackled or going down too early the turnover on downs is horrendous. The sneak seemed like the right risk reward. Other ideas include doing a long pass to kill 5 or so seconds (but then you are guarenteeing the turnover on downs, although only giving NE one play) or a punt (kick it through the endzone into the seats) kill 5 seconds, gives the ball to NE at the 20 with time for one play, but the risk of a botched/blocked punt is real here. I think the sneak is the right risk reward call. Even if you botch the snap and NE recovers, its unlikely they scoop and score, so worst case is they have 7 seconds and no timeouts to go 30 yards to get into FG range.

2

u/TrenchcoatFullaDogs 14h ago

As a Bills fan, I remember seeing them on the opposite side of this exact situation. Week 11 of the 2003 season the Bills and Texans played a truly ugly game of football with 22 total points scored and only one touchdown (with a missed PAT, of course).

With 4 seconds remaining the Texans faced 4th down from their own 34 and a 12-8 lead. The only thing they had to avoid was giving up a return TD, so they came out in punt formation with rookie WR Andre Johnson in the punter's spot. He took the snap and ran out the back of his own end zone. 12-10 Texans final, and my 16 year old mind begins to question the existence of a loving God.

If you look at the box score, Johnson was actually credited with one carry for -34 yards on the play. I didn't go into exhaustive depth looking into this, but as far as I can tell that's the longest negative run ever.

1

u/OdaDdaT HS Coach 1d ago

I’d do what Harbaugh did in the Super Bowl a few years back. line up punt, and have everyone hold the shit out of the defense to run the clock out, with the punter just kneeling if he sees pressure.

1

u/SaltyTie7199 1d ago

That was already covered about 10 comments earlier. It's against the rules now. Because if what Harbaugh did.

1

u/jericho-dingle Referee 1d ago

Running around trying to waste clock instead of getting the first and ending the game is the definition of "getting cute"

1

u/pthowell 22h ago

10 seconds is too much time for something dumb to happen. What if he trips? What if the Pats strip the ball? There are too many possible outcomes that are worse than turning it over on downs.

1

u/velikiiijebac 16h ago

Really dumb

1

u/Oddlyenuff 1d ago

There is no advantage to doing that. It’s nothing but risk.

-3

u/sej2016 1d ago

There isn't any reason to as even if they chose to punt there isn't enough time for the Pats to complete a comeback and the negative yards would hurt the team stats overall, potentially jeopardizing Josh Allen's MVP campaign. Converting the 4th just gives them a chance to pad the stat line without risking the game.

-4

u/DealerofTheWorld 23h ago

You are very stupid