New Report on Seattle's 2 Point Conversion (and this is really bullcrap if true)

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Charbonnet was "driven by the fundamental, instinctive habit of securing a loose ball, even though he didn't initially understand the full context of the play. He later stated, "I had no idea, but I'm always taught to pick up the ball".
That's good coaching. And a player responding well to good coaching.
There are a LOT of moving parts on that play. But Zach wasn't picking up the ball to be "nice." He picked up the ball because he was well coached.
I'm a Ram fan, but I'm willing to give Zach credit for being the ONLY player on the field who responded as he should have at the very end of that play.
And no doubt he was planning on giving the ball to the official. I would bet next month's mortgage that he was as surprised as everybody else that he was being awarded the 2 pt conversion.
 
There are terrible and missed calls in every game and we benefit from some and are screwed by some. This one because of the bizarre way it went down is painful. But I expect the refs to be bad and if they prove me wrong I'm ok with that.
I agree, but if not a nationally televised game, the call does not get reversed. I knew it when McCauley replayed it and he sold it to New York.
 
And no doubt he was planning on giving the ball to the official. I would bet next month's mortgage that he was as surprised as everybody else that he was being awarded the 2 pt conversion.
Yeah, I'd agree that he planned on giving the ball to the official after he picked it up. And I'd agree he was as surprised as everyone else as to the outcome. He's acknowledged all that.

But it's also still true that he was well coached and did the smart thing under the circumstances.

And now I'm gonna try to move on from the topic because giving praise to a Hawk player makes me want to puke.
 
Everything went against us at the end of that game. Giving up a punt return that should have never happened was the issue. For everything that happened we still scored in OT and were up 7 to win, but the Defense couldn't get a stop. The two point play was unfortunate but no more than that.
 
As ref fuckups go this was a big one and it affected the seeding and eventual results of the NFCCG and title. So I'm still pissed but on the other hand I'm not gonna act like the fans I detest of other teams who carry around this kind of BS and storyline it when their team comes up short.

Rams weren't good enough to overcome the refs. Hope that changes next year. Fix the fucking defense and it won't matter.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat:

- 2 new starting CBs
- 1 new starting ILB
- 1 new starting offensive weapon (likely WR2)
- retooling of the ST kick return and cover teams

Equals an LA Rams team that would have gone 15-2 and won a SB this year.

With health on their side that’s the recipe for success for 2026.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Merlin
I'm in the minority on this, but I prefer it when "at the end of the day" the call ends up being the correct one. No matter which team it benefits, the Rams or their opponent.

Am I glad that the Rams beat the Saints in the NFCCG? Sure I am. But it's a bummer that the refs completely screwed up the PI call.

Am I bummed that the Rams lost to the Hawks in large part due to that controversial 2-point call? Of course.

But was it a backwards pass? Yes. Should the ball have been live? Yes. Should Zach have been legally able to recover it in the EZ for a TD? Yes. Did the ref screw up by blowing the whistle early? Yes. Should Rams defenders be coached to go after the ball when there is any question as to whether the ball was a fumble or a lateral or a pass? Yes.

Is it okay that the TV Analyst called the NYC office? I don't know, and I hope they write a rule about that.

That play was damn weird to be sure. But it "should" have been considered a live ball.
I agree it's better that they get the call right. Where I disagree is that they got that call right. Let's be frank, not one player or ref on that field believed it was a fumble and that the ball was live. There was no question in anybody's mind. If there was, there would have been a scramble for it, and the refs wouldn't have waited as long as they did to review it.

It was a fluke of a play that it happened to be going ever so slightly backwards and hit Verse's helmet, ricocheting forward. Every person on the field thought it was an incomplete pass. A game shouldn't turn on a player walking over AFTER the whistle blew and retrieving the ball. Well-coached or not, that's not the right outcome.

If a whistle blows while there's a scramble for the ball, by all means, treat it like it didn't happen if the players keep playing. But that didn't happen here. Not a single player on the field was scrambling to get the ball.
 
Bigger missed call was Stafford getting his head yanked from the obvious facemask in the NFCCG, Instead of a FG, the Rams may have scored a TD. That difference in points was the difference in the final score.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ram Ts

JE also missed the point that it wasn’t an immediate recovery. If we blow up Kupp or JSN on a similar looking play, may not be a backwards pass, I don’t want to see any flags for the Rams doing what it takes to recover the ball.

JE is correct about the interference from the rules analyst commentator, but it also creates a precedence equivalent to the standard kickoff return that was removed for safety precautions. I’m not sure the NFL wants to open a can of worms with players blowing each other up over the potential of a backwards or lateral pass.