Deletion of Philly Special

Comment: I am concerned about , , and  here, and I do wish this article had been created a bit later to let us get some kind of sense of the long-tern historical impact this play is going to have. But, realistically, given what was at stake here, this is probably going to be the type of play that winds up being deserving of it's own article. And, the play itself has gotten plenty of coverage, like https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/02/05/super-bowl-52-eagles-patriots-peter-king-mmqb this
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:RECENT||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Meets , and enough potential expansion remains where it'd be a shame to pare down and merge into Super Bowl LII. Two weeks after the game, ''Sports Illustrated'' had an extensive writeup on the origins of the play: https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/02/21/philly-special-eagles-trick-play-clemson-westlake-high-gray-military-academy-2011 "‘Philly Special’ Was Drawn Up By a Mad-Scientist Coach on a South Carolina Baseball Field in 2011
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: look at Helmet Catch. While I'm not trying to pull a purely  vote here, similar to that play there's more to this one that is giving it continued notability after the Super Bowl is over. For example that trademark battle going on over the term. If the play was just a single event fading into the wind like most things brought to AFD for similar reasons, there wouldn't be much debate over it continuing all over the place. Also, people are still debating the legality after the fact. Another factor is that this play created a Super Bowl record that never even existed beforehand to break, most touchdown passes (1 lol) caught by a quarterback in a Super Bowl. I'd link to some previous AFDs I found, but I fear that would reduce my comment into an OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: Notable play, the play and this name are given a lot of coverage in |outside reliable sources (including a cover story in Sports Illustrated with the play name as its title), and the fact that several organizations are attempting to trademark "Philly Special
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Seen a lot of newspaper articles on this play specifically, even after the event, and while coverage'll fade as time goes on, I think this passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)