View topic - Extra Point idea

[Pommah Profile]

The league is thinking about farting around with extra points, since the kick for 1 point from the 3 yard line is largely automatic. Most of the thoughts are that the kick would take place from farther away, like the 20 or 25, to make it more difficult.

I see two problems with this. One, where is the balance point - where does it actually become difficult enough? The 20? The 25? It will take a lot of experimenting to find out, and the NFL will look pretty foolish during that period. The other thing it does is take away the fake-kick-run-it-in-for-2 play, which takes away some of the excitement the NFL is trying to put back in, in the first place.

My idea is to use what the game's progenitor uses, Rugby Football. In that sport when a "try" is scored (a touchdown), the conversion kick is from where the ball crossed the goal line. If the NFL did that, a touchdown in the corner would result in a subsequent very difficult conversion kick, as the goal posts are not only much further away, they present a very narrow target. This also brings about a new element of strategy to the game; goal line situations present a tricky choice. Go for the pass to the corner, and now you have a difficult conversion to make. Plow straight ahead, conversion is a piece of cake.

What do you yinzers think?

[Still Peon Profile]

the conversion kick is from where the ball crossed the goal line. If the NFL did that, a touchdown in the corner would result in a subsequent very difficult conversion kick, as the goal posts are not only much further away, they present a very narrow target.

This is definitely a better idea than what they're currently considering. In fact, as bad as Godell is at doing the whole commish thing, I think he's worst at coming up with new rules, or tweaking the current ones. I haven't liked even one thing he's come up with.

[Ohio Profile]

The league is thinking about farting around with extra points, since the kick for 1 point from the 3 yard line is largely automatic. Most of the thoughts are that the kick would take place from farther away, like the 20 or 25, to make it more difficult.

I see two problems with this. One, where is the balance point - where does it actually become difficult enough? The 20? The 25? It will take a lot of experimenting to find out, and the NFL will look pretty foolish during that period. The other thing it does is take away the fake-kick-run-it-in-for-2 play, which takes away some of the excitement the NFL is trying to put back in, in the first place.

My idea is to use what the game's progenitor uses, Rugby Football. In that sport when a "try" is scored (a touchdown), the conversion kick is from where the ball crossed the goal line. If the NFL did that, a touchdown in the corner would result in a subsequent very difficult conversion kick, as the goal posts are not only much further away, they present a very narrow target. This also brings about a new element of strategy to the game; goal line situations present a tricky choice. Go for the pass to the corner, and now you have a difficult conversion to make. Plow straight ahead, conversion is a piece of cake.

What do you yinzers think?

Very good post Pommah... I agree to almost everything but... There are three major differences between rugby and footbal in terms of this rule change:
- The width of the football field is about 20 yards shorter. So the angle would be different
- We snap the ball. In rugby this kick is like a kick-off situation. No outside pressure and no chances of a blocked kicked or a bad snap or ball handling ( Tony Romo ... )
- Most Importantly : Football : Touchdown 6 , Kick 1; Rugby: Touchdown 5, Kick 2. In one sport You miss two kicks and it's like you didn't score one touchdown. In the other you have to miss 6... We don't value kickers or punters... It is like they are "players". In rugby those guys are normal players. Not situational players. It would be like Big Ben punting the ball all the time or Polamalu taking the kick...

So... We are talking about 1 point... It is almost never crucial to the result of the game. And, in today's game, they never miss it...

So? What do we go from here ?

You don't want to see Important players lost for the season for this useless point. Like the Patiots two years ago...
You want to keep the excitement ? You will hardly do it if it is valued ONE point.

At the same time the NFL has concussion problems... Which means, you don't want teams to run the ball ( lot of contacts ) or have contacts whatsoever...

Expect everything to remain the same for the foreseable future. At this rate I see more chances to give 7 points to a TD than everything else

[isfry Profile]

I think after a touchdown the team who scored must line up their long-snapper, who has to dunk the ball over the crossbar...lefty. One point.

[Still Peon Profile]

I think after a touchdown the team who scored must line up their long-snapper, who has to dunk the ball over the crossbar...lefty. One point.

I'd pay at least $1.00 to see that.

[bubbybrister Profile]

I say get rid off all kickers. These little euro-soccer players just don't belong on the field. Make all teams go for 2 after a touchdown.
Plus, the most exciting part of a football game is when time is winding and the team with the ball has to score a TD to win. It infuriates when coaches take their foot off the gas when they get "in-range" of a FG because they assume the idiot kicker will win the game. They get conservative, plunge the RB into the line 3 straight times, then roll out space-man spiff in his oversized helmet and he shanks a 35 yarder that would have put the Steelers in the playoffs... I'm still bitter about the end of the season.

[Ed Burns Profile]

I think after a touchdown the team who scored must line up their long-snapper, who has to dunk the ball over the crossbar...lefty. One point.

That would be priceless.