Lots of guys get injured on picks, let's remove them.Lots of guys get injured from ZBS, let's ban that.
Again, this is no longer a meaningful play. It just isn't missed. There are injuries all over the place on the field but at least those plays mean something. This is a play that adds nothing to your experience as a fan....do you enjoy the PAT?
So move the PAT back and/or make the goal posts skinnier.....don't completely change the game and it's scoring system.
So let me get this straight, giving a team an automatic point .4% of the time more than now "completely" changes the game but moving the kick back so it is a 25 yard kick which would drop there % to 97% success over the last 2 years doesn't change the game despite altering outcomes over 7x as much as the proposed change? I mean now you aren't even making sense.
Making an extra point harder doesn't change the game , it makes the game more challenging. Eliminating extra points completely and making a TD worth 7 points changes the game. What are you confused about again ?
Making an extra point harder doesn't change the game , it makes the game more challenging. Eliminating extra points completely and making a TD worth 7 points changes the game. What are you confused about again ?
So changing the game is only about what makes it easier? Your other comment was if it just changes ONE outcome it matters (oh, cue the drama) and now you are gonna defend a system that changes 7x the number of outcomes, oh the horror!If we put a top bar on the goalposts and forced kickers to kick into that box that wouldn't be a change but a "challenge" so that is ok?
There have been 8 total PAT's missed over the last 2 years (4 each season) out of 2502 total attempts. There are sports like baseball or soccer where the rarity of something (goal, home run) makes it exciting but those are both positive events and almost the core of what you watch the game for and shows the skill of the player. The PAT is the opposite, the rarity is the negative play and the failure is almost never the results of a PAT being blocked because of good effort (it is almost impossible for the defense to block a properly kicked PAT because of the trajectory is so high) but because one of three non-entities in the sports f'ed up - long snapper, holder or kicker.
As long as you say there has even been only 1 missed PAT which occured you have no argument . That 1 miss changes the score of a game and possibly the outcome . Therefore it still matters.
Ask Gronk how much it changes the game having them. There's always 2 sides to a coin. Don't just be a drone and look at one but look at BOTH sides. "The high success rate coupled with the injury risk outweighs the very slim drama of a possible miss." http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/01/21/eliminating-extra-point-makes-sense/
That's not the answer. Narrow the goal posts a little bit and move the XP back. Kickers are making everything it seems.
I'd be for that. The only thing is those 3pt 40 - 50+ yrd field goals with an AFL type goal would be extremely difficult.
AFL is too extreme, those are only 9 feet wide. Right now NFL is 18 feet, 6 inches. Something around 15-16 feet would be better. And they have to make the uprights higher because some of the kicks they declare good are a little iffy because they go over the upright.
That's not the answer. Narrow the goal posts a little bit and move the XP back. Kickers are making everything it seems.
I'd be for that. The only thing is those 3pt 40 - 50+ yrd field goals with an AFL type goal would be extremely difficult.
AFL is too extreme, those are only 9 feet wide. Right now NFL is 18 feet, 6 inches. Something around 15-16 feet would be better. And they have to make the uprights higher because some of the kicks they declare good are a little iffy because they go over the upright.
Why bother to make the uprights higher? Just add some lasers to them and turn them on for as needed. They will be doing that on the field for 1st downs soon enough as well.
That's not the answer. Narrow the goal posts a little bit and move the XP back. Kickers are making everything it seems.
I'd be for that. The only thing is those 3pt 40 - 50+ yrd field goals with an AFL type goal would be extremely difficult.
AFL is too extreme, those are only 9 feet wide. Right now NFL is 18 feet, 6 inches. Something around 15-16 feet would be better. And they have to make the uprights higher because some of the kicks they declare good are a little iffy because they go over the upright.
Why bother to make the uprights higher? Just add some lasers to them and turn them on for as needed. They will be doing that on the field for 1st downs soon enough as well.
Because if the ball hits the upright it can still bounce in.
That's not the answer. Narrow the goal posts a little bit and move the XP back. Kickers are making everything it seems.
I'd be for that. The only thing is those 3pt 40 - 50+ yrd field goals with an AFL type goal would be extremely difficult.
AFL is too extreme, those are only 9 feet wide. Right now NFL is 18 feet, 6 inches. Something around 15-16 feet would be better. And they have to make the uprights higher because some of the kicks they declare good are a little iffy because they go over the upright.
Why bother to make the uprights higher? Just add some lasers to them and turn them on for as needed. They will be doing that on the field for 1st downs soon enough as well.
Because if the ball hits the upright it can still bounce in.
Then your not trying to catch 'a little iffy' calls but alter the game. Say what you mean the first time. :)
This quote from Goodell struck me as odd. ""There's one proposal in particular that I've heard about," Goodell added. "It's automatic that you get seven points when you score a touchdown, but you could potentially go for an eighth point, either by running or passing the ball, so if you fail, you go back to six."In what way is this new or different from what we have now? We already have the "automatic" seven points with the option to try for eight and end up with only six. All this proposal does is eliminate the "automatic" kick. It just made me wonder what Goodell thought was so intriguing about this particular proposal.
This quote from Goodell struck me as odd. ""There's one proposal in particular that I've heard about," Goodell added. "It's automatic that you get seven points when you score a touchdown, but you could potentially go for an eighth point, either by running or passing the ball, so if you fail, you go back to six."In what way is this new or different from what we have now? We already have the "automatic" seven points with the option to try for eight and end up with only six. All this proposal does is eliminate the "automatic" kick. It just made me wonder what Goodell thought was so intriguing about this particular proposal.
There have been other no PAT proposals over time that either didn't allow for 2 OR allowed for an 8th point but at no risk to the 7th.
Not happy with the idea. At all. It's a fundamental change. They already almost eliminated the kickoff. Rule changes are bad enough. Simply removing parts of the game is a problem though. After this they will remove the punt probably.You don't change the basic structure of a sport.
The conversion rate is so high it isn't a play. It is perfunctory. You actually would have a higher failure rate on handoffs than PAT's that is how bad it is.
Agree, and there has been cases of players getting seriously hurt on extra point attempts.
Lots of guys get injured on picks, let's remove them.Lots of guys get injured from ZBS, let's ban that.At some point you've got to realize that there is no "perfect" product, and you cant keep changing fundamental aspects of the gam, or you end up with retarded sht like this:
I think they should combine the extra point and kickoff (after a TD) into one play. Let the teams kick a long one near mid field. A good kick through the uprights gives you a point and the other team takes over on the 20. If it's a miss, it's a live ball and that's your kickoff.
If you're going to just completely re-write the game, then don't pretend it's still football. Might as well stop letting the players touch the ball with their hands and watch lame azz soccer and call it "football"
Yeah, changing the extra point completely rewrites the game. Try to have a little imagination and vision: http://www.sportsattic.com/araig/NflRulesHistory.htm
This site must be so frustrating for dalbuc lol Agree with him and the proposal 100%. Get rid of it. Its just a ritual at this point.
This site must be so frustrating for dalbuc lol Agree with him and the proposal 100%. Get rid of it. Its just a ritual at this point.
Well, it is called football for a reason. I wouldn't get rid of anything where kicking is involved. Just make the extra point more of a challenge, like kicking it from way back.
This site must be so frustrating for dalbuc lol Agree with him and the proposal 100%. Get rid of it. Its just a ritual at this point.
Well, it is called football for a reason.
black people were slaves for a reason.Doesn't mean its a good one and that things should stay the same
Like I've been saying for years, they should do away with the extra point kick and the two point conversion. When a team scores a TD they should get 6 points and then line up their offense and go for the extra point just like they do now on 2 point conversion attempts. Teams that excel at converting those extra point attempts would have a huge advantage. It would add a lot of drama and excitement to the game, especially at the end of game when a team scores that last second TD....but still has to convert that extra point play to tie it up.
This site must be so frustrating for dalbuc lol Agree with him and the proposal 100%. Get rid of it. Its just a ritual at this point.
Well, it is called football for a reason.
black people were slaves for a reason.Doesn't mean its a good one and that things should stay the same
Dude, not an appropriate analogy 2 days after MLK day.