Extra Points: What say you?

[PitchShifter]

+1.

Neil Rackers would be sweating kiddie pools in his shoes.

Or, steal the rule from rugby that you have to kick from the position you scored.

For example, if you score in the back corner of the end zone, you have to kick from 3 yards from that sideline so that the posts look like this:

You must be registered for see images

uce

OMG, is that Bruce stadium just down the road for me with my ACT Brumbies kicking against the Hurricanes? never thought I'd see that on here

I never really saw the point in taking the extra point at such close range and directly in front. But misses do happen and it's part of the traditional game.

Just what problem is the League is trying to address by removing them?

 

[BillsCarnage]

Move it back 10yrds and take a page from the AFL and make the uprights 9ft wide

 

[chickenhead]

The more interesting debate is the one about whether you should go for 2 every time in the current system, not whether we should get rid of the PAT kick altogether. Going for 2 is risky precisely because the PAT is safe (but not guaranteed). That's where gamesmanship comes in, and gamesmanship is interesting.

We'd have to see how the stats bear it out, but the new system may actually promote conservative play in a lot of progressions. We'd either see coaches sticking with 7 on opening touchdowns, or see failed conversions followed by sticking with 7 by the opponent. Maybe some would go for the conversion every time, but no one does that now, when they can.

Feels a bit like the loser point in the NHL standings.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Blindfold the kickers, spin them around 10 times, and place them in the correct spot to kick from and see how automatic they are then. Problem solved.

 

[Azlen]

The problem I would have with moving it back is that it would make the outcome of more games be dependent on the kicker and nobody really wants that do they?

 

[FArting]

Keep it the same

 

[DoTheDew]

This would probably shorten NFL games by a good 5-10 minutes at least. Obviously, the NFL doesn't want to lose that commercial revenue, and they'd probably be more likely to expand the automatic review system as a way to get back a few more commercial breaks. Perhaps they'd start reviewing things like pass interference calls?

Not sure if that'd be a good thing or bad thing, just saying...

 

[Duckjake]

This would probably shorten NFL games by a good 5-10 minutes at least. Obviously, the NFL doesn't want to lose that commercial revenue, and they'd probably be more likely to expand the automatic review system as a way to get back a few more commercial breaks. Perhaps they'd start reviewing things like pass interference calls?

Not sure if that'd be a good thing or bad thing, just saying...

I agree. They go to commercial after the TD. Come back for the extra point, go to commercial again, come back for the kickoff and then go to one more commercial. That's a lot of revenue to give up and time wasted.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Saw this on Deadspin today. Found it interesting.

What if the NFL installed the following rule: A player can only attempt one FG per game? How many kickers do you roll with and when do you send them out there? I myself would get all fired up to watch a fat lineman try and boot a 50-yarder with the game on the line.

 

[jmt]

Kick the point!

 

[Cardiac]

I agree. They go to commercial after the TD. Come back for the extra point, go to commercial again, come back for the kickoff and then go to one more commercial. That's a lot of revenue to give up and time wasted.

I think this is the nexus of the issue. I typically use this time to take a bio break or get refreshments because the extra point is boring and automatic. I'd bet I'm not the only one so the NFL may be losing revenue $'s because that commercial time becomes watched less and ergo less valuable.

*********** was right then and it still applies, follow the money.

 

[Fitz Rulz]

You must be registered for see images

how about changing the shape?