Goodell Wants to Get Rid of the Extra Point

[BringBackThatOleTimeBoys]

Why not just make the PAT a much longer kick?

+1

Change it without going so rad to take out the PAT play.

 

[percyhoward]

Coaches already have to make that decision and most go for the automatic kick unless they have to go for two late in a game.

It doesn't have to be from such a close distance that it's automatic. Back it up. Just like when touchbacks on kickoffs were becoming automatic, and they moved back the kickoff point, instead of getting rid of kickoffs completely.

 

[KJJ]

It doesn't have to be from such a close distance that it's automatic. Back it up. Just like when touchbacks on kickoffs were becoming automatic, and they moved back the kickoff point, instead of getting rid of kickoffs completely.

If you make kicked PAT's more difficult too many games will be decided by kickers. The best solution is to make teams cross the goal line to score a PAT. I want to see games won by great plays in the end zone not by a kicker.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Speaking Wednesday, RoyTheHammer wants to get rid of Roger Goodell once and for all.

 

[SkinsFan28]

what about this:
combine the kickoff and pat.
a team scores 6 for a td
they have the option to run a play for 1pt from the 2
then either a successful onside kick or a kickoff through the goalposts gives them one additional point. otherwise the kickoff is treated normally.

 

[Blackspider214]

It's so rare that a missed extra point costs a team a game you had to go back a decade. The NFL doesn't like to see games decided by kickers which is one of the reasons they changed the OT rules allowing both teams to have a possession unless a TD is scored.

False. It doesn't care if games are decided by kickers. How many Super Bowls have been decided by FGs? Buffalo missed one. NE made 2 to win. Colts made one against us. Then the countless playoff games decided by kicks. Just this year, Saints, and Niners won on last second FGs as time expired to win.

What they didn't want was teams to just move the ball 40 some odd yards and kick a FG and game over. If they did that, other team gets to match. Had nothing to do with kickers deciding games.

Changing the scoring of your sport is stupid and what needs to be done to get those points. Rules are different. But altering the scoring, which sport has ever did this?

 

[JS22]

Some interesting, but far too complicated, ideas here. Just make the extra point a 30-35 yard kick and keep everything else like it is. You'll get a handful of misses each week and add a little drama.

 

[WV Cowboy]

I'm kind of liking where they are giving 7 for a TD. Then you can go for the 8th point if you want to, but lose one point if you fail.

Or narrowing the goal posts for the extra point attempt.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Narrowing the goal posts/increasing the distance is really just manipulating the percentages. Keeping the extra point is basically saying, every time a touchdown is scored I want an X% chance that it will be worth only 6 points instead of 7. Why do we want that to be true? Randomness? Drama? I'm pretty sure an NFL game has enough of either to survive. What makes it even sillier is that X is currently something like one half of one percent, so in addition to it being a dumb thing to do at any percent, it is also an extremely boring waste of time that is now an instant snack/restroom break in most homes.

 

[KJJ]

False. It doesn't care if games are decided by kickers. How many Super Bowls have been decided by FGs? Buffalo missed one. NE made 2 to win. Colts made one against us. Then the countless playoff games decided by kicks. Just this year, Saints, and Niners won on last second FGs as time expired to win.

What they didn't want was teams to just move the ball 40 some odd yards and kick a FG and game over. If they did that, other team gets to match. Had nothing to do with kickers deciding games.

Changing the scoring of your sport is stupid and what needs to be done to get those points. Rules are different. But altering the scoring, which sport has ever did this?

As long as FG's are part of the game they will be the determining factor in a number of games but if you make PAT kicks tougher to make them less automatic they'll be games practically every week decided by a missed extra point that wouldn't be good for the game. Missed FG's use to be spotted at the line of scrimmage but now are moved back to the spot of the kick to discourage teams from kicking FG's. It's more exciting for a team to keep their offense on the field and go for it on 4th down the fans love it. In the NFC title game last week Seattle bypassed a FG and went for it on 4th down and it resulted in a TD pass. Change comes with the times because players are bigger, faster and stronger today. Coaches have become more innovative. Some of the rules that were in place 30 years ago wouldn't work in todays game which is why we see rule changes almost every year. The game is evolving and rule changes have to be made to keep it moving in a positive direction. Everything is being done to make the game better and more exciting. I don't agree with some of the rule changes but I understand with the passage of time that adjustments to the rules have to be made.

PAT's have become so automatic that most fans head to the bathroom immediately after a TD taking the extra point for granted but the last thing the NFL wants is for games to come down to missed PAT's especially in the playoffs and SB. If you make PAT kicks tougher games will be decided by them every week. The NFL doesn't want kickers and missed PAT's to influence the outcome of games every week. To make a PAT kick tougher they would have to be at least from 35 yards out and at an angle. Imagine a team scoring 5 TD's and lose because of 2 missed PAT's. You have to factor in weather conditions when adding length to a PAT attempt. There's games where teams pass up chip shot FG's because of extremely poor weather conditions.

A team could score a TD with less than a minute to play moving within one point of a tie game and lose because of a missed PAT due to poor weather conditions. There's no way the committee would vote to make PAT kicks tougher knowing they would decide a number of games throughout the season. The only reason this topic has come up is because PAT's are so automatic. To make them less routine and add drama to every PAT is simple make teams keep their offense on the field and make them cross the goal line again from one or two yards out to convert a PAT.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Pat From the wherever you want yard line then you KO FROM THAT Spot THE oTHER WAY IF YOUMADE IT

 

[barney]

Keep it as it is and don't p**s about !!!!

 

[Spectre]

I agree with a few people. 1) if you want to make it more meaningful, push it back 10 yards, or 2) get rid of it and do what Goodell proposes. Like someone said, the 2-point conversion was adopted in 1994. Most of us probably don't even realize that. We assume it's been around forever. We're either too young to remember or we forgot how it used to be because it's been so long. People freak out after every little change. They want to keep football "pure." This is so trivial and it doesn't change the way the game is played. It's not like he's saying you're no longer allowed to run the ball.

By that line of thinking, we should just get rid of the lateral, too. There were probably less than a handful of those all year. And safeties (the play), because they don't happen often, either.

Um, No.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I'm all for getting rid of the XP, but this made me curious...

if you make PAT kicks tougher to make them less automatic they'll be games practically every week decided by a missed extra point that wouldn't be good for the game.

I went back at looked at the stretch from 1950 to 1960, back when XPs were around a 94% proposition. Over that period, a team missed an XP and lost the game by one point 11 times. In one of those, the losing team missed two XPs and the winning team missed one. There were also three games featuring a missed XP that ended in a tie. So one in 57 games were decided by a missed extra point. Today, that would translate into 4.5 games per season, or once every 4 weeks. I don't honestly know if the two-point conversion would make these kinds of games more or less frequent.

If you make PAT kicks tougher games will be decided by them every week. The NFL doesn't want kickers and missed PAT's to influence the outcome of games every week. To make a PAT kick tougher they would have to be at least from 35 yards out and at an angle.

They won't be decided by them every week. And no, you don't have to push them that far back. FG stats suggest that the 10-yard line (28-yard kick) would be sufficient to bring the average down to around 95%, where it used to be.

To make them less routine and add drama to every PAT is simple make teams keep their offense on the field and make them cross the goal line again from one or two yards out to convert a PAT.

The first question to answer is: why have a PAT at all? It's this weird little untimed play after a TD that's disconnected from anything else in the game. Once we understand what we're trying to accompish, then we can talk about what form it should take (if any).

 

[Super_Kazuya]

By that line of thinking, we should just get rid of the lateral, too. There were probably less than a handful of those all year. And safeties (the play), because they don't happen often, either.

Um, No.

Safeties make perfect sense though; in the game of field position that football ultimately is there should be a penalty for being pushed backward into your end zone. Even with few safeties occurring, the threat of the safety is very apparent.

Extra points make no sense, they are just a random act performed at the end of a touchdown drive by a specialist who doesn't do anything resembling what happened on said touchdown drive. It would make just as much sense to have whoever scored the touchdown race Rowdy in a 100 yard dash to get one extra point.
At least if they made it one point on a score from the one and two from the five (or similar) you are still playing football and not fake rugby. But it still begs the question, why do we need an extra point at all? Why do we want to randomize TD value on the ability to execute a single, extra play?

 

[JD_KaPow]

By that line of thinking, we should just get rid of the lateral, too. There were probably less than a handful of those all year. And safeties (the play), because they don't happen often, either.

Wow, that's quite the straw man. Nobody is saying, "get rid of rare plays." (And your examples aren't all that rare. Every pitch play is a lateral. There were four times as many safeties as missed extra points last season).

Laterals and safeties occur during regular football plays and have regular football outcomes. Safeties and laterals aren't boring, either. The extra point, as I said above, is this weird little untimed play that is not part of the regular football game and is incredibly boring because it's practically automatic. There's no reasonable "line of thinking" that links these together.

 

[DallasJ7]

I'm fine with Goodell's proposal, and actually, of all the proposals of altering the PAT, it probably changes the current game the least. All that would happen is turning a 99.5% chance of getting that 7th point into an automatic 100% chance. Going for 2 won't change because right now you're pretty much taking a free point off the board to try for an 8 point TD. So a coach's strategy regarding going for 2 shouldn't change at all with Goodell's proposal.

I like that TDs are basically worth 7 points, and that 2 FGs are worth one point less. So rather than making PATs more difficult and reducing the chance of a TD being 7 points, I'd rather just make the PAT automatic and get rid of the play.

 

[KJJ]

The first question is: why have a PAT at all?

I'm sure the PAT came about to help try and avoid tie games. Tie games would be more common if 7 points were automatically given for each TD without having to earn an extra point. The 2 point conversion came about the same way and to further decide a winner OT was adopted. I've covered every angle of this topic and the best solution is to have teams run a play from a yard or two out to convert PAT's. A 2 point try can start at the 5 yard line. I believe the NFL will eventually do away with the kick and make teams keep their offense on the field and run a play to convert a PAT.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I'm sure the PAT came about to help try and avoid tie games. Tie games would be more common if 7 points were automatically given for each TD without having to earn an extra point. The 2 point conversion came about the same way and to further decide a winner OT was adopted. I've covered every angle of this topic and the best solution is to have teams run a play from a yard or two out to convert PAT's. A 2 point try can start at the 5 yard line. I believe the NFL will eventually do away with the kick and make teams keep their offense on the field and run a play to convert a PAT.

You're proposing a massive, radical change to the game. Your one-point try would have a 51% success rate (if it started at the one yard line, lower from the two), vs. the kick, which has always been in the mid-to-high 90s. Your two-point try would have a 34% success rate. The biggest change I see this making would be to make FGs more valuable. I can't imagine to what problem this is the best solution.

 

[KJJ]

You're proposing a massive, radical change to the game. Your one-point try would have a 51% success rate (if it started at the one yard line, lower from the two), vs. the kick, which has always been in the mid-to-high 90s. Your two-point try would have a 34% success rate. The biggest change I see this making would be to make FGs more valuable. I can't imagine to what problem this is the best solution.

What I'm proposing would make PAT's less automatic which is what everyone wants. If you want to know what the NFL will eventually do with PAT's all you have to do is look at how they handle 2 point conversions. They don't make the kick harder they make teams either pass or run to convert them. They'll do the same thing with 1 point PAT's do away with the routine kick and make teams pass or run from a yard or two out to convert. FG's are 3 points whether they're kicked from 30 yards out or 64 yards out. Fans and the NFL want to see teams cross the goal line not settle for FG's.