- Messages
- 62,299
- Reaction score
- 63,981
With Cundiff, I still believe that you have to focus more on how well he kicks from long range--not his overall success. All kickers' overall percentages (the good-to-better kickers at least) decrease by the number of long range misses. If Cundiff were 10% to 15% better in the 40-49 yard range, I wouldn't feel as negatively about him as I do. His success from 50+ yards could be better. But regardless of how good a kicker is, you usually end up crossing your fingers and praying whenever they're kicking from that far out.Champsheart said:Ok, let me put it this way -
Billy converted 76.9% of his kicks.
That was 25th in the NFL last year.
He only attempted 2 kicks 50 yards or more, and missed both.
No playoff team last year had a kicker with a worst percentage.
Pats- 93.6%
Jets - 82.8%
Steelers - 84.8%
Indy - 80%
Chargers - 80%
Broncos - 85.3 %
Eagles - 84.4%
Packers - 85.7%
Vikings - 81.8%
Falcons - 78.3%
Rams - 79.2%
Seahawks - 92%
If you are going to succeed and win the close ones, you better have a kicker better than 25th in the NFL.
In 3 years Cundliff has never made 80% of his kicks.