NFL Rule Change Proposal

• OQB

  

  What do you guys think of the "extra point" play in football?
  
  I think it is the most useless and non-entertaining play in sports....success rates are close to 99% and no effort is given on the play.
  
  I propose getting rid of the extra point all together and force the teams to attempt a 2-point conversion.
  
  
  What do you guys think?
• hoops23

  

  Meh, I think the XP is ok mainly because it's an extra point awarded for scoring a TD, yet, it's not always guaranteed...
  
  If Team A scores a TD and the rules state you have to go for 2, and they don't get it, 2 FG's by team B ties it up, instead of Team B being down 1 with the XP.
  
  I don't know, I guess it's just my thought on the issue.
• OQB

  

  That is ok Hoops....good points.
  
  
  I was watching All Bets Are Off and a caller suggested this to Bruce and he liked the idea. I was just wanting to hear some more opinions on the matter.
• lhslep134

  

  I don't like the fact that 2 FGs can equal a touchdown and a missed 2 point conversion (which would happen a lot more often than a missed extra point obviously), but other than that fact, I don't mind the idea. Don't really feel care either way
• Azubuike24

  

  Against it. The score formulations are engrained in the minds of those in the sport. I know it's just a single point, but changing this completely alters scoring in a game. As someone said, it's far easier to kick 2 FG's than it is to score a touchdown. Now, if they were going to do something drastic like eliminate the XP AND make the goalposts only half as wide, I might be in favor of it. That would still make it that much tougher to equal a TD, even if it was only worth 6 points (with a possibility of 8).
• thavoice

  I would keep it as it is.
  
  really dislike the new kickoff rules tho.
  
  I guess a team the other night kicked off from the 30 instead and the refs allowed them to, but got they all got in trouble for it.
  
  
  Some rule changes in terms of practice has some coaches not happy.
  
  The lack of padded contact practices in training camp and in season. It is a recent SI article. Looks like running teams will be even fewer and far between. One coach said last year players REQUESTED more padded hitting in season. Under the new deal there are many less in two a days...no two a day hitting, and in season I think there are only allowed 16 hitting days in pads.
  
  Look for the power game to go by the wayside even more in the nfl.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  [video=youtube;kTGco82JKHo][/video]
  
  No. Keep it.
• OhioStatePride2003

  Commander of Awesome;863947 wrote:[video=youtube;kTGco82JKHo][/video]
  
  No. Keep it.

  That was great, wasn't it? Haha. I'd been sooo pissed.
• Laley23

  

  I LOVED that Saints play!
  
  "NOOOOO!"
  "Oh my God! How could he DO that?!"
• SportsAndLady

  

  lhslep134;863753 wrote:I don't like the fact that 2 FGs can equal a touchdown and a missed 2 point conversion

  
  So just make a TD worth 7 points instead of 6.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  Why have kickers then? Might as well just use a jugg machine for kickoffs.
• lhslep134

  

  SportsAndLady;864077 wrote:So just make a TD worth 7 points instead of 6.

  
  So you'd eliminate 2 point conversions? That's an even worse idea.
• Laley23

  

  SportsAndLady;864077 wrote:So just make a TD worth 7 points instead of 6.

  
  Cause then going for 2 results in way to many points.
  
  I mean, is the PAT really THAT big of a deal to people. Why is this even being discussed?
• SportsAndLady

  

  lhslep134;864112 wrote:So you'd eliminate 2 point conversions? That's an even worse idea.

  Laley23;864113 wrote:Cause then going for 2 results in way to many points.
  
  I mean, is the PAT really THAT big of a deal to people. Why is this even being discussed?

  
  I think eliminating PATs is a terrible idea lol
  
  I was just saying if it was going to be rid of, and people don't like how 2 fgs=1td, then just make the TD worth 7.
  
  But yeah you are both right, that would add too many points (9 points for a TD is too much). I was just throwing that out there.
• mhs95_06

  The shorter kick-off play should help the kick-off be a positive play, and reward for scoring. Teams with really precise kickers should really benefit. I always get upset when the kicking team puts it in the end zone giving the returning team an easy out to the 20 yd line. Proper kick-offs should rarely be touch-backs when done correctly. A good kicker would take the extra leg he has to go longer than the goal line to instead get more height on the ball and give his defense time to get down and to put them in the corner so they can be well covered and jostle the returner to cause fumbles and maybe make them fair catch it inside the 5 yd line. It could add a lot of strategy to licking and returns, like maybe they take chances and let it bounce rather than get jostled or fair catching, which may result in the ball going OB, or going into the EZ where it is fair game for the defense, or going out of the EZ for a touchback. I think it will be good for the game if the offense tries to use it to gain a lot of advantage rather than just pounding it out of the EZ. And it should be safer, which is what they are really trying to get, by making it a more tentative play instead of all out speed and slam.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  I agree that some teams might risk kicking the ball high and to a corner on kickoffs, hoping the receiver muffs it or they get a tackle inside the 10 yard line.
  
  However, because it's now much easier for teams to kick the ball into (and out of) the endzone, you're going to see a lot of those kicks toward the end of games as coaches play it conservative and force opponents to go 80 yards rather than take a chance on someone breaking a long return.
  
  I'd have left that rule alone, but I guess they had safety concerns for making the change.
• OhioStatePride2003

  mhs95_06;864683 wrote:The shorter kick-off play should help the kick-off be a positive play, and reward for scoring. Teams with really precise kickers should really benefit. I always get upset when the kicking team puts it in the end zone giving the returning team an easy out to the 20 yd line. Proper kick-offs should rarely be touch-backs when done correctly. A good kicker would take the extra leg he has to go longer than the goal line to instead get more height on the ball and give his defense time to get down and to put them in the corner so they can be well covered and jostle the returner to cause fumbles and maybe make them fair catch it inside the 5 yd line. It could add a lot of strategy to licking and returns, like maybe they take chances and let it bounce rather than get jostled or fair catching, which may result in the ball going OB, or going into the EZ where it is fair game for the defense, or going out of the EZ for a touchback. I think it will be good for the game if the offense tries to use it to gain a lot of advantage rather than just pounding it out of the EZ. And it should be safer, which is what they are really trying to get, by making it a more tentative play instead of all out speed and slam.

  When you're kicking to the likes of Devin Hester, Joshua Cribbs, Eric Weems, etc.... I think kicking the ball into the endzone is a good play because it beats having one ran back, it beats kicking the ball out of bounds, and even if you have a precise kicker - they (Hester, Cribbs, Weems) are capable of making a ton of people miss for a TD. I get what you're saying though, and agree to a certain extent, but it depends on who's back there receiving the kicks.
  
  I get what the rule is meant to do, which is provide a "safer" kickoff, but I don't think it'll necessarily work. There's still going to be run backs, there's still going to be injuries... I dunno. I think in the end, it can be more dangerous than the way it was. Most kickers in the NFL (exclude Phil Dawson) will have no trouble kicking the ball through the back of the endzone. I think you'll see certain "strategies" form where teams are using the "pop-up" kicks to their advantage. I think this could leave to more injuries, potentially.
• thavoice

  dont think that the 'easy out' is to kick it through the endzone to ensure no return.
  
  I read an article that stated in 2010 the average starting field position in 2010 after a KO was the 32 yard line. They 'project' it to be the 27 yard line this year (I dont know how they think that though) and it will cause lower scoring because of that 5 yard difference.
  
  SUre, there are times you pin a team inside the 20 on the old kickoffs and I would venture to say many of those is when a guy returns it from 2-4 yards in the end zone.
  
  As far as directional kickoffs to the sidelines like punts. WEll, you have the little rule of if the ball goes out of bounds then the other team gaes it like at teh 40 or sometthing like that. Many coaches I dont think will go for that.
  
  I do look for many kickers to try and boot it deep in the end zone and make them start at teh 20 and go 80 yards for a TD. I think less teams will return it if they are a couple of yards deep like they were in the past because the defenders are starting 5 yards closer. Last year, if you caught it 2-4 yards deep you had a better chance to get a good return than you wil this year.
• thavoice

  teams could try to kick it higher and pin teams like on punts, but it is harder to do that from a tee than it is a punt, and also, blocking on KO return is much, much more set up htan on punts and would be harder to pin teas.