Get rid of the extra point? Any rule changes you'd like to see?

Hazys

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/08/23/bill-belichick-doesnt-see-the-point-in-extra-points/

Patriots coach Bill Belichick recently caused a stir when he said the NFL wants to eliminate kickoffs. Now Belichick has weighed in on a play that he says would be better suited to elimination: The extra point.
In an interview on WEEI, Belichick pointed out that the point after touchdown is so easy that it rarely creates any interest at all, and he said that if the league isn’t going to make it harder, then the league should just get rid of it.

“Philosophically, plays that are non-plays shouldn’t be in the game,” Belichick said, via Mike Reiss of ESPNBoston.com. “I don’t think it is good for the game. Extra points, when you’re up to the 99 percent range in extra points it’s not a play. Let’s move the ball back to the 15-20 yard line and not make it a tap in. Make them kick it. Same thing with the kickoff return, if you’re just going to put the ball on the 20, put the ball on the 20.”

Belichick’s way of thinking makes a lot of sense: The extra point is basically nothing more than a way to give fans a longer bathroom break after a touchdown. And on the rare occasions that an extra point is missed, it’s more about bad luck than skill. Belichick’s solution of moving the line of scrimmage on extra point attempts back to the 20-yard line makes some sense; that would equate to a 38-yard field goal, which isn’t a chip shot.

But we shouldn’t forget about the two-point conversion, which is one of the most exciting plays in football. Under the current rules, the line of scrimmage for point after attempts is the 2-yard line, whether teams are kicking for one point or attempting a two-point conversion. Moving the line of scrimmage to the 20 would only make sense if it’s a rule exclusively for one-point kicks, and two-point conversion attempts still start from the two-yard line.

Another option would be moving the line of scrimmage for all extra points to the 1-yard line. Extra point kicks would still be chip shots, but two-point conversion attempts would be easier, which would encourage coaches to go for two more often, which would make the game more exciting.

The extra point kick could also just be completely eliminated and teams could be given the option of either taking seven points for a touchdown, or taking six points with the chance to go for two and turn it into eight.

In the XFL, there were no extra point kicks. Teams got six points for a touchdown and then ran another play from the two-yard line, and if they scored they got one extra point. That rule might sound like some wacky idea from the mind of Vince McMahon, but it was actually taken from the NFL, which briefly experimented with that rule during its 1968 exhibition games against AFL teams in the preseason. (The World Football League had a similar rule, called the Action Point, in the 1970s.) In the playoffs the XFL changed its extra point rule to allow teams to go for two or three points by moving the line of scrimmage back farther from the goal line.

I’m surprised Belichick, who once sent Doug Flutie into a game to dropkick an extra point, didn’t suggest getting rid of the holder and forcing every team to dropkick extra points. That would make it less of a gimme.

I’ve also heard it suggested that the real way to make extra points interesting is to require the player who scored the touchdown to kick the extra point. It would be amusing to see running backs and wide receivers (and occasionally 350-pound linemen who recovered fumbles in the end zone) trying extra points, and it would encourage coaches to go for two a lot more often.

Don’t expect a radical change to extra point rules any time soon: Any rule change on extra points would require 24 NFL owners to support it, and NFL owners aren’t the most radical of people. But Belichick is right: Extra point kicks are boring plays. The NFL should change the point-after rules to take some boredom out of the game.

What do you think about eliminating extra points? or making them harder, like kicking from the 20?

I'd hate to dramatically change the game by moving extra points to the 20 yrd line but its kinda silly that there is a play that has a 99% sucess rate, the only play with a higher sucess rate would be taking a knee.


Any other rules you like to see the NFL try out?

Personally i'd like to see bigger game rosters (50) and bigger rosters (60), i think it would lower the impact/frequency of injuries and with better specialization increase the overall quality of play.

Hazys

Also does anybody know whats the number of players on the active game roster for NCAA teams?

tallaghtoutlaws

Hazys wrote: »

Also does anybody know whats the number of players on the active game roster for NCAA teams?

The depth chart has 66. But some colleges have 125 players on their rosters. Walk ons, Red Shirts etc etc

tallaghtoutlaws

This thread reminds me of the last thread:

My opinion then which I stand by now to be honest.

Now I am back I thought I would wade in here

jman0war good thread by the way kudos.

Just a couple of things on what changes you would like to see though:

PAT: 4 of the 11 misses this season cost the respective team their game and were crucial. Although very low the PAT is the easy option for points after. Teams do have a right to make life difficult for themselves if they so wish choose by going for 2 which we all know is a gamble.

But as for changing the 1 point and angles and all of that. No thanks. You are asking kickers to change their method not just in the NFL but all the way back through college and high school. You change the Pros you would have to change High school and College games also where Kicking is already a lot harder than the Pros. HS and College football have high amount of PAT misses every year where they are truly not a given. Pros make it look a lot easier than it really is.

To kick a PAT you need a strong solid line, A long snapper is literally inch perfect every time, a holder you know is going to bring that ball in and down and set it up on time and a kicker who can make the kick while under pressure.

I just think as easy as it sounds to change it, you are asking a lot more than you think.

Drop Goals: Have you ever tried to drop kick an American Football? Not as easy as a Rugby ball thats for sure. American Footballs are lighter and smaller than Rugby balls and dont have that flat nose so when it hits the ground the point will make it go away from your foot almost every time. I have Rugby players in UCD on my AF team and they have tried and failed trying to drop kick a ball when they do it regularly in Rugby. Now add the pressure to the ball in motion. Bad idea.


Some things I would like to see changed:

The penalty for PI as someone pointed out. In the NFL the penalty is enforced from the point of contact of the PI. In the NCAA its from the previous spot. I think I would rather see the NCAA ruling of it in the Pros.

Also PI itself. Far too much lenience given to Offensive players. Needs to change.

The umpire put back in the spot he was before they move him behind the Defense. So many more holding calls missed this past NFL season.

Few more may come to mind.

mikemac

Now if you win two challenges and you get a third

I think if you win you should keep going until you lose

Some coaches are a disaster at these, I know John Harbaugh won one out of seven at one stage last year.
But if you're good then carry on, it gives an advantage to those who are getting the best advice and know when to challenge.

I'm not saying giving both teams unlimited challenges.
But if you win three then give four and if you win your fourth you get a fifth and so on

It is possible for teams to win far more of these. Fox employ Mike Pereira, former VP in the league for Officiating and it's amazing how he always calls the challenges correctly.

Trojan

Remove all helmets and padding, remove breaks between plays, and make the same guys play offence as defence, and the quarterback must throw the ball backwards.

But seriously, how often is the 2 pointer used, and how often in NFL do we see a fake extra point going for the 2 pointer? I'd say the latter is rare - most often 2 point is obvious, and only used at end of 4th, so moving the 1 point kick back makes sense.

Kick off can't be gotten rid of because k/o returns are some of the most spectacular of all TDs.

Chucky the tree

Trojan wrote: »

Remove all helmets and padding, remove breaks between plays, and make the same guys play offence as defence, and the quarterback must throw the ball backwards.

But seriously, how often is the 2 pointer used, and how often in NFL do we see a fake extra point going for the 2 pointer? I'd say the latter is rare - most often 2 point is obvious, and only used at end of 4th, so moving the 1 point kick back makes sense.

Kick off can't be gotten rid of because k/o returns are some of the most spectacular of all TDs.

They'll be a rarity now with the new rules though.

Trojan

Sorry Chucky, I hadn't read the original article (referenced in the one above).

Makes sense now - league sees lots of injuries on the k/o return where I see "spectacular" TDs - each to their own and preventing injuries is a laudable goal if someone misguided here. I'm with them on the principle, but surely there's some other way to reduce injuries in the game. What are the stats like on that aspect?

I notice a lot of TV coverage don't even show the extra points, they go to ads anyway, which shows how important they are.

johnmcdnl

I'd love to see college style over time periods...

you get the ball on the 20/25 yard line and you try to score... then the other team gets the ball after you drive and they get to try to score...

if both team scores ball moves back 5 yards and you start over... far better than first score wins where you just drive into field goal range and then a FG can win without the other offense ever getting a chance at all....

Trojan

I'd love to see any changes that increase the level of risk that NFL teams take - e.g. promoting a more college style play, with laterals, trick plays, etc. They make the game far more entertaining.

Hey, what about the drop goal?

tallaghtoutlaws

Trojan wrote: »

Hey, what about the drop goal?

Not as easy as it sounds. So many rugby players come to me in UCD and ask why we dont do it as they do it in rugby so I challenge them to do the same with an American football which is much smaller and with pointier ends than a rugby ball and they cant do it. Unlike a rugby ball the bounce when it hits the ground is all over the shop.

Teams never practice it and I can't see ever doing it as it will be most definitely hit and miss.

Doug Flutie in his last game in the NFL as a Pats QB was the last to do it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0Jsz-fSNd4

JJ

I have a suggestion FWIW...

They should make the extra point similar to conversions in rugby. The new rule could be that the ball is placed on the yard line where the offensive team last tackled a player on the defensive team on a kick off. There would probably have to be a maximum yardage on the placement like the 35 yard line, including cases where the defensive team scored a TD on the last kickoff. This would reward teams for kicking the ball and tackling the return team within the 20 yard line.

johnmcdnl

JJ wrote: »

I have a suggestion FWIW...

They should make the extra point similar to conversions in rugby. The new rule could be that the ball is placed on the yard line where the offensive team last tackled a player on the defensive team on a kick off. There would probably have to be a maximum yardage on the placement like the 35 yard line, including cases where the defensive team scored a TD on the last kickoff. This would reward teams for kicking the ball and tackling the return team within the 20 yard line.

what happens if the KR scores a TD on the opening kickoff... (or score on opening drive if I'm understanding this correctly) there's been no tackles yet so no where to place the ball??

I'm kinda confused about what your suggesting here but it seems to have a few holes..

if I'm reading this right your suggesting that - if you manage to stop an offense say on their 20 yard line with a 3 and out if you manage to score on that drive your extra point attempt comes from the 20 yard line.....

however if they manage to get a drive up the field and score with a 5 yard run your kick would be from the 35 yard line because you tackled last on your own 5 yard line...

but if they get a 90 yard pass for a TD then your PAT would be from the 10 yard line...

so it's better if you let the other team score huge TD's

JJ

I suppose I didn't quite think that through but what I'm trying to suggest is a point after system that is similar to rugby where the kicking attempt is not always from the same spot and not always a gimmie.

me-skywalker

Trojan wrote: »

Kick off can't be gotten rid of because k/o returns are some of the most spectacular of all TDs.

I agree! New rules will ensure these will become a rarity, unfortunately, but better protection to see our favourite players play more!

johnmcdnl wrote: »

I'd love to see college style over time periods...

you get the ball on the 20/25 yard line and you try to score... then the other team gets the ball after you drive and they get to try to score...

if both team scores ball moves back 5 yards and you start over... far better than first score wins where you just drive into field goal range and then a FG can win without the other offense ever getting a chance at all....

New O/T Rules came into force last season. I thougth they were a brilliant and much fairer addition to the rules. But I think they need to be rolled out into the regular season rather that soley post-season.

I think with as with all rule changes the NFL will take its time and probe lightly first before introducing something. They feel they already have a great product that works and sells! They don't want any major changes to affect the integrity 'If it ain't broken don't fix it.' As with FIFA in soccer they would be opposed to any major changes as these changes could disrupt the 'status quo' also could backfire and the people in power dont want to loose their footing or staus to become known as the man who brought in a terrible change.

bruschi

the kick off has to go back to the 25. otherwise kicking off is just a pointless excercise, either move it back to the 25, or just restart the game on the 20, which is effectively what is happening. pre season didnt show it up much, but the Packers/Saints game did, and I'd expect the vast majority of games this sunday to have endless amounts of touch backs.