NFL moves PAT to 15y line

[Troglodyte]

Montana to Clark, Roethlisberger to Holmes. Some foreign dude missing an extra point. It just doesn't have the same feel.

I agree it will take away from the celebration of TDs where the extra point is critical as people hold their breath waiting for the kick. But those will be the exception.

 

[steelerscotty]

I think it should count for one more point if he can hit the upright!

But he has to yell "BANK" first . . .

 

[Coach]

in accordance with player safety, this request and any request in the future that requires players to play more, is denied.
love,
ginger commish

Player safety has just taken a hit. Extra points are " safe " 2 point conversations have more risk.

 

[deljzc]

Player safety has just taken a hit. Extra points are " safe " 2 point conversations have more risk.

Nothing about this rule should change the number of 2 points conversions that drastically (+10%)

At a 96-97% success rate, there is no team/coach in the league that is going to make the radical decision to attempt 2-point conversions INSTEAD of extra points on a TD to TD basis as their everyday strategy.

You might see a small uptick because a team that misses an XP early could attempt a 2-point conversion as a make-up play, but the game (from a strategy standpoint) still revolves around assuming 7 points for a TD and every decision will still be made with that in mind. And the "chart" as to when to decide to go for 1 point or 2 points shouldn't change.

 

[ark steel]

Eliminate extra points. All TD's are 7 points.

Eliminate kick-offs. QB gets on the 35 yard line and has to throw the ball downfield, from his knees. Ball is down there. No more kickers or kick returns. All those player's are now much safer. Of course, they are unemployed, but they are safer!!!

 

[Coach]

Nothing about this rule should change the number of 2 points conversions that drastically (+10%)

At a 96-97% success rate, there is no team/coach in the league that is going to make the radical decision to attempt 2-point conversions INSTEAD of extra points on a TD to TD basis as their everyday strategy.

You might see a small uptick because a team that misses an XP early could attempt a 2-point conversion as a make-up play, but the game (from a strategy standpoint) still revolves around assuming 7 points for a TD and every decision will still be made with that in mind. And the "chart" as to when to decide to go for 1 point or 2 points shouldn't change.

Deljzc,

Now extra points are 33 yard kicks. What is the success rate at this distance? Does anyone know?

Using this chart ( 30-39 yard range ) , there are going to be some missed extra points. Best guess is few kickers will covert all extra points. Teams score 30-50 TD's a year. 1-4 misses a year seems likely for most NFL kickers. This combined with bad weather will nudge some teams to a 2 point conversion....I think

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/kicking/sort/fieldGoalPct

 

[deljzc]

Deljzc,

Now extra points are 33 yard kicks. What is the success rate at this distance? Does anyone know?

Using this chart ( 30-39 yard range ) , there are going to be some missed extra points. Best guess is few kickers will covert all extra points. Teams score 30-50 TD's a year. 1-4 misses a year seems likely for most NFL kickers. This combined with bad weather will nudge some teams to a 2 point conversion....I think

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/kicking/sort/fieldGoalPct

League average for 30-39 yards has been around 90% over recent years.

But that includes odd angles. My guess at this year's percentage success will be 96-97% for the new extra points, but we'll see.

I agree weather now becomes a major factor in some games, but inclement weather might also effect success rates for 2 points conversions as well. It will be up to the coach to decide.

Knowing how conservative coaches are, I don't see this as some drastic change in the way the game will be played.

I think people are reading WAY to much into the decision.

In the 1970's (when they first moved the goalposts back), XP percentage was around 92%. That was the low (even lower than the 1960's). By the mid-80's it was in the 96-97% success rate. The last 5 seasons, it was over 99%.

Why can't the simplest answer be the truth? The league just wants the XP success rate to go back to about 95-97% and doesn't want to change the success rate of 2-point conversions (currently at about 47-48%).

The excitement part comes from those available percentages and the strategy they provide over the course of a whole season. There is no effort to increase 2-point tries (although that will likely be a small effect) or change the way the game is played or change the basic assumption a TD is 7 points (rather than a bunch of 6's and 8's).

Why not just try to get the XP try back to how it was in the 1980's?

 

[Steel G]

Deljzc,

Now extra points are 33 yard kicks. What is the success rate at this distance? Does anyone know?

Using this chart ( 30-39 yard range ) , there are going to be some missed extra points. Best guess is few kickers will covert all extra points. Teams score 30-50 TD's a year. 1-4 misses a year seems likely for most NFL kickers. This combined with bad weather will nudge some teams to a 2 point conversion....I think

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/kicking/sort/fieldGoalPct

I still think most coaches are highly conservative and anything around 90% means they will still just opt for the one. Now, yes, outdoors in the colder, windier weather may make some think twice. But I think most will still play the percentages and take the 1.

 

[Coach]

League average for 30-39 yards has been around 90% over recent years.

But that includes odd angles. My guess at this year's percentage success will be 96-97% for the new extra points, but we'll see.

I agree weather now becomes a major factor in some games, but inclement weather might also effect success rates for 2 points conversions as well. It will be up to the coach to decide.

Knowing how conservative coaches are, I don't see this as some drastic change in the way the game will be played.

I think people are reading WAY to much into the decision.

In the 1970's (when they first moved the goalposts back), XP percentage was around 92%. That was the low (even lower than the 1960's). By the mid-80's it was in the 96-97% success rate. The last 5 seasons, it was over 99%.

Why can't the simplest answer be the truth? The league just wants the XP success rate to go back to about 95-97% and doesn't want to change the success rate of 2-point conversions (currently at about 47-48%).

The excitement part comes from those available percentages and the strategy they provide over the course of a whole season. There is no effort to increase 2-point tries (although that will likely be a small effect) or change the way the game is played or change the basic assumption a TD is 7 points (rather than a bunch of 6's and 8's).

Why not just try to get the XP try back to how it was in the 1980's?

I kicked some for fun during my football days. I could throw it from the 40 yard line through the goal posts, but never kick it beyond the 30 yard line through the goal post no matter how hard I tired. Lousy technique I guess!

I thought it was actually harder to kick it at the goal line. 5-10 yard back from the goal line was easier. At least I thought so. You have to get a quick rise out of the kick to make it from the goal line.

90% conversion rate between 30-39 would mean 2 extra points missed per every 20 attempts, or 4 extra points misses for every forty attempts.

I guess you could say this rule makes kickers more valuable.

# Kicker's Matter!

 

[SteelerSask2]

With the draw and the fade that kickers use regularly now, you often say to yourself that if the kick was ten yards further back it would miss. I think the number of 94-97% success will probably bear out. So is it really worth it. No one is going to go for it unless the situation requires.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I'm against it. Touchdowns are the goal here. Really don't want a bunch of focus on what happens after a touchdown. It was fine the way it was.

 

[Troglodyte]

I'm against it. Touchdowns are the goal here. Really don't want a bunch of focus on what happens after a touchdown. It was fine the way it was.

The miss rate was 1/200. If by "fine" you mean "meaningless and boring", I agree with you.

 

[fogdoctor]

I changed my mind primarily because kickers are specialists to the extreme in the current NFL. When the rules were designed they were set to the specifications of non-specialists. So I see two options that would address this:

1) The extra point should be set at about the 50th percentile of success. That would put it at the the 35yd line, or a 52 yard kick. This would lead to more excitement and more TV revenue from people actually waiting for the buildup to a potential miss.

2) The other option would be to change the rules for kickers to be eligible. You would need to play on a certain number of your teams offensive or defensive snaps (say 50%) to be eligible to kick. In this case, you could leave everything else the same.

 

[Shane Falco]

It's just another set of betting angles for the bookies.

 

[Troglodyte]

I changed my mind primarily because kickers are specialists to the extreme in the current NFL. When the rules were designed they were set to the specifications of non-specialists. So I see two options that would address this:

1) The extra point should be set at about the 50th percentile of success. That would put it at the the 35yd line, or a 52 yard kick. This would lead to more excitement and more TV revenue from people actually waiting for the buildup to a potential miss.

I think the 2 point conversion success rate is close to 50%. Making the extra point a 50-50 chance, would essentially eliminate the extra point as teams would be very inclined to go for 2 at the same odds of success.

It would make sense to me that the extra point be placed where it is twice as likely to be good than a 2 point conversion. Twice as likely but only half the points is an even trade-off.

 

[fogdoctor]

I think the 2 point conversion success rate is close to 50%. Making the extra point a 50-50 chance, would essentially eliminate the extra point as teams would be very inclined to go for 2 at the same odds of success.

It would make sense to me that the extra point be placed where it is twice as likely to be good than a 2 point conversion. Twice as likely but only half the points is an even trade-off.

Sounds good.

 

[Wingman]

Why not make the goal posts closer together and put one of those back boards in there. If the board gets hit on a kick off the kicking team gets 3 points and the ball is in play on the field for who ever gets it. Same on the field goals and extra points. That would really **** with the bookies and make the kicking game more risky.

 

[deljzc]

I think the 2 point conversion success rate is close to 50%. Making the extra point a 50-50 chance, would essentially eliminate the extra point as teams would be very inclined to go for 2 at the same odds of success.

It would make sense to me that the extra point be placed where it is twice as likely to be good than a 2 point conversion. Twice as likely but only half the points is an even trade-off.

This is exactly what they did. Except the 2-point conversion success rate is about 48% and they want to make the 1-point success rate 96%.

 

[fogdoctor]

This is exactly what they did. Except the 2-point conversion success rate is about 48% and they want to make the 1-point success rate 96%.

The success rates of both are too high. I would like to see the extra point success rate closer to 50-75% and the 2pt conversion at 25-50%.

The 2pt conversion is soooooooo much better.

 

[deljzc]

The success rates of both are too high. I would like to see the extra point success rate closer to 50-75% and the 2pt conversion at 25-50%.

The 2pt conversion is soooooooo much better.

So you would like 2-point conversion from like the 10 yard line and 50 yard field goals for the XP? Really?

That sounds stupid.

 

[fogdoctor]

So you would like 2-point conversion from like the 10 yard line and 50 yard field goals for the XP? Really?

That sounds stupid.

Dumber than a 98% success rate? And nobody going for 2?

 

[Confluence]

This sounds like a rule change that should be tried in the preseason and then implemented next year....

 

[deljzc]

This sounds like a rule change that should be tried in the preseason and then implemented next year....

They did this too.

Last pre-season they had 43 yard XP. Obviously they didn't like that success rate and adjusted it.

 

[deljzc]

Dumber than a 98% success rate? And nobody going for 2?

In the history of the sport the XP has been 95%+. So the whole history of the sport is stupid? They've been doing it wrong forever?

For most of this game's professional history, there never was a 2-point conversion.

Most here are saying don't mess with a good thing and you're proposing changing the whole math behind scores in the NFL (7 points for a TD and 3 points for a FG). Yeah. That's stupid.

 

[swal75]

They used this rule in the Pro Bowl or something very similar, and Adam Vinateri missed 2 XP