Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Little by little these changes make the game unfamiliar to what we are used to. Moving up the kick off spot has practically eliminated kick off returns. You can barely hit a qb anymore. You can barely touch a receiver anymore. "Going across the middle" was once a badge of courage for guys like Michael Irvin, Christ Carter, Keyshawn Johnson, now you can dance there and barely get hit (unless your Vernon Davis against chancellor . Dang ! ) All of which have to do with player safety. And, all of which are far more significant changes than removing the XP would be. I hate change just as much as the next guy, but this one actually makes a lot of sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I don't think I will end up caring one way or the other on this one. I could see the Players Union getting involved in this though. I'm sure the poor Kickers don't want any change that in way further diminishes their role with the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Follow up question for those going with the "safety angle" how many players are hurt on XP? More than the 5 XP missed in a season? To me, it has more to do with the fact that it's a formality, and not that there is a huge safety concern (on XP's in particular). That's just a bonus. And, I'm not saying remove the XP (I like the idea of making it longer much better). Just make it a meaningful play, more than twice out of 1200. That's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Of course, one problem with lengthening the XP is that it takes away most of the element of surprise. In other words, I'm guessing there would be different starting points for where an XP would be kicked from, and where a 2-pt conversion would be attempted from. Otherwise, not a lot of teams are going to want to go for 2 from the 20 yard line, for example. Likewise, there probably wouldn't be a lot of fake XP attempts where the holder needs to complete a 30-yard pass to get the additional point. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) To me, it has more to do with the fact that it's a formality, and not that there is a huge safety concern (on XP's in particular). That's just a bonus. And, I'm not saying remove the XP (I like the idea of making it longer much better). Just make it a meaningful play, more than twice out of 1200. That's all. Fair enough, but how far back makes it meaningful, and how far is too far? What percentage of XP attemps should be missed to make it worth doing? I'm less against moving it than getting rid of it entirely, but that seems like a gimmick. Current XP is a 19-20 FG attempt. Move it 10-15 yards so they are 30-35? And do we move the line if you're going for 2? If so then you have to declare whether you're kicking or going for 2. And what happens on a botched kick attempt, do you get 3 points if you can run/pass it in from there? Sorry but permutations and hypotheticals are my thing as a software engineer. So I've got a million what ifs? Dammit Gophers you stole my thunder. Edited January 21, 2014 by stevegrab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) I don't think I will end up caring one way or the other on this one. Me either. The fact that I've allowed myself to become involved in this debate speaks volumes about my ability to find something to do, other than work, while at work. I can post endlessly, about topics that I couldn't really care less about, just to avoid doing something far more important. Edited January 21, 2014 by Gopher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Me either. The fact that I've allowed myself to become involved in this debate speaks volumes about my ability to find something to do, other than work, while at work. I can post endlessly, about topics that I couldn't really care less about, just to avoid doing something far more important. You could always weigh in on the dynasty topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Little by little these changes make the game unfamiliar to what we are used to. Agree 100%. If it's not broken don't fix it. This does absolutely nothing for the game, and it's not a necessary think to fix. The XP is quick and easy and it's over, it's not like we're spending any amount of time on it. And yes, it gets pretty epic when blocks/misses change games. I love the missed two foot putt analogy - imagine Tiger dropping a major after missing a two footer on #3 on Friday! I get the kickoff (kind of) and safety, but we're still seeing a decent amount of returns. I'd like to see them move that to the 50 and limit the kicker to one step and plant plus not allow running starts for coverage guys. That reduces the speed of the collisions with blockers, the primary risk, and would even encourage more onsides kicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Fair enough, but how far back makes it meaningful, and how far is too far? What percentage of XP attemps should be missed to make it worth doing? I'm less against moving it than getting rid of it entirely, but that seems like a gimmick. Current XP is a 19-20 FG attempt. Move it 10-15 yards so they are 30-35? And do we move the line if you're going for 2? If so then you have to declare whether you're kicking or going for 2. And what happens on a botched kick attempt, do you get 3 points if you can run/pass it in from there? Sorry but permutations and hypotheticals are my thing as a software engineer. So I've got a million what ifs? Dammit Gophers you stole my thunder. Move it back to the 20 (making it a 37-yard attempt) increases the chance of it being missed, from virtually none (less than a percent) to (and I'm guessing here) somewhere in the 10-15 percent range. It's like a FT in the NBA... If they were layups (where the player could stand right under the basket), fans would be saying that they should either do away with free throws, or move them back. Some guys shoot 90%, and others shoot 60%. Either way, it's far more meaningful than a gimme/layup. Yeah, as much as I like the idea, I'm not sure it will happen. Too many what if's, and too many factors to consider. Of course, I never saw the current NFL overtime format coming, either (and that sounded very funky/confusing at first, as well), so anything is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 You could always weigh in on the dynasty topics. Honestly, I have watched so little college football this year, that I'm not sure my opinion would be worth anything. Maybe even more worthless than the extra point in pro football, actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 The NFL is showing a disturbing trend that seems to be in favor of killing the golden goose. Sometimes the best change is no change. ... unless you're an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Honestly, I have watched so little college football this year, that I'm not sure my opinion would be worth anything. Maybe even more worthless than the extra point in pro football, actually. Nice tie-in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 All of which have to do with player safety. To a point - a point which I think they are blowing by. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ts Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 If (as Goodell states) the league needs to "add excitement with every play" then I'd suggest the first thing to be outlawed should be the victory formation and/or even being allowed to run out the clock in general. Watching QBs take a knee is hardly an "exciting" part of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 But as with the XP, it doesn't really change anything. He could instead fall on his keyster and wait for a defender to touch him down. Why bother? And you can't "outlaw running out the clock." That's ridiculous. I can see it now, the team way ahead calls 3 straight runs up the middle and gets flagged for it. "Illegal running out the clock on offense......" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Yep, unenforceable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Move it back to the 20 (making it a 37-yard attempt) increases the chance of it being missed, from virtually none (less than a percent) to (and I'm guessing here) somewhere in the 10-15 percent range. It's like a FT in the NBA... If they were layups (where the player could stand right under the basket), fans would be saying that they should either do away with free throws, or move them back. Some guys shoot 90%, and others shoot 60%. Either way, it's far more meaningful than a gimme/layup. Yeah, as much as I like the idea, I'm not sure it will happen. Too many what if's, and too many factors to consider. Of course, I never saw the current NFL overtime format coming, either (and that sounded very funky/confusing at first, as well), so anything is possible. So instead of making them automatic the alternative is making them an 85-90% conversion rate. I know you're just guessing at numbers and the distance. That is part of what I was after, what percentage of possible misses makes the PAT meaningful. I wonder what the % of conversion was in the "old days when it was still meaningful". (It has been nearly automatic in the NFL for as long as I've watched, going back to the 70s.) AFAIK, the FT in basketball was never a layup that was moved back to the current distance. That is the issue here, change seemingly just for change sake. The current OT (change from sudden death) is made more complex than it really is. Simply put, you kick a FG on first possession, instead of winning the other team gets a possession. Nothing more/less than that. I think NCAA version is more confusing (must go for 2 in 3OT). PS I know what you mean about work. Must stop posting.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 See, I like this one. Make it a 35-40 yard XP . . . or they can go for two. this. snap it from the 30. let these kickers earn their $ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) this. snap it from the 30. let these kickers earn their $ And the holders too, don't forget about the holders. Edited January 21, 2014 by keggerz 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 So instead of making them automatic the alternative is making them an 85-90% conversion rate. I know you're just guessing at numbers and the distance. That is part of what I was after, what percentage of possible misses makes the PAT meaningful. I wonder what the % of conversion was in the "old days when it was still meaningful". (It has been nearly automatic in the NFL for as long as I've watched, going back to the 70s.) AFAIK, the FT in basketball was never a layup that was moved back to the current distance. That is the issue here, change seemingly just for change sake. I'm not saying that the FT was ever a layup. I'm saying imagine if it was... that's what today's NFL XP amounts to. Again, it's not a huge concern of mine, but no matter how you spin it, it's a pretty meaningless play (a formality 99.5% of the time). The current OT (change from sudden death) is made more complex than it really is. Simply put, you kick a FG on first possession, instead of winning the other team gets a possession. Nothing more/less than that. I think NCAA version is more confusing (must go for 2 in 3OT). Right... That's what I was saying, pretty much. At first, it seemed a lot more complicated than it really is. I actually like it, the way it is, just as much as the college format for OT. PS I know what you mean about work. Must stop posting.... Ugh... This is nothing. I'm in the middle of trying to catch up on a 51-page thread over at FBG. Two days in, and I'm halfway through it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AF Retired Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 They could make it a 'drop kick' instead. Had someone do that a few years ago on a field goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 They could make it a 'drop kick' instead. Had someone do that a few years ago on a field goal. Doug Flutie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 AFAIK, the FT in basketball was never a layup that was moved back to the current distance. That is the issue here, change seemingly just for change sake. The free throw rule changed in basketball when Wilt Chamberlain dunked his. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Follow up question for those going with the "safety angle" how many players are hurt on XP? More than the 5 XP missed in a season? Gronkowski - but other than that not sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Gronkowski - but other than that not sure. Gronk gets hurt in ghey bars also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.