Extra Points Could Become 42 Yards in the NFL

Submitted by Cold War on

NFL Media's Judy Battista reports the NFL Competition Committee is in preliminary talks about placing the ball at the 25-yard line for the point-after attempt. That would make the extra point a 42-yard attempt.

The ball is currently spotted at the 2-yard line, a 20-yard chip shot that was converted 99.6 percent of the time during the 2013 season. The kick was so automatic that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell floated the idea in January of eliminating the PAT entirely.

"There is no consensus yet," one member of the committee told Battista. "We could experiment in preseason, but we are not there yet." Placing the ball at the 25-yard line would certainly increase the degree of difficulty for kickers. The conversion rate of field goals between 40 and 49 yards last season was 83 percent.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330385/article/competition-comm…

Gulogulo37

March 5th, 2014 at 6:38 AM ^

The 25-yard line might be a bit much, at least at first. Then again, would kickers really miss that much more from, say, the 10 as opposed to the 2? It does seem pretty pointless to keep it as is, given that it's nearly automatic.

But what do you do about 2-point conversions then? You can't move those to the 25-yard line because that'd probably fail around 99.6% of the time. If you just moved kicks out to the 25, everyone would just go for 2.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

March 5th, 2014 at 6:40 AM ^

I wouldn't mind this one bit.  Why is it stupid?  Extra point tries are what's kind of stupid nowadays.  Nothing wrong with acknowledging that the game has evolved such that something that used to matter, doesn't, and you'd like it to matter again.

Michigan Arrogance

March 5th, 2014 at 6:58 AM ^

so essentially it's an average length FG, but not worth 3? IDK I guess it's fine. I know they have to change this somehow, but I keep thinking about other major changes like this in other sports.

 

3 pt line in basketball (Shot clock too I guess, but that's a natural evolution, IMO)

mound height in baseball

2 line pass in hockey I guess

 

IDK, what's the analog of EP changes in other sports?  Moving the FT line back? Increasing the net size in hockey? Seems like the NFL at least is thinking outside the box here.

joeyb

March 5th, 2014 at 6:14 PM ^

I bet if you did a survey with the question, "How many points is a touchdown worth?" you would get more people who respond with 7 than those who say 6. This would probably change that.

What's interesting to me is that it will drive teams to utilize 2 point conversions, making the PAT something that is only used when a team is down by 1 or up by 8 in the 4th. Scoring a TD as time expires doesn't get you out of the water, making the select few times they happen as exciting as kicking a FG to win/tie the game.

cbuswolverine

March 5th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^

It's stupid because it needlessly places more weight on the kicking game.  I don't see what good can come from adding this kind of variance to every scoring situation.  A better solution would be to just do away with PATs and make TDs worth seven points unless a team wants to risk a point to go for two.

Swayze Howell Sheen

March 5th, 2014 at 6:51 AM ^

this makes no sense unless you change where the 2-pointer is tried from as well.

a better idea: steal from rugby. just change it so that  the place on the field that where you kick from in the lateral direction is based upon where the touchdown was scored. in rugby, it is based on where the ball is placed, or crazily enough "touched down", but in the NFL it would likely be where the player crosses the line.

 

 

Space Coyote

March 5th, 2014 at 9:05 AM ^

Let's quit moving the goal posts and get to the real issue, the problem I have with this rule is that while it strives to make "every play exciting", it also works against another issue that the NFL believes they're dealing with: putting too much emphasis on kickers.

I also think, from about 42 yards, kickers make it decently over 90%. Add to the fact that now they get to place where the ball starts rather than it just being where the last play ended, and I bet this is made 95% of the time anyway.

I don't know what the solution is. I know I'm not in favor of taking it away. But I'm also not sure that this works. I dunno, maybe give the defense large fathead stickers that they can put on broom sticks to try to block the extra points. Or trampolines, which we all know made basketball better with "slam ball". In all seriousness, I think there needs to be some method of making a block more likely on extra points, that would be more exciting and also put more emphasis on the defense making a play rather than the kicker just missing.

Also, tramampoline

GoBlueInNYC

March 5th, 2014 at 7:44 AM ^

Does it really matter that PATs are automatic? I always thought part of the playcalling strategy was knowing when to take the (near) automatic kick v. when to gamble on going for 2.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

March 5th, 2014 at 8:36 AM ^

I don't think coaches ever bother going for 2 unless getting the 1 point is totally worthless.  Like when the touchdown puts them up by 1 or down by 5.  Given that I don't think this would change the calculus very much.  But it probably would create more instances where the choice has to come into play.

MichiganMan_24_

March 5th, 2014 at 8:12 AM ^

Its only worth one freaking point..so why does it have to be difficult..no outcomes were changed last year because a team made an XP..government bodies annoy me with changes when things are fine as is.

bacon

March 5th, 2014 at 8:28 AM ^

Clearly the way to fix this involves a drinking game. Make the kicker take a shot every time his team gets a first down. Problem solved. Alternatively, you could make him spin in circles for 30 seconds and then kick the ball while dizzy. It would give a new definition to icing the kicker if he had to spin in circles during the timeout.

KSmooth

March 5th, 2014 at 8:54 AM ^

The problem is that the kick is practically automatic, therefore anticlimactic.

The solution: eliminate the kick, give a team a choice after a touchdown of taking seven points automatically, or 6 points plus an attempt at a two-point conversion.

ScruffyTheJanitor

March 5th, 2014 at 8:56 AM ^

this is pretty dumb. I was hoping some intelligent analysis would come to me, but it hasn't. I don't understand why anyone cares in the least that extra points are automatic. You could just give them seven points for a TD unless the coach wanted to go for an extra point-- but even then, I don't get what the big deal is. I don't remember the NFL (reportedly a few years off of a $150 Million dollar salary cap) suffering because the extra point was a formality.