NFL make XPs longer for the preseason

Submitted by MGoManBall on March 26th, 2014 at 11:48 AM

For the first 2 weeks of the NFL preseason at least, they will move extra point kicks back to the 20 yard line. 

Anybody here think this become a permanant change? How does it affect 2-point conversions? If I'm an NFL coach, I seriously consider going for 2 after each touchdown.

Anybody think this will trickle down to the college game?

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/nfl-moving-extra-points-back-----in-the-preseason-144622396.html

Comments

Alton

March 26th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^

90-95% is much, much more interesting than the (essentially) 100% that you see now.  I can't even remember the last time I saw an NFL kicker miss an extra point.  And if the outcome of every extra point is the same, why do it?

Personally, I would prefer eliminating the extra point altogether but giving teams the option to "risk one to get one" on a 2-point conversion.  In other words, a touchdown with no extra point attempt would be worth 7, but a team would have the option to take only 6 points for the touchdown and then try a 2-point conversion.

wayneandgarth

March 26th, 2014 at 1:12 PM ^

While I agree with Alton's recommendation, I don't see it as any more interesting than status quo, other than you don't waste time on the extra points.    Why I say this is because you wouldn't see any more 2 pt conversions. 

With today's almost 100% extra pt, that is essentially the same as awarding 7 for a touchdown and risking one point if you want to try for the two point conversion.

stephenrjking

March 26th, 2014 at 1:06 PM ^

Part of the reason for my cynicism is that I don't think a 95% sure thing is enough incentive to alter the conversion calculus much. In my opinion, the calculus will only really change if and when the statistical value for a 2-point conversion (at the rough 50% conversion rare! about a point a try) is significantly better than the value of a one-point try (still close to 1 at 37 yards).

But perhaps that's ok. Do we really want the 2-point conversion to be the dominant play? I like the idea of "more," not sure I want it to always be the advisable choice.

Simps

March 26th, 2014 at 11:56 AM ^

Little to no impact on the NFL if they do that. It gives the appearance of being more difficult. In college it would be a game changer. I think I recall our kickers going like 4-14 one season during the RR era, and 37 yards would've been like trying to shoot a running rabbit with a $3 pistol. 

Snow Sucks

March 26th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^

This is a good thing. The normal 20-yard PAT is, for the most part, pointless and I really think it should be moved back. Obviously there have been games won and lost with the PAT, but not many when taking into account the amount of football games (on all levels) have been played.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

March 26th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^

All in favor.  I read where some kickers were complaining this kind of change would legislate them out of the game and make their position far less important.  I really don't think they get it.  Such a change would make their position much more valuable.  Why pay more for a kicker if any asshole kicker can make the kick?  But if the range of success in the league becomes 85% to 95% on XPs, that's a real difference.  A good kicker becomes that much more important and teams will be willing to fork out when they find one.

BobbyRizigliana

March 26th, 2014 at 12:04 PM ^

Kicker salaries would actually go UP if the extra point is moved back. Even if they eliminate the XP and do the "go for 2 or get 1" scenario, I still don't think there will be any negative impact to kickers. Field goals will always be valuable.

However the kick off change (moving it up) and potential elimination of the kick off would impact a specific type of kicker (long distance, not so accurate). but I'm not sure any NFL team employs that type of kicker today.

ak47

March 26th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^

I think they were complaining that they were essentially being penalized for doing too good of a job.  Passing yards are going up around the league but the rules are not being changed to make completing a pass more difficult.

Also the argument for being phased out is simple, if they move the kick far enough back that most if not all teams start going for 2 then that is one less thing a kicker is doing, that probably won't lead to an increase in salaries.  That plus moving the kickoff up makes kickers with big legs who could gaurantee touchbacks before the new rules less valuable as well.

WolvinLA2

March 26th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^

I totally disagree.  PATs for kickers are like expense reports for me.  They're simple, a little tedious, no one tells me I do them well, but when I'm go through it too quickly and screw up, I get in trouble.  If my boss took "doing expense reports" away from me, I wouldn't think I was any less valuable to my company.  Same thing with KOs - almost everyone was getting touchbacks anyway.  

FGs are the only way kickers are separated from one another.  As long as those exist, kickers are fine.  Now you want to give kickers more importance?  Have two options to go for two - run a play from the 2, or kick a 55 yard FG.  

ak47

March 26th, 2014 at 5:24 PM ^

I wasn't saying it would lead to them getting paid less, I was saying it wouldn't lead to them getting paid more.  Kickers used to matter more in games but now the kickoff has been taken away, if it goes far enough away xp will be too.  It's not that xp's are meaningful but I don't think its unreasonable for kickers to think people are trying to phase out their importance on the game.

WolvinLA2

March 26th, 2014 at 12:29 PM ^

Kickers exist on NFL teams for FGs.  Kick offs and PATs are such easy tasks that any D3 kicker could do it, so they could eliminate a both of those and it wouldn't change the value of a kicker to the team.  4th and 8 from the 30 is why the kickers exist.  Nothing they do to KOs or PATs will have an impact on how a team views their kicker.

JHendo

March 26th, 2014 at 12:36 PM ^

I'd also imagine this may also possibly bring an end to signing a 2nd kicker for a few weeks only when absolutely necessary due to injury.  You'd almost have to go 2 deep during the whole season with your placekickers because you no longer could just cope with the punter handling the PATs for part of a game if something happens to the starter.  This change is absolutely going to make kickers much more valuable (and demanding of more money).

maize-blue

March 26th, 2014 at 12:00 PM ^

I would go for two every time. I would also go for it on every 4th down and onside every kick off.

I actually remember hearing about a HS coach a while back who did things like this because the sucess percentages were good enough for him to try.

DealerCamel

March 26th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^

He sat us all down one day and he said, "Alright gents, we've done the math, and, well... we're just not gonna punt anymore.  We're also gonna go for two every time and we're gonna onside kick it every time."  We had about six different kinds of onside kicks we could use including one without the tee that was still within the rules.  

It worked because in 8-man football you're pretty much as likely to score from the 50-yard line as you are from the opposing 20.  But yeah... high school.

DealerCamel

March 26th, 2014 at 12:22 PM ^

What will happen is that kickers will get really good at kicking extra points from 20 yards out.  Natural evolution and everything, you know.  

I'm in favor of them going rugby-style and kicking from the part of the field you score on.

LandryHD

March 26th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^

This will just make kickers hit longer field goals more consistently. They'll be kicking a lot more game time pressured kicks. So I guess you'll see a lot more dramatic end of game FGs.

ScruffyTheJanitor

March 26th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^

over something that was such a non-issue. Sitting on the sidelines is pretty easy too; we should add boobie traps and live bears to the side line to make it more difficult. Seriously, I don't ever remember watching an extra point and thinking "You know what? I need more excitement. STIMULATE ME MORE NFL." In an over analyzed league with terrible,terrible announcers in abundance, a concussion problem that is both a huge PR problem and an actual health risk, players who wreck their bodies and rutinely end up broke, the fact that there are like two minutes of non-stress per game seems like such a non-issue. 

Brhino

March 26th, 2014 at 12:38 PM ^

Do teams ever line up to kick an extra point, and then fake it to attempt a two point conversion?  I don't really recall ever seeing that.  Fake field goals, sure.  Fake extra points, not so much.

superstringer

March 26th, 2014 at 12:40 PM ^

Screw kickers' feelings.

Totally better idea is what's been floated as the no-kick alternative -- all TD's are worth 7 points, but, if you "go for 2" (really, now, "go for 1") you get 8 points if you make it and 6 if you don't.  So the economics are the same -- the 2-point conversion represents a difference of 6 versus 8 points; if you don't try the 2-pointer, you get 7 points.  So no kicking XP's, no stupid extra play that's automatic anyway.

But what can I say, I also like the idea of replacing the kickoff with a 4th-and-25 at the 35 yard line, so you normally would punt (not kick off) or, instead of the "onside" kickoff, you would line up with your offense to go for it (but only Ray Rice, however, will actually be able to make that conversion, if he's not, you know, in jail).