Are NFL kickers too good? Should the NFL adjust ?

[Deberg_1990]

Get rid of extra points?

Narrow the goal posts?

Put a different point value on field goals based on distance?

Discuss.....


http://mmqb.si.com/2013/10/28/matthe...quarterback/5/

At some point, the NFL’s going to have to acknowledge the efficiency of field-goal kickers is just too good. And the league is either going to have to narrow the goalposts or put a different point value on field goals from different distances.

When kickers are making 19 of 20 field-goal tries, on average, from inside the 40-yard line (stunning but true) and two-thirds of their attempts beyond 50 yards (and they are: 45 of 68, or 66.2%), you know this isn’t what the game is supposed to be. Kicking field goals has just become too easy.

This easy, as the season nears the midpoint:

From inside the 40-yard line: 230 of 245, 93.9%.
From between the 40- and 49-yard line: 126 of 153, 82.4%.

And the biggest waste of time in sports is the point-after. Six were missed all season last year, and this year, only two of 524 have gone awry. It is positively insane that the NFL doesn’t either eliminate the PAT, move the snap way back from the 2-yard line, or force teams to go for two. Something. Anything. For years, it’s been a nothing play, and the Competition Committee refuses to do anything tangible about it.

I know some will say, “Wait until the weather turns. Then you’ll see the percentages go down.” And they will. But by how much? The field goal is simply not challenging enough. Do we want the game to be so boring, to lack any suspense, when a kicker steps up to make a field goal? I can tell you the founding fathers of this game never dreamed the kickers would be so great that they would be good on 87 percent of their field goals through nearly half a season.

[a pp roach]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

The fact that kickers are so good almost makes them irrelevant. If you keep the system the way it is, then bad kickers will kill you since everyone else has a suitable one, but at the same time you're not going to invest a high pick in one since they're common.

If you make kickers' jobs harder by giving them narrower goalposts or otherwise differentiating, it'll make kickers more important in the game. A team with a dominant kicker will see the same advantage as a team with a dominant running back or wide receiver. I'm not quite sure I want that.

pretty much spot on. and i like the idea. kinda makes it more cool to be a kicker. i mean, they are often the top scoring player on teams in games, and when there is a final score like 15-9, the focus is oh man they had a great defense out there, when your kicker did put up 5 field goals, and gets no recognition half the time.

[Buck]

Settling for 3 points is punishment enough.

PATs should be moved to be a 30 yard kick though, at least.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by Buck

Settling for 3 points is punishment enough.

[Hammock Parties]

If anything, field goals make it too easy for guys like Alex Smith to compete.

I say get rid of field goals entirely.

[cmh6476]

points based on distance is dumb. Punish a team that moves farther down the field? why not just widen the has marks?

[cmh6476]

and blindfold the kicker on the pat

[Dayze]

i think the extra point is a complete waste of time.

[cmh6476]

keg softball rules. Kicker does a kegstand then kicks the pat

also plays into the fgs later in the game as the kicker gets more wasted throughout

[a pp roach]

Originally Posted by cmh6476

points based on distance is dumb. Punish a team that moves farther down the field? why not just widen the has marks?

think of it more like a jump shot vs a 3 pointer, where a touchdown is a slam dunk with nutsinyoface

[DaKCMan AP]

Shaun Suisham says no.

[Buck]

Originally Posted by notorious

2arena4u?

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Pam Oliver's Forehead

If anything, field goals make it too easy for guys like Alex Smith to compete.

I say get rid of field goals entirely.

Every thread isn't about Alex Smith you daft ****. Just shut the **** up.

[tk13]

I'd think eliminating the XP would make results even more unpredictable. It'd be more exciting, but you might end up with more upsets. You get in a close game and someone like Manning or Brady loses because they convert 1 two pointer and the other team has a good day and gets 3.

[lcarus]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

They could make it illegal for white guys to kick. That'd **** things up a little.

But Justin Medlock's life would be fantastic all of a sudden

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Dayze

i think the extra point is a complete waste of time.

It's very odd that the extra point has survived. The odds of making it are probably 99.5% or higher. Plus, it's very anti-climactic to kick an extra point for a win or a tie after scoring a touchdown.

They should just give teams seven points and give them the option of risking one of those points by going for eight. So you get 7 points for a touchdown, and if you go for another point you end up with either 8 points (successful) or 6 points (unsuccessful).