NFL eyeing proposal to abolish extra points

[ShowtimeSBMVP]

NFL eyeing proposal to abolish extra points
1


By Marc Sessler
Around the League Writer
Published: Jan. 20, 2014 at 04:53 p.m.
Is the extra point about to go the way of the dinosaur?

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell told NFL Network's Rich Eisen on Monday that the league's Competition Committee might eventually abolish the time-tested point after touchdown in favor of a brand-new scoring system.

"The extra point is almost automatic," Goodell said. "I believe we had five missed extra points this year out of 1,200 some odd. So it's a very small fraction of the play, and you want to add excitement with every play.

"There's one proposal in particular that I've heard about. It's automatic that you get seven points when you score a touchdown, but you could potentially go for an eighth point, either by running or passing the ball, so if you fail, you go back to six."

Extra points have become an afterthought. Unless you're up against Lawrence Taylor in Tecmo Bowl, there's virtually zero drama attached to the point after. Taylor's old coach Bill Belichick has often opined about about how unnecessary the extra point feels.

Goodell said "some issues" stand in the way of a change, asking: "Is that going to discourage people from going for two?"

We doubt it. Teams inclined to go for the deuce will continue to do so in situations that call for an eight-point score -- with the same potential consequences. Traditionalists might disagree, but this is a good idea long overdue.

Well, unless you're a kicker.

Goodell's entire interview will air Monday night at 8 p.m. ET on NFL Network's "Total Access."

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by tk13

It's funny, at first I thought this idea had some merit. However, I was surprised there were even 5 misses last year. That almost makes me want to keep it. That's one game every 3 weeks affected by a missed XP. These guys are professionals, if you can't execute that play you almost deserve to be punished.

Those 5 games were probably not impacted because games aren't decided by 1 point very often, and the fact that the PAT was missed usually doesn't even impact decisions later in the game.

You are already at 99.6% chance of making it, the chance that you either make it or a miss doesn't impact a game is probably 99.9%.

The PAT is stupid, it should be done away with, and I'm surprised at how many people are defending the PAT. A few of the pro-PAT posts are exceptionally stupid.

[alnorth]

I also disagree with the argument that the PAT should be made more difficult, just get rid of the damned thing. If you are already willing to concede that the PAT as-is is a worthless thing that should be reformed or eliminated, then before you describe your new and improved PAT, you need to first explain why we should keep the PAT. "Because we've always done it" isn't a good enough reason, we don't play football to kick extra points, we play to score touchdowns.

If we didn't have the PAT and a TD was just worth 7 points, there is not a chance in hell that we'd think reducing it to 6 and introducing a PAT would be a good idea, even if it was a PAT that could be missed sometimes.

[morphius]

I really have no strong feeling on this at all. Of course it does sort of take even more of the "foot" out of "foot"ball.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Those 5 games were probably not impacted because games aren't decided by 1 point very often, and the fact that the PAT was missed usually doesn't even impact decisions later in the game.

You are already at 99.6% chance of making it, the chance that you either make it or a miss doesn't impact a game is probably 99.9%.

The PAT is stupid, it should be done away with, and I'm surprised at how many people are defending the PAT. A few of the pro-PAT posts are exceptionally stupid.

You're probably right, but then we'd have zero percent chance of finishes like this!

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by tk13

You're probably right, but then we'd have zero percent chance of finishes like this!

2002 - Trey Junken botched a snap for the Giants, leading to a loss in the Wildcard
2003 - Carney misses on the play you referenced
2006 - Shayne Graham misses a go-ahead field goal try that would have clinched Cincy into the playoffs
2007 - Tony Romo botches a snap on what was basically a PAT (a 19 yard attempt) leading to a playoff loss

Lots of exciting endings we'd miss out on. And while we pass these off as boring, I certainly don't think PATs are boring when a team scores a game-winning TD in the playoffs and the last PAT will either tie or seal the deal. Are people really going to say they don't hold their breath a little?

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Are people really going to say they don't hold their breath a little?

Yes.

If a team down by 6 scores a TD with 0:00 left on the clock, I'm switching the channel because I have a 99.9% chance of knowing who just won the game.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Yes.

If a team down by 6 scores a TD with 0:00 left on the clock, I'm switching the channel because I have a 99.9% chance of knowing who just won the game.

I am sure that if you're watching a game where you are rooting for a team in a playoff/play-in/super bowl game that you change the channel with 0 seconds to go, and one more play that needs to be run. Good point.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Those 5 games were probably not impacted because games aren't decided by 1 point very often, and the fact that the PAT was missed usually doesn't even impact decisions later in the game.

You are already at 99.6% chance of making it, the chance that you either make it or a miss doesn't impact a game is probably 99.9%.

The PAT is stupid, it should be done away with, and I'm surprised at how many people are defending the PAT. A few of the pro-PAT posts are exceptionally stupid.

The reason people are defending the PAT is because you are taking a football play away, and the only reason you're doing that... it's not because it makes the game more fair. It's not to keep players safer. It's because apparently running 8-10 more plays in a game is apparently too much to handle, because we were all apparently complaining that the game was too long. Nevermind that nobody ONCE on this board complained about extra points until Goodell even brought it up.

That's the problem.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

2002 - Trey Junken botched a snap for the Giants, leading to a loss in the Wildcard
2003 - Carney misses on the play you referenced
2006 - Shayne Graham misses a go-ahead field goal try that would have clinched Cincy into the playoffs
2007 - Tony Romo botches a snap on what was basically a PAT (a 19 yard attempt) leading to a playoff loss

Lots of exciting endings we'd miss out on. And while we pass these off as boring, I certainly don't think PATs are boring when a team scores a game-winning TD in the playoffs and the last PAT will either tie or seal the deal. Are people really going to say they don't hold their breath a little?

OK, you named 4 plays out of probably 15,000 EP kicks. And two of those you listed for some reason aren't even extra point attempts.

[morphius]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The reason people are defending the PAT is because you are taking a football play away, and the only reason you're doing that... it's not because it makes the game more fair. It's not to keep players safer. It's because apparently running 8-10 more plays in a game is apparently too much to handle, because we were all apparently complaining that the game was too long. Nevermind that nobody ONCE on this board complained about extra points until Goodell even brought it up.

That's the problem.

My wife and kids have asked me to explain why the extra point. I could only come up with that is was a gift point for scoring a TD that you had to earn, and you have to kick the ball sometime for the sport to be called football.

[TLO]

Originally Posted by tk13

You're probably right, but then we'd have zero percent chance of finishes like this!

NOOOOOOO!!!

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

OK, you named 4 plays out of probably 15,000 EP kicks. And two of those you listed for some reason aren't even extra point attempts.

Shayne Graham's was an extra point. That's my bad. So 3 out of 4 examples I gave were PATs. Romo's botched snap... that was basically a PAT.

Let me ask you this. How many NFL playoff/super bowl games in a season have the last play in regulation come down to an extra point that ties or wins the game? Or a chip shot field goal within 20 yards? How about "play-in" regular season games?

Probably 2 or 3 per year. So if this kind of thing has happened about 25 times the last 11 years. Let's even be generous and say "50 times." If a play was botched 4 times, that's either 8% or 16% of the time. That is NOT insignificant.

[tk13]

Originally Posted by Big Smoke

NOOOOOOO!!!

Yeah, that's a classic. That miss actually eliminated the Saints from playoff contention that year.

[Basileus777]

Removing extra points makes sense. It's a pointless play and getting rid of it helps the pacing of the game a bit.

[salame]