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."

[listopencil]

In my kids' Pee Wee league, they gave 2 points for the kick and 1 point for a play. Because barely any of the kids could kick one. It was kind of funny and added excitement when a team would go for two.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Nightfyre

Field goals at this distance are not nearly as prevalent as extra points. Further, the field goal is for three points, where the extra point is just one point.

Perhaps, but 99%+ is still 99%+. If they're going to consider it automatic for one point, it's got to be automatic for 3 points if they're going to be logically consistent, because the issue is the high success rate.

And, for the record, 1 point can be all the difference in the world. Just ask the Patriots about that after yesterday's missed conversion attempt. Had they only needed 7 there, that game's still in play game at that point.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by Raiderhader

Clearly you have not invested a lot of time in watching the Kansas City Chiefs.

I have, I've just taken to jamming a hanger up my nose on Mondays. It's bliss I tells ya!

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by listopencil

The try/convert is among the oldest parts of the game of gridiron football and dates to its rugby roots. In its earliest days, scoring a touchdown was not the primary objective but a means of getting a free kick at the goal (hence why the name "try," more commonly associated with rugby today, is still used in American football rule books), and thus early scoring rubrics for the game gave more points to the subsequent kick than the actual advancement of the ball into the end zone. The related term "conversion" is still used in both rugby union and rugby league to refer to extra points scored by kicking the ball through the posts after a try has been scored.

By the start of the 20th century, touchdowns had become more important and the roles of touchdown and kick were reversed. By this time the point value for the after-touchdown kick had reduced to its current one-point value while the touchdown was now worth five. (This later increased to six points in American football in 1912 and in Canadian football in 1956.)^{[citation needed]}

Although a successful kick is only worth one point, missing one can decide the outcome of the game. Perhaps the most famous example to this was the 2003 game between the New Orleans Saints and Jacksonville Jaguars where, after scoring a touchdown as time expired as a result of the multiple-lateral River City Relay, Saints kicker John Carney missed the extra point, giving the Jaguars a 20-19 victory and eliminating the Saints from playoff contention. On November 11, 1979 the New York Jets lost to the Buffalo Bills 14-12 - the difference coming from two missed extra points by place kicker Toni Linhart. Linhart never played another game in the NFL.

Another 2003 game, this one between the Carolina Panthers and Tampa Bay Buccaneers, was sent to overtime after what would have been a game-winning extra point was blocked; the Panthers won the game in overtime 12-9. A 2005 game between the Green Bay Packers and Tampa Bay Buccaneers is another notable exception, as the Buccaneers won 17-16, the difference being Ryan Longwell missing an extra point after a Packers touchdown.^[1]

No argument will ever be won by saying, "In rugby they do this..."

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

OK. But really the end result is still pretty much taking points off the board. You've got the free point in your pocket. But fail on your extra-extra point, you lose the free point you had.

But, I suppose the current kicking of the EP is about the same as a free point when they make it 99.9% of the time. Going for two is about like taking a free one off the board. Hmmm...

So it's about the same deal but "seems" different.

Pretty much. It's virtually the same gamble as now, but you eliminate the "gimme" play and just go kick the ball off. I think game flow would be better.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Perhaps, but 99%+ is still 99%+. If they're going to consider it automatic for one point, it's got to be automatic for 3 points if they're going to be logically consistent, because the issue is the high success rate.

You're simultaneously over and under thinking this one.

[Sannyasi]

Seems like a good change to me. I actually wouldn't mind forcing teams to go for 2 although I'm sure some purists will tell me why I'm a moron for wanting to replace a routine play with an exciting one. But at the very least let's get rid of the extra point. Its a waste of time.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by ChiefsandO'sfan

"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."

And that, my friends, is the basis for all NFL decisions in teh degenerate-al age...

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Perhaps, but 99%+ is still 99%+. If they're going to consider it automatic for one point, it's got to be automatic for 3 points if they're going to be logically consistent, because the issue is the high success rate.

Well, but a EP is a set distance every time. A FG varies. If a team earns the field position for a short FG, that's just the way it is.

I do recall discussions from time to time about making longer FGs worth more, shorter ones worth less.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

You're simultaneously over and under thinking this one.

I realize that the league will just ignore the logic problem. That doesn't mean we shouldn't point it out.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Hmmm... I want to hate this proposal but I really can't.

The downside is removing the tactic of lining up in the kick formation and running a fake but it's not like coaches opt for that option anyway.

So much for the "integrity of the game."

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

No argument will ever be won by saying, "In rugby they do this..."

I posted it to point out how outdated the extra point kick really is. It's more like, "We should stop, because in rugby they do this and we aren't playing rugby."

[greatgooglymoogly]

Originally Posted by listopencil

I posted it to point out how outdated the extra point kick really is. It's more like, "We should stop, because in rugby they do this and we aren't playing rugby."

EP kicks in rugby aren't limited by a narrow set of hash marks. They can be attempted along the sideline, if that happens to be where the player scored the try.

Goodell's complaint was that EPs were too easy and "automatic". I proposed something to make them more difficult.

[Discuss Thrower]

**** it, ban the FG formation for the PAT and make the scoring team try a drop-kick or go for two.

[Zebedee DuBois]

no foot in football??

Instead of abolishing it, spice it up by erecting a giant skee-ball apparatus behind the goal posts. Now you have multiple scoring oportunites!!