Thread: NFL considering proposal to abolish extra points

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."

rest - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200...h-extra-points

I would absolutely love this. Remember the Lions-Eagles game this year where they had to go for 2 every TD because there was too much snow to kick? That was unbelievably exciting. I imagine the people who are used to the XP and set in their ways will scream about against it and complain about how Goodell is ruining the league, but I think this is an excellent idea. What is the point of a play that is automatic?

what a bunch of geese.

leave the XP alone! it didnt do nothing to you goodeel

For viewing purposes, I think this would work great. You get the option of playing conservative and just taking the 7 points which is pretty much what happens when you kick an extra point, or the option of passing/running with a 2 point swing on the line which is exactly what happens now.

Bah, why the hell are there so many proposals to change the game coming out this winter? Anyway, I don't want them to remove the extra point. What I would like them to do is move it back about 20 yards to make it at least more than a chipshot FG. This keeps special teams involved on all scores but makes it at least challenging. There is a lot of coaching strategy involved in the decision to kick the extra point and go for two as a close game progresses through the second half.

its the most popular game in our corner of the world and they are constantly trying to change it, I dont get it.

Useless proposal, dumb idea. You can go for two anytime you want, why not have an option? Take the automatic 1 or try for two. Makes more sense that way.

Well, let's put it this way, the NFL has proposed and implemented far more stupid rule changes that this one doesn't seem so bad.

It should be changed, but not eliminated. Move the goalposts closer together. For extra points, put the ball at the 35 or something just to make it more difficult. No need to eliminate.

(Screaming) ...ahhhh rabble rabble. Goodell is ruining the league!

they should also make the field a hexagon instead of a rectangle. . .

think of the possibilities!

hell, why not make the field a giant octagon-- you could have FOUR ENDZONES!!

*farts*

How about instead they make fumble recoveries reviewable.

Originally Posted by dogfish

they should also make the field a hexagon instead of a rectangle. . .

think of the possibilities!

hell, why not make the field a giant octagon-- you could have FOUR ENDZONES!!

*farts*

Why not make the goal posts more like the ones on Harry Potter..you know that game where Harry is up on a broom flying around.

Originally Posted by Army Bronco

Why not make the goal posts more like the ones on Harry Potter..you know that game where Harry is up on a broom flying around.

totally. . . football would be a lot more exciting if they figured out how to play with three teams at once. . .

It's a good idea, especially as proposed: 7 pts—UNLESS a team goes "double or nothing" on an end zone attempt from the 2. It preserves the possibility of a 2 PAT when needed (which HAS made pro games far more interesting than when teams down 15 or 16 pts needed 3 scores) without making it no-risk (as would be the case if 7 pts guaranteed even on missed 2 PATs.)

It's the same argument many people have been making for decades: In the old days PATs were far from automatic, and truly did reward scoring teams who managed just a little bit more; 7-6 games decided by successful PATs were common in footballs early days even when both teams scored a TD.

Kickers and equipment are MUCH better now, and the PAT is so close to automatic that the rare misses are invariably due to a bad snap or Romoesque hold. The PAT's no longer an occasional REWARD for exceptional teams who genuinely do something "extra"—it's a rare PENALTY for incredibly bad luck. The only saving grace is that it usually doesn't matter; the PAT's only worth 1 pt, so it almost never decides ANY game, let alone one with playoff implications (though it can slightly alter draft order.)

Yet even on the VERY rare occasions a missed PAT makes a huge real difference, being almost entirely luck rather than skill makes it incredibly arbitrary and unfair, like flipping a coin to decide who does and doesn't go to the playoffs (yes, I realize that's the final tiebreak, but only after exhausting a DOZEN merit-based tiebreaks.) Let's go all the way back to Christmas Eve 2006: http://www.pro-football-reference.co...0612240den.htm

Some of ya'll probably remember the game; I certainly do, because I had a huge fight with my mom over whether we'd drive to her brothers house for Christmas before or AFTER the game. It was a big one: With just 2 weeks left in the season, Cincy came to Denver in tight race with each other, NY and KC for the wildcard spots. It was a back and forth; on the first scrimmage play, Cutler threw a pick returned to our 5, but 3 plays later we were bailed out when D-Will picked Palmer n the end zone (the last game I ever saw D-Will play.)

We took a 4 pt lead to the fourth quarter, extened to 7 on an Elam FG, then Cincy got a drive going, only to have Lynch cause a fumble at our 24, recovered by rookie Elvis Dumervil. We did a whole lotta nuthin', exchanged punts a few times, then Cincy got another drive going, and that one reached the end zone with 0:46 to play: 28--27 Denver, with the PAT to come and force OT unless we reached FG range in about half a minute. Yet there'd been a light drizzle off and on all day though, and the holder bobbled it, tried to run and was tackled: Game over.

After a heroic three and a half hour struggle between two very good teams, that game was won (or rather, LOST) by incredibly bad luck on a PAT. Cincinatti lost their final game to Pitt (ironically, despite a 2 TD rally that DID force OT) and missed the playoffs because of that missed PAT: They finished 8-8, a game behind the #6 seed Chiefs Cincy beat in Week 2.

It gets better though: If not for the insane rule that says division standing's the first tiebreak for wildcards CREATED TO IGNORE DIVISIONS, we would've MADE the playoffs (despite the thuggish way the 7-9 '9ers won OUR final game in OT) again, solely because of that flukey missed PAT. Beating Cincy gave us the tiebreak over all bubble teams EXCEPT KC, because they had a better divison record; unfortunately, all other bubble teams had the tiebreak over KC, so the only we made the playoffs was if KC was #5 seed, which was impossible.

What if we'd finished ahead of KC in the division though? Well, in that case, Denver would've been #6 seed and Cincy would've stayed home, solely because of a PAT missed solely due to luck. After something like that, deciding playoff teams by coin flip seems relatively fair.

Frankly, I think this may be the first good idea Goodell's ever had. Touchdowns score 7 unless you want to roll the dice and take the 50/50 shot of getting either 6 or 8. Good deal, Goodell.

Also, Praters season PAT record becomes pretty much unbreakable.