NFL exploring eliminating extra point or make it a 43-yard attempt

[soxhop411]

@ProFootballTalk: Roger Goodell: NFL will explore eliminating the extra point http://wp.me/p14QSB-9otr ”
 

 
If the league decides to punish Welker, it wouldn’t be the first time that one of the coach’s suggestions worked its way up the ladder in the league. Earlier this month, Belichick said he thought extra points were boring because of how automatic they’ve become and there’s enough agreement with him that the league will explore dropping extra points this offseason.
That was the word from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who told Rich Eisen of NFL Network that the league is examining proposals for abolishing the extra point  for pretty much the reason that Belichick cited. Goodell outlined one of the proposed changes.
“The extra point is almost automatic,” Goodell said. “I believe we had five missed extra points this year out of 1,200 some odd (1,256-for-1,261, to be precise). 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.”

I would be fine with this….
----------------------------------------------------------v
Update
3/3/2014
 

 
The NFL Competition Committee has discussed experimenting this preseason with a longer -- much longer -- extra-point try. According to one member, the committee's meetings this weekend included preliminary talks about placing the ball at the 25-yard line for the extra-point kick -- which would make it a 43-yard attempt -- rather than the 2-yard line, where it is currently placed.
Last season, kickers missed just five of 1,267 extra-point attempts, a conversion rate of 99.6 percent --so good that the extra point has become almost automatic, leading Commissioner Roger Goodell to recently suggest its demise could be imminent. A longer extra-point try would certainly make things more interesting and require significantly more strategizing. The conversion rate of field goals between 40 and 49 yards last season was 83 percent. The last time the extra-point conversation rate regularly fell below 90 percent was in the 1930s and early 1940s. That would surely give coaches something to ponder when weighing whether to kick for one point or try for two, with the success rate for two-point conversion attempts typically around 50 percent.
 
 
"There is no consensus yet," said the committee member. "We could experiment in preseason, but we are not there yet."
No matter. It seems likely that the extra point as it is currently tallied will eventually be the latest victim of the kickers' own success. It will follow in the footsteps of sudden-death overtime, which was altered first for the 2010 playoffs and then for the regular season in 2012 after years of deliberation, sparked in large part by the kickers' increasing accuracy. Owners feared aSuper Bowl might someday be decided by an overtime coin flip, with one team booting the winning field goal while the opposing squad never had a chance to touch the ball.
The NFL, of course, usually moves deliberately before enacting significant rules changes. In the meantime, kickers -- through a combination of specialization, better field conditions, the now-omnipresent kicking gurus and camps and rules changes -- are only getting better. Kickers made a higher percentage of field-goal (86.5 percent) and extra-point attempts (99.6 percent) last season than they ever had before. Perhaps even more striking is how many long field-goal attempts are being made. In 2013, 67.13 percent of all field-goal attempts of at least 50 yards were good. While the numbers fluctuate from year to year, that is a sharp rise even from 2012, when just 60.92 from long distance were good, and it is dramatically up from just 10 years ago, when kickers made just 48.38 percent from 50 yards or more.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000330411/article/nfl-might-experiment-with-making-extrapoint-attempts-longer

 

[mt8thsw9th]

But what about exciting plays like the dropkick?

 

[Jettisoned]

I think if they shortened the poles and put a crossbar on top it would make it a lot more exciting. On XP's and chip shot field goals the kicker needs to kick with a flatter trajectory, giving the defense a better shot at blocking it.  Longer field goals wouldn't be affected much because (correct me if I'm wrong here) the ball doesn't clear the top of the uprights very often from 40 yards out.

 

[Curll]

But what about exciting plays like the dropkick?

Hmm, should be illegal imho

 

 
On a serious note, this would be interesting. On the bright side: it could speed up the game, in theory. There doesn't seem to be any reasonable downside, but it does relegate kickers to further obscurity. 

 

[OCST]

I always thought that it should be a true conversion: make it mandatory that the player who actually scored the touchdown had to kick the XP.
 
That would be interesting.

 

[canderson]

Please lord let this happen.

 

[Tony C]

The NFL doing the common-sensical thing? Will wonders never cease, just do it sooner rather than later.

 

[glennhoffmania]

How would the 2 point try work?  If you go for it and not get in you lose a point?

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

How would the 2 point try work?  If you go for it and not get in you lose a point?

 
 

@ProFootballTalk: Roger Goodell: NFL will explore eliminating the extra point http://wp.me/p14QSB-9otr ”
 
I would be fine with this….
 
"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.”

 

[Bellhorn]

I think if they shortened the poles and put a crossbar on top it would make it a lot more exciting. On XP's and chip shot field goals the kicker needs to kick with a flatter trajectory, giving the defense a better shot at blocking it.  Longer field goals wouldn't be affected much because (correct me if I'm wrong here) the ball doesn't clear the top of the uprights very often from 40 yards out.

I like this. It would also eliminate situations like the end of the Patriots-Ravens game last year, where the officials were basically guessing whether or not the kick was actually good.

 

[kenneycb]

Boredom, unnecessary injury risk, speeding the game up and other things if that nature.

 

[Dogman]

Boredom, unnecessary injury risk, speeding the game up and other things if that nature.

 
 
I would think advertisers are going to be upset by the removal of potential blocks of airtime. I don't think they do anything with it.

 

[URI]

I always thought that it should be a true conversion: make it mandatory that the player who actually scored the touchdown had to kick the XP.
 
That would be interesting.

I would love the NFL to go to penalty kicks after overtime. Thirty-five yard FGs from everyone on the roster until you miss.

WHO WOULD SAY NO? /simmons

 

[kenneycb]

 
 
I would think advertisers are going to be upset by the removal of potential blocks of airtime. I don't think they do anything with it.

There's no commercial between the TD and XP so unless there's some in game thing getting shown I'm not sure how it's really effected.

The only thing I can think of is lack if a fake FG option but those fall into the same category as missed XPs

 

[Dogman]

There's no commercial between the TD and XP so unless there's some in game thing getting shown I'm not sure how it's really effected.

The only thing I can think of is lack if a fake FG option but those fall into the same category as missed XPs

 
 
Reviews on questionable TD's certainly do so there is a potential block that could be removed.

 

[wiffleballhero]

Either move it way back (to some distance where the % really makes you calculate if you should go for 2) and/or make the post more narrow or make the player who scored the touchdown kick it. Any of those three options would add both a strategic and entertaining element to the game.
Just giving the point is only doubling down on the lameness.
 
Another option would be to spot the ball an inch before the goal line and give the offense one point for a running play and two for a pass -- no kicking at all -- with the spot so close that a QB sneak is almost always going to work.

 

[lexrageorge]

I don't understand the point (no pun intended). So, because the extra point is nearly automatic, the solution is actually making it automatic? Why?

Every play is an injury risk (Gronk says high).  If the play is meaningless, because it's essentially automatic, it makes sense to ask why bother running the play.  Plus each extra point takes about a minute or so to execute, all for about 1 second to come off the clock.  
 
I don't see how fake field goal attempts would get affected.  FG's are different.  And there are very few faked conversions.

 

[kenneycb]

 
 
Reviews on questionable TD's certainly do so there is a potential block that could be removed.

But that has nothing to do with the XP.  It would probably give them even more time to review TD calls.

 

[Dogman]

But that has nothing to do with the XP.  It would probably give them even more time to review TD calls.

 
 
You are missing the point.  
 
If the XP lives:
 
Questionable TD is reviewed, go to commercial.
 
Return from commercial, kick XP, go to another commercial before KO.
 
If XP dies:
 
One set of commercials after review and before KO.

 

[kenneycb]

Every play is an injury risk (Gronk says high).  If the play is meaningless, because it's essentially automatic, it makes sense to ask why bother running the play.  Plus each extra point takes about a minute or so to execute, all for about 1 second to come off the clock.  
 
I don't see how fake field goal attempts would get affected.  FG's are different.  And there are very few faked conversions.

By FG I meant XP.  Of which I presume there are very few.

 

[snowmanny]

If they're going to eliminate things that happen automatically they should just give the Cowboys a loss in week 17 and skip the game.

 

[wiffleballhero]

The crossbar idea is pretty brilliant. It could also be coupled with raising the bottom bar. That would go a long way toward eliminating the easy 48 yarder.
 
That, combined with moving the kick back to the 25. 

 

[kenneycb]

 
 
You are missing the point.  
 
If the XP lives:
 
Questionable TD is reviewed, go to commercial.
 
Return from commercial, kick XP, go to another commercial before KO.
 
If XP dies:
 
One set of commercials after review and before KO.

Or you return from commercial, announce the result, go to commercial, kickoff.  It's a very easy workaround.

 

[Tony C]

how many fakes were there on XPs this past season?

 

[Tony C]

If they're going to eliminate things that happen automatically they should just give the Cowboys a loss in week 17 and skip the game.

 

 

[kenneycb]

how many fakes were there on XPs this past season?

Looks like there's been about one a year over the last four years.  A quick Google pulls up none this year but there were at least two in 2012 (Bears and Ravens).  That's about all I really care about researching this answer besides saying "not many".

 

[Awesome Fossum]

I always thought that it should be a true conversion: make it mandatory that the player who actually scored the touchdown had to kick the XP.
 
That would be interesting.

 
That would be incredible. That's definitely what should happen.
 
The XFL eliminated kicks and required teams to run or pass from the 1 yard line for 1 point. For the playoffs, they added a 2-point conversion (from the 5) and 3-point conversion (from the 10).
 
If you're not willing to get creative, getting rid of it entirely is a good move.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

A touchdown should be 7 points; the XP should remain at 1 pt, but the ball should be spotted at the 5 and a conversion should be 3 points.   Wouldn't that make for an exciting game!
 
Only about 35% serious.

 

[axx]

How about they eliminate the XP altogether and force them to go for two always?

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

I favor moving the extra points and not eliminating them altogether. Make it a 35 yarder -- only 12 kickers had a 100% record kicking between 30-39 yards (http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/player-stat/field-goal-percentage-30-to-39). 

 

[singaporesoxfan]

How about they eliminate the XP altogether and force them to go for two always?

 
I've mentioned this before on this site, but the Lions-Eagles game where snow made it impossible to kick XPs and forced both teams to go for two always was the most fun non-Pats game I saw this season.
 
But the XP has the advantage that it makes a TD worth more, though just slightly, than 2 FGs, which I think is about right.

 

[Grimace-HS]

I favor moving the extra points and not eliminating them altogether. Make it a 35 yarder -- only 12 kickers had a 100% record kicking between 30-39 yards (http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/player-stat/field-goal-percentage-30-to-39). 

I like this idea and think that it might be the easiest transition from the current setup.  Whereas going for the 2-point conversion adds excitement, I am not as comfortable with the added injury risk (and I thought others had indicated this as well).  Because of that, as well as possible reduction in the kicker's value (and potential salary...I'm just assuming this might result), I'd wonder if the player's union could have a say on this matter (do they have a say on this?).  But by moving back the kick to the 35-yarder (or something close to that), the kick would definitely not be automatic, but also not result in constant 2-point conversion attempts.  And the value of having a good kicker would increase.  Heck, a spread-formation could also open up the field and let some interesting fake opportunities occur.
 
Any of the suggestions I've read look a lot better than what we have currently.

 

[Beomoose]

 
 
I would think advertisers are going to be upset by the removal of potential blocks of airtime. I don't think they do anything with it.

I had the exact same thought. There's going to be plenty of ad dollars pushing against the idea of speeding the game up that much.

 

[Harry Hooper]

I had the exact same thought. There's going to be plenty of ad dollars pushing against the idea of speeding the game up that much.

 
Use the top crossbar suggestion made by Jettisoned above and cover the rectangle made by the uprights and the two crossbars with a giant paper sheet featuring an advertiser's logo. Kicked ball breaks through the sheet = good
 
Add a bullseye target on the sheet for field goals. Hit the small center and get 4 points, larger center 3 points, and just barely within the rectangle is good for 2 points. All dropkicks remain at 3 points.

 

[Soxy]

I don't really get the ad dollar argument.  They can just reallocate the (little) time that was previously used to broadcast extra points into additional ad time.  You probably wouldn't even notice it either.
 
On the list of things advertisers care about, whether or not the NFL has extra points is probably near the bottom.

 

[garlan5]

I'd be more in favor of the NFL getting rid of the stupid overtime rules and fixing that.   Among other things would be the review issue on fumbles. Then we can talk extra point.  I think that's lower on my priority list. 

 

[gaelgirl]

I don't really get the ad dollar argument.  They can just reallocate the (little) time that was previously used to broadcast extra points into additional ad time.  You probably wouldn't even notice it either.
 
On the list of things advertisers care about, whether or not the NFL has extra points is probably near the bottom.

I think potentially losing the opportunity to air ads (even if it's just a minute or 90 seconds of ad time) is probably very high on the list of things advertisers care about. 
 
I am guessing that if anything is done with this, it'll be moving back the kick and making it less of an automatic point. I don't think the NFL wants to degrade the importance of the kicker position, nor do they want to eliminate the decision of going for two. 

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

I really think this just stems from the fact that the injury versus necessity scale is chiming in.  Only 5 missed extra points all year means the play is basically automatic. They don't see the use of guys banging heads on a play that doesn't effect the game. But the reality is that they're OK with those guys banging heads on a similar play as long as its a competitive play. Look at all the "safety" changes on kicks the last few years (line rules, pushing, etc) and you know its been a hot topic. When a guy like Gronk gets hurt on a play that basically is useless, it does make sense to just put the 7th point on the board.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

If they're going to eliminate things that happen automatically they should just give the Cowboys a loss in week 17 and skip the game.

 
Missed this earlier. Nice work.

 

[bankshot1]

Off the top of my head, if the NFL changes PATs to a successful pass/run a 1point is awarded (8 points) or fail a 1 point is subtracted (6 points)  teams would most likely just  take the 7 points, and not risk losing the 1 point, and falling behind when the other team scores. This sounds more like a late game strategy. IMO the probability of success has to be very high to really make this an integral part of the entire game, and not just the 4th quarter (for example the ball is at the 1 instead of the 2). 
 
 
 
 
.
 
,

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Off the top of my head, if the NFL changes PATs to a successful pass/run a 1point is awarded (8 points) or fail a 1 point is subtracted (6 points)  teams would most likely just  take the 7 points, and not risk losing the 1 point, and falling behind when the other team scores. This sounds more like a late game strategy. IMO the probability of success has to be very high to really make this an integral part of the entire game, and not just the 4th quarter (for example the ball is at the 1 instead of the 2). 
 
 
 
 
.
 
,

 
Um, yeah. 
 
The point isn't to change in-game strategy.  The point would be to eliminate an essentially meaningless play (the extra point), not to encourage teams to go for 2 more often or make it a more integral part of the game.  Teams would do the same calculus that they do now when deciding to go for 2 or not, which means in most cases they wouldn't be doing it until late in the game.

 

[singaporesoxfan]

Off the top of my head, if the NFL changes PATs to a successful pass/run a 1point is awarded (8 points) or fail a 1 point is subtracted (6 points)  teams would most likely just  take the 7 points, and not risk losing the 1 point, and falling behind when the other team scores. This sounds more like a late game strategy. IMO the probability of success has to be very high to really make this an integral part of the entire game, and not just the 4th quarter (for example the ball is at the 1 instead of the 2). 
 
 
 
 
.
 
,

This is pretty much what happens already. Unless you are arguing that there's some sort of loss aversion that makes the calculus different between starting at 6 points and starting at 7 with a shot of either gaining or losing a point.

 

[DJnVa]

Off the top of my head, if the NFL changes PATs to a successful pass/run a 1point is awarded (8 points) or fail a 1 point is subtracted (6 points)  teams would most likely just  take the 7 points, and not risk losing the 1 point, and falling behind when the other team scores. This sounds more like a late game strategy. IMO the probability of success has to be very high to really make this an integral part of the entire game, and not just the 4th quarter (for example the ball is at the 1 instead of the 2). 

 
Yes. Exactly. You're basically just restating the rationale. Just like now, teams will take the 7 unless it's a specific late game situation.

 

[bankshot1]

I was just stating what had not been explicitly said.
 
Right as in-game strategy would not change, the only real change would be the elimination of several plays, but not to really make the game more interesting. If that were the goal, then a mandatory 2-pt. run/pass conversion might be rule change. 

 

[Dehere]

I'd like to see the uprights narrowed. I don't have any real problem with extra points but I do think the games are made more boring when coaches choose to play for a 40+ yard FG try in the waning minutes, and that strategy seems to generally be rewarded. Narrow the uprights, make all kicks tougher, and incentivize offenses to play more aggressively late in games.
 
The advertising issue is irrelevant. The advertising load is fixed in the contracts. If a break is lost due to eliminating extra points it will just show up somewhere else.

 

[luckiestman]

This is pretty much what happens already. Unless you are arguing that there's some sort of loss aversion that makes the calculus different between starting at 6 points and starting at 7 with a shot of either gaining or losing a point.

 
 
The loss aversion thing is an interesting behavioral question

 

[DJnVa]

Still not seeing how they lose ad time.
 
Current: TD, XP, commerical, kickoff, commercial
 
Change: TD, commercial, kickoff, commercial

 

[Soxy]

I think potentially losing the opportunity to air ads (even if it's just a minute or 90 seconds of ad time) is probably very high on the list of things advertisers care about. 


Right, but I haven't seen a convincing argument that there would be less ad time if they eliminate extra points. Like I said in my post you quoted, whatever hypothetical time they would lose could just be reallocated throughout the telecast and no one would probably notice. And if they do notice, they probably won't care. NFL fans won't stop watching just because a couple commercial breaks get extended to make up for lost ad time.

 

[jimc]

 
 
The loss aversion thing is an interesting behavioral question

 
Yeah if the change happens I could see someone getting a pretty nice academic paper out of this. 

 

[JimD]

The play football needs to get rid of is the onside kick.  If your team scored, the other team gets the ball - period.