@BobGlauber: NFL owners have approved competition committee's proposal to change extra points. PAT kick at 15, 2-pt conversion at 2, defense can score.
every PAT attempt becomes an "All-out Block" call. They don't have to worry about the surprise 2-pointer, and the angle of the kick will be lower than it has been on PATs. Plus, blocks a returnable if you get really lucky.
That translates to more penalties and injuries. Which is probably the best reason to vote against the change.
If a team lines up to go for 2, but has a pre-snap penalty, can they change their mind and move back into kicking position? What about a defensive roughing-the-kicker call-- can the offense take that as a half-the-distance walk-off from the 2-point-try spot?
Will defenses get the option to enforce celebration penalties against the Try, rather than on the Kickoff? (I kind of like the idea of a Taunting call that leads to a PAT from 47 yards out.)
@PatKirwanCBS: the new xpt-33yd kick is a90% success rate and a 2 pt play is 47.8% success rate...Teams will keep kicking..I do like the ability to return
By that math you average .90 points per traditional PAT at the new distance and .956 points per two point attempt.
Reliable veteran PKs get a little more valuable. A "big leg" guy who honks an occasional 30-yarder will be getting more opportunities to hurt his team, relative to a vet who is automatic at under 40 but lacks top-end range.
- If a "shanked" kick lands in the endzone, or closer, why can't the D return that?
- If they can't, then another issue may be the determination of a partially blocked vs a flubbed kick.
@MaioccoCSN: If team lines up for 2 points and is penalized, can move back to kick for 1 point. Back to 20 after 5-yard penalty, back to 25 for holding.
can be blocked and returned. No problem with the block.
Like that the two point conversion from the two can be return because of a fumble or interception [also known as a pick-two].
@PatKirwanCBS: the new xpt-33yd kick is a90% success rate and a 2 pt play is 47.8% success rate...Teams will keep kicking..I do like the ability to return
By that math you average .90 points per traditional PAT at the new distance and .956 points per two point attempt.
Why would they still kick?
Defenses are going to be in 100% block mode, so the PAT% will likely be lower than that for equivalent FGs, where there is more threat of a fake.
1) Leave everything alone or
2) Eliminate the 1 point kick and leave everything else alone
Why even consider anything else? I am still going to fast forward through a 15 yard line extra point. No chance I fast forward through a 2 point conversion.
Here is a new wrinkle. I'm down by 5 with 5 seconds left. I score a TD. I'm up one with 1 second left. Too risky to attempt an XP, so I kneel on the ball, right? Then kick off and hope nothing bad happens. The XP wouldn't do you any good, only negative things could happen. Makes no sense to try it. You could try for two, but is that worth the risk? I know it's an unlikely situation, but it's something that will come up at some point.
Here is a new wrinkle. I'm down by 5 with 5 seconds left. I score a TD. I'm up one with 1 second left. Too risky to attempt an XP, so I kneel on the ball, right? Then kick off and hope nothing bad happens. The XP wouldn't do you any good, only negative things could happen. Makes no sense to try it. You could try for two, but is that worth the risk? I know it's an unlikely situation, but it's something that will come up at some point.
That is a real interesting situation. You now go for 2 since there is no difference between being up 1 or 2 late in the game, but being up 3 makes a difference. But under the new rule, you risk going down 1 if there is a "pick 2" or a blocked kick being returned for a defensive 2.
Does the risk of falling behind outweigh the benefit of going up 3? Going for 1 still seems worthless, but the question becomes really interesting as to whether you really go for 2 or just take a knee.
I've always hated the whole easy extra point. I think always spotting the ball at the one which might cause teams to go for two much more often is the better option but this is probably the second best idea.
I'm all for making kickers actually earn that point and placing more value on that position.
Seems this has chance of resulting in less tie games in regular time Â
every PAT attempt becomes an "All-out Block" call. They don't have to worry about the surprise 2-pointer, and the angle of the kick will be lower than it has been on PATs. Plus, blocks a returnable if you get really lucky.
That translates to more penalties and injuries. Which is probably the best reason to vote against the change.
33 yarder is still a "chip shot" for 95% of NFL kickers. They shouldn't have to adjust the angle from that range.
@PatKirwanCBS: the new xpt-33yd kick is a90% success rate and a 2 pt play is 47.8% success rate...Teams will keep kicking..I do like the ability to return
So the odds are better if you go for two all the time by that data?
change. Hopefully they move it out another 5 yards after this year.
XP's are the most boring play in football. After a team scores a TD, you basically have 7-8 minutes of dead time with the XP, and a kickoff that is a touchback most of the time. This won't really remedy that but it's a step in the right direction IMO.
pre season wouldn't matter it isn't real game situation Â
Interview the coaches, run through some situations to find out what they would do. That would give you an idea of what would happen. Maybe they did that, somehow I doubt they involved more than a couple of coaches and all of them are likely long retired. Maybe their sole purpose was to increase 2 pt attempts, and I would agree this likely does that.
...it isn't about exciting the XP provided an equity in scoring and that balance is now thrown off by this change. It's an EXTRA point for scoring a TD, the defense shouldn't be able to score on it. It is a EXTRA point for scoring a TD, it shouldn't be difficult to score. If you want to risk that EXTRA point by going for 2 you have that option. One point should be a gimme. It should be easy. But you don't want to eliminate that easy score play because it reduces your options of how to go for 2. If you want more two point plays, you don't make the 1 point play harder and adding the risk of a defensive score to either play, you make the 2 point play easier. This is why moving it to the 1 yard line for both 2 and 1 pt play makes sense for their (assumed) goal, at least a lot more sense than what they are doing.
to have a major impact on the game. I would rather see my team tie and go to OT rather than lose on a missed XP. If they wanted the 2 point play to be more involved they should have just eliminated the kick to make everyone go for 2.
This is not fixing the game in any way so why bother? they need to worry about fixing other issues in the game rather than the extra point. The league was also looking to protect players more, imo this will cause more injuries with more teams going to 2 point plays. TC always says how violent the goalline plays are and I agree.
Pointless rule that will probably be changed back once a few teams lose because of a missed XP. this does not make the game better or more exciting. A kick is not exciting.
The extra point WAS supposed to be a reward for scoring a TD.
If kicks are snapped from the 15 so in essence a 32 yd. PAT for 1 point why didnt they make the 2 = or> challenging by moving the 2 pointer to the 15, or even 10?
So now whether you have an 80 or a 20 yd. drive your reward for 6 can more easily be 2 instead of 1.
High powered balanced offenses could easily put up an extra 4-6 points a game.
NFL is leading to Arena Football II, the outdoor division.
but can't the D only score if they return the 2-point attempt?
just googled that question and the first thing that came up is the Eagles' website, which says, no, the D can score on either:
"On Tuesday, NFL owners voted to accept the league’s competition committee recommendation plan for renewed PAT rules. There will be two changes to the preexisting rules.
1. Extra points will be moved from the 2-yard line to the 15-yard line.
2. The defense can now return a turnover on a PAT or two-point conversion attempt.
A “touchdown” scored by the defense in either scenario will result in two points."
This rule change is no big deal either way for me.
I would rather that they get rid of the ability to spike the ball. That always bothered me...Make a team throw the ball. That would help the D and make the game more exciting, knowing that the offense can't just spike it for a clock stoppage.
Once you get past the traditionalist stuff and memories of the good ole days.
Many more goalline plays (which are the most exciting) and field goals with some sense of excitement.
We'll look back at the traditional extra point in a few years and wonder why we went so long with such a boring play built into the flow of an otherwise exciting game.
Does this mean that until this year if the offense ran a pass on a 2 point play and the defender intercepted, it couldn't be returned for 6? If so, I had no idea and it doesn't make sense.
Does this mean that until this year if the offense ran a pass on a 2 point play and the defender intercepted, it couldn't be returned for 6? If so, I had no idea and it doesn't make sense.
No it couldn't. And it still can't: it can be returned for 2. It would be dumb if the defense could score more points than the offense.
no upside to this rule of any kind. There are other rule changes over the past years that I hate more, but at least I can see the reason for it (mostly player saftey rule changes). At least there I can say, OK, even though I don't agree with it there is at least a reason.
I see no way that this improves the game, other than trying to create more "exciting" situations. Teams losing a game because of a missed kick hardly fits that fucking bill. Goodell has to go.
And yes, I understand the relationship of Commissioner VS ownership, so spare me that tired ridiculous fucking lecture.
That translates to more penalties and injuries. Which is probably the best reason to vote against the change.
Will defenses get the option to enforce celebration penalties against the Try, rather than on the Kickoff? (I kind of like the idea of a Taunting call that leads to a PAT from 47 yards out.)
By that math you average .90 points per traditional PAT at the new distance and .956 points per two point attempt.
Why would they still kick?
- If they can't, then another issue may be the determination of a partially blocked vs a flubbed kick.
Like that the two point conversion from the two can be return because of a fumble or interception [also known as a pick-two].
Quote:
@PatKirwanCBS: the new xpt-33yd kick is a90% success rate and a 2 pt play is 47.8% success rate...Teams will keep kicking..I do like the ability to return
By that math you average .90 points per traditional PAT at the new distance and .956 points per two point attempt.
Why would they still kick?
Defenses are going to be in 100% block mode, so the PAT% will likely be lower than that for equivalent FGs, where there is more threat of a fake.
In fact, let's make a touchdown worth one point and the conversion worth six!
It's mystifyingly stupid.
'But if you really want to make it interesting put it (the ball) at the one.'
Either:
1) Leave everything alone or
2) Eliminate the 1 point kick and leave everything else alone
Why even consider anything else? I am still going to fast forward through a 15 yard line extra point. No chance I fast forward through a 2 point conversion.
That is a real interesting situation. You now go for 2 since there is no difference between being up 1 or 2 late in the game, but being up 3 makes a difference. But under the new rule, you risk going down 1 if there is a "pick 2" or a blocked kick being returned for a defensive 2.
Does the risk of falling behind outweigh the benefit of going up 3? Going for 1 still seems worthless, but the question becomes really interesting as to whether you really go for 2 or just take a knee.
This what it's all about keeping you in from of the tv for 5 more lousy seconds
I'm all for making kickers actually earn that point and placing more value on that position.
That translates to more penalties and injuries. Which is probably the best reason to vote against the change.
33 yarder is still a "chip shot" for 95% of NFL kickers. They shouldn't have to adjust the angle from that range.
So the odds are better if you go for two all the time by that data?
'But if you really want to make it interesting put it (the ball) at the one.'
I liked that idea the most. Made a lot of sense to me.
Quote:
to incentivize teams to go for two.
'But if you really want to make it interesting put it (the ball) at the one.'
I liked that idea the most. Made a lot of sense to me.
if not
it is insane that they make these changes without seeing the unintended consequences in game situations
XP's are the most boring play in football. After a team scores a TD, you basically have 7-8 minutes of dead time with the XP, and a kickoff that is a touchback most of the time. This won't really remedy that but it's a step in the right direction IMO.
This is not fixing the game in any way so why bother? they need to worry about fixing other issues in the game rather than the extra point. The league was also looking to protect players more, imo this will cause more injuries with more teams going to 2 point plays. TC always says how violent the goalline plays are and I agree.
Pointless rule that will probably be changed back once a few teams lose because of a missed XP. this does not make the game better or more exciting. A kick is not exciting.
If kicks are snapped from the 15 so in essence a 32 yd. PAT for 1 point why didnt they make the 2 = or> challenging by moving the 2 pointer to the 15, or even 10?
So now whether you have an 80 or a 20 yd. drive your reward for 6 can more easily be 2 instead of 1.
High powered balanced offenses could easily put up an extra 4-6 points a game.
NFL is leading to Arena Football II, the outdoor division.
just googled that question and the first thing that came up is the Eagles' website, which says, no, the D can score on either:
"On Tuesday, NFL owners voted to accept the league’s competition committee recommendation plan for renewed PAT rules. There will be two changes to the preexisting rules.
1. Extra points will be moved from the 2-yard line to the 15-yard line.
2. The defense can now return a turnover on a PAT or two-point conversion attempt.
A “touchdown” scored by the defense in either scenario will result in two points."
FMIC - look at Defenderdawg's 6:12 post. Not sure if that guy from CSN has it right...
I would rather that they get rid of the ability to spike the ball. That always bothered me...Make a team throw the ball. That would help the D and make the game more exciting, knowing that the offense can't just spike it for a clock stoppage.
Many more goalline plays (which are the most exciting) and field goals with some sense of excitement.
We'll look back at the traditional extra point in a few years and wonder why we went so long with such a boring play built into the flow of an otherwise exciting game.
Great decision. Very happy about this.
No it couldn't. And it still can't: it can be returned for 2. It would be dumb if the defense could score more points than the offense.
I see no way that this improves the game, other than trying to create more "exciting" situations. Teams losing a game because of a missed kick hardly fits that fucking bill. Goodell has to go.
And yes, I understand the relationship of Commissioner VS ownership, so spare me that tired ridiculous fucking lecture.