• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New NFL rule on extra points - poll

What do you think of the new rule?

  • Good

  • Bad

  • Meh

  • Not sure

  • Other - explain

Results are only viewable after voting.
Charmonium

Charmonium

Lifer
The distance has been changed from 19 yards to 32. This was adopted today by an overwhelming vote by owners. Not sure if the link will be viewable outside of the US and CA. If not, just google nfl extra point rule.

So what do you think. It's exceeding rare that the the extra point is ever missed. Increasing it by almost 70% should make it a little harder and add some tension to the game.
 
Charmonium said:
The distance has been changed from 19 yards to 32. This was adopted today by an overwhelming vote by owners. Not sure if the link will be viewable outside of the US and CA. If not, just google nfl extra point rule.

So what do you think. It's exceeding rare that the the extra point is ever missed. Increasing it by almost 70% should make it a little harder and add some tension to the game.
Click to expand...

Great rule change. The extra point was pretty dumb anyway. Last year 99.6% of extra points were successful. It'll still be north of 90%, but I bet there will be a few games decided by missed extra points this year.
 
Interesting.

I like it, has been automatic for too long now.

They actually did that ?

A few other minor things in there.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
The defense being able to score 2 is the only thing I like about it, and I could have sworn that they already used to do that.
 
I wish they'd just get rid of it. What makes football interesting to me is watching the defense try to stop the offense and the offense try to overcome the defense. Kicking is kind of a weird sideshow. I hate it when one team outplays the other but loses because of shitty kickers (or good kickers on the other team).

I guess you'll see more two point attempts now, but that just rewards teams that are good at short yardage situations... and why? Don't those teams already have an advantage converting on short yardage 3rd and 4th downs?
 
In rugby, the conversion kick is attempted from any distance the kicker likes, as long as it is in line with where the ball is grounded in the end zone and perpendicular to the goal line. With considerable frequency, this produces kicks attempted from very near the side lines (and basically anywhere else in between, of course), and in my opinion adds a very interesting dimension to the game.

It'd be cool if the NFL could do something like that - make the kickers contend with more angles.

In general, I like the rule change they made since it gives at least a little more significance to the point after. It was too much of a gimme.

Oh, and in rugby it's 5 pts for a "touchdown" and 2 pts for the kick.
 
They should just get rid of the extra point kick altogether. Make every team go for 2 every time. Much more entertaining.
 
A better system would be make it, take it. If the offense scores a TD, they get the ball back. Thats how its settled in the streets...
 
Might be interesting to see if a team is down by 7 points, if they score a touchdown with only a few seconds left, and the weather 's really snowy or windy, if they would be more likely to go for 2 in that situation because the field goal is now farther out.
 
Its interesting, until your team loses a game because of some bullshit extra point missed late in a game. Everyone else will be laughing and you'll be saying kickers aren't real players anyway and you shouldn't have lost!
 
Childs said:
A better system would be make it, take it. If the offense scores a TD, they get the ball back. Thats how its settled in the streets...
Click to expand...

Lol this would make high powered offenses even more stacked. Could make for some blowouts and high scoring games with large swings. Would make the end of games more interesting.
 
I love the rule change. In fact an even 35 yards would have been perfect for me. You still have a very large majority of kicks being made but it puts much more pressure on the actual extra point and some teams (thinking of Philly and Pats) will be more inclined to try for 2 point conversions.
 
If it encourages more 2 point conversion attempts, I'm a fan. Anything to change the monotony of NFL football. Pass, pass, pass, penalty for defensive pass interference, pass, pass, 1 yd run for first down, pass, pass, TD, kick automatic extra point.
 
Blackjack200 said:
but that just rewards teams that are good at short yardage situations... and why? Don't those teams already have an advantage converting on short yardage 3rd and 4th downs?
Click to expand...
wat?

How dare they give an unfair advantage to a team who can move the ball better...

:colbert:
 
Blackjack200 said:
I wish they'd just get rid of it. What makes football interesting to me is watching the defense try to stop the offense and the offense try to overcome the defense. Kicking is kind of a weird sideshow. I hate it when one team outplays the other but loses because of shitty kickers (or good kickers on the other team).
Click to expand...

Most of the time the kicker (in field goal attempts) is coming out because of the offense's failure to do their job. So I never blame the kicker for "losing" a game. But that is for field goals. I can count the number of times I've seen a team lose a game because of an extra point on one hand.
 
Triumph said:
Most of the time the kicker (in field goal attempts) is coming out because of the offense's failure to do their job. So I never blame the kicker for "losing" a game. But that is for field goals. I can count the number of times I've seen a team lose a game because of an extra point on one hand.
Click to expand...

You call moving the ball 60 yards a failure? I still remember the Jets playing the Steelers in the playoffs, this has gotta be 10 years ago, and the Jets missing two game winning field goals (one in the waning seconds of the 4th Q, the other in OT) from about 40 yards. Of course the Steelers ended up winning. Boy, that's a shit sandwich I'll never forget.
 
I think the defending team should also have gotten to choose the lateral spot of the ball (between the hash marks). That would give the coaching staff a little more burden in game planning, and potentially alter kicking spots based on game conditions.
 
95% hit rate at that distance

How many teams will try to manipulate the kick such that they can generate a two point play from it?
 
I like it for a lot of the same reasons everyone has already mentioned. The extra distance should also make it easier to block the kick, which gives the defense more incentive to play hard during the kick.
 
Not a football fan but even I can see the value in this. Extra points not being a given will add to the excitement of the game. Maybe instead of a 2 point conversion it could be 3 also. Or get rid of kicking for extra points and make them try to convert for 2. Changing up the 7-14-21 scores by making it possible to win multiple ways would make the game more interesting throughout the course of it.

Too much downtime and monotony for my liking. http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/pie-c...watching-nfl-game-vs-replays-commercials-etc/
 
Last edited:
cabri said:
95% hit rate at that distance

How many teams will try to manipulate the kick such that they can generate a two point play from it?
Click to expand...

Exactly. The chances of missing are still pretty minuscule assuming decent weather. This isn't going to change much for 95%+ of the XP attempts.

I still like the move as something had to be done to make it even remotely possible for a miss/block.

All that being said, they really need to move the KO spot further back and allow for kick returns. I understand why they did it -- to lessen the chance of injuries on KOs -- but if that is the reason then just do away with the KO all together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top