PAT's moving back to the 20 for preseason

[seahawk12thman]

So teams are going to battle it out and because some kicker misses a long extra point we are going to give the game to the other team, this is absurd.

I tend to agree with this idea. This is going to introduce another level of fluke into a game that's already pretty fluky as it stands. I get the idea that the PAT as it stands is pretty automatic and in a way useless, but I'm not really interested in introducing even more volatility into football. If we're really that annoyed by the lack of excitement on the PAT kick, then just go with the other suggestion and abolish it straightaway and give teams the option of taking a free 7 for a TD or taking 6 and going for 2.

Excellent post. Either make all the teams go for two, or give them an automatic 7 but don't let kickers play an even bigger role in the outcomes. Leave the damn game alone.

 

[HawkWow]

In the video, Bellichek says PAT's are currently a non-competitive play. It's impossible to block a kick so why even bother? Make it a competitive play by increasing the difficulty

I totally agree with Bill. I think he said as of now, the PA success rate is like 98%. Moving it back to the 20 drops that number to 83% (IIRC). 98% is basically automatic. No play should be automatic, IMO.

 

[volsunghawk]

In the video, Bellichek says PAT's are currently a non-competitive play. It's impossible to block a kick so why even bother? Make it a competitive play by increasing the difficulty

I totally agree with Bill. I think he said as of now, the PA success rate is like 98%. Moving it back to the 20 drops that number to 83% (IIRC). 98% is basically automatic. No play should be automatic, IMO.

The rate is actually regularly above 99%. In 2012, it was 99.5%. I think I recall reading that last year, it was 99.6%.

Basically, any time the PAT isn't successful, it's a fluke occurrence.

 

[HawkWow]

In the video, Bellichek says PAT's are currently a non-competitive play. It's impossible to block a kick so why even bother? Make it a competitive play by increasing the difficulty

I totally agree with Bill. I think he said as of now, the PA success rate is like 98%. Moving it back to the 20 drops that number to 83% (IIRC). 98% is basically automatic. No play should be automatic, IMO.

The rate is actually regularly above 99%. In 2012, it was 99.5%. I think I recall reading that last year, it was 99.6%.

Basically, any time the PAT isn't successful, it's a fluke occurrence.

There you have it. There should be no feel free to go to the refrigerator plays in the bigs. I also like Roland's idea of awarding 2 pts for kicks over 50 (+). I'm all about tradition and hate most rule changes, but the game has to grow at the same pace as the athlete, IMO.

 

[253hawk]

Just make it so that the player that scored the TD has to kick the XP. The entertainment value would go through the roof, especially on fat-man fumble returns.

 

[jkitsune]

So if the team tries for a 2PT conversion... you must go 20 yards?

No. 2pt conversions are still handled from the 2-yard line.

In other words, the percentages for success for PATs and 2pt conversions would become a lot closer, and it would spur teams to try for the 2pt conversion more often.

I don't think it's about hating kickers, either. I think it makes the kicker position more valuable because the guys who can manage to consistently maintain a higher success rate will be more handsomely rewarded. Right now, kickers are more fungible due to the fact that PATs are a joke.

Agree. Teams will value having a good kicker much, much more if this change happens.

 

[jkitsune]

So teams are going to battle it out and because some kicker misses a long extra point we are going to give the game to the other team, this is absurd.

I tend to agree with this idea. This is going to introduce another level of fluke into a game that's already pretty fluky as it stands. I get the idea that the PAT as it stands is pretty automatic and in a way useless, but I'm not really interested in introducing even more volatility into football. If we're really that annoyed by the lack of excitement on the PAT kick, then just go with the other suggestion and abolish it straightaway and give teams the option of taking a free 7 for a TD or taking 6 and going for 2.

Excellent post. Either make all the teams go for two, or give them an automatic 7 but don't let kickers play an even bigger role in the outcomes. Leave the damn game alone.

I've always liked the idea of free 7 or 6 + 2.

But why are you so anti-kicker? They've become an increasingly smaller portion of the game since the original creation of FOOTball, granted, but I don't see what's wrong with kickers being made important, to some extent. I hate any idea that involves increasing the point value of long field goals, but extra points? Why have them if they're not risky?

 

[acer1240]

There are lots of things that could be done to improve the game. This is not one of them. It's not broke NFL.....leave it alone, no fixing needed.

 

[HawkWow]

So teams are going to battle it out and because some kicker misses a long extra point we are going to give the game to the other team, this is absurd.

I tend to agree with this idea. This is going to introduce another level of fluke into a game that's already pretty fluky as it stands. I get the idea that the PAT as it stands is pretty automatic and in a way useless, but I'm not really interested in introducing even more volatility into football. If we're really that annoyed by the lack of excitement on the PAT kick, then just go with the other suggestion and abolish it straightaway and give teams the option of taking a free 7 for a TD or taking 6 and going for 2.

Excellent post. Either make all the teams go for two, or give them an automatic 7 but don't let kickers play an even bigger role in the outcomes. Leave the damn game alone.

I've always liked the idea of free 7 or 6 + 2.

But why are you so anti-kicker? They've become an increasingly smaller portion of the game since the original creation of FOOTball, granted, but I don't see what's wrong with kickers being made important, to some extent. I hate any idea that involves increasing the point value of long field goals, but extra points? Why have them if they're not risky?

Agreed. Our kicker is making 3 mil per. That's 6 times more than the best CB in the game. Make him work, thinks me.

If the PATs are hitting at better than 99%, that's pretty automatic already. No sense risking injury on something so certain. I hadn't considered the auto 7 approach. I like it. Especially if tied in with Roland's suggestion of 50 (+) yd PATs counting as 2. That gives the choice of running a play or your kicker forced to prove his worth. Either approach would add excitement to the game. No question.

 

[themunn]

There are so many things that would be better than moving it back.

Do it rugby style, the ball has to be snapped in line with where the ball crosses the plane, so if you've got a sideline TD you have to take it from (close to) the sideline.
Then it's not a straight kick - and teams with a power running game like ours will be able to score lots of PATs because we ram it up the middle

 

[Largent80]

Wouldn't it be more exciting to try and run or pass for the extra point?

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Wouldn't it be more exciting to try and run or pass for the extra point?

Interesting. They do have to do something because any play that's 99.6% successful shouldn't be allowed. At least get it somewhere near the 2 point conversion rate so there's some strategy going on.

 

[seahawk12thman]

So teams are going to battle it out and because some kicker misses a long extra point we are going to give the game to the other team, this is absurd.

I tend to agree with this idea. This is going to introduce another level of fluke into a game that's already pretty fluky as it stands. I get the idea that the PAT as it stands is pretty automatic and in a way useless, but I'm not really interested in introducing even more volatility into football. If we're really that annoyed by the lack of excitement on the PAT kick, then just go with the other suggestion and abolish it straightaway and give teams the option of taking a free 7 for a TD or taking 6 and going for 2.

Excellent post. Either make all the teams go for two, or give them an automatic 7 but don't let kickers play an even bigger role in the outcomes. Leave the damn game alone.

I've always liked the idea of free 7 or 6 + 2.

But why are you so anti-kicker? They've become an increasingly smaller portion of the game since the original creation of FOOTball, granted, but I don't see what's wrong with kickers being made important, to some extent. I hate any idea that involves increasing the point value of long field goals, but extra points? Why have them if they're not risky?

Anti-kicker might be a little harsh. Steven is worth every penny they paid him last year. The guy only missed one field goal and seems to know his range evidenced by the niner game when he put his ego aside and told Carroll that he couldn't make the kick and we ended up scoring a touchdown on the play.

I just feel like these guys battle it out and beat each other up on the football field and to have someone that takes very few snaps coming out and deciding the game on an extra point to me is ridiculous. If a team get into the endzone they should be rewarded, not punished because some kicker comes on the field and misses an extra point by a couple feet because it was brought back 20 yards. What sense does that make?

If you can't get in the endzone then you should be rewarded with three points and I have no problem with the kicker getting credit because your team wasn't tough enough on that drive to get in. :thfight7:

 

[volsunghawk]

I tend to agree with this idea. This is going to introduce another level of fluke into a game that's already pretty fluky as it stands. I get the idea that the PAT as it stands is pretty automatic and in a way useless, but I'm not really interested in introducing even more volatility into football. If we're really that annoyed by the lack of excitement on the PAT kick, then just go with the other suggestion and abolish it straightaway and give teams the option of taking a free 7 for a TD or taking 6 and going for 2.

Excellent post. Either make all the teams go for two, or give them an automatic 7 but don't let kickers play an even bigger role in the outcomes. Leave the damn game alone.

I've always liked the idea of free 7 or 6 + 2.

But why are you so anti-kicker? They've become an increasingly smaller portion of the game since the original creation of FOOTball, granted, but I don't see what's wrong with kickers being made important, to some extent. I hate any idea that involves increasing the point value of long field goals, but extra points? Why have them if they're not risky?

Anti-kicker might be a little harsh. Steven is worth every penny they paid him last year. The guy only missed one field goal and seems to know his range evidenced by the niner game when he put his ego aside and told Carroll that he couldn't make the kick and we ended up scoring a touchdown on the play.

I just feel like these guys battle it out and beat each other up on the football field and to have someone that takes very few snaps coming out and deciding the game on an extra point to me is ridiculous. If a team get into the endzone they should be rewarded, not punished because some kicker comes on the field and misses an extra point by a couple feet because it was brought back 20 yards. What sense does that make?

If you can't get in the endzone then you should be rewarded with three points and I have no problem with the kicker getting credit because your team wasn't tough enough on that drive to get in. :thfight7:

Um, if you get into the end zone, you ARE rewarded. With 6 points. Not 7. Why should every TD be followed by a play that is completely non-competitive and adds another point on to the team that just got 6?

Right now, teams are rewarded after scoring a TD with a chance to either kick a PAT from the 2-yard line for 1 point or get 2 points by running a play from the 2-yard line. The success rate for the PAT is OVER 99%. It's essentially automatic. The success rate for the 2-point conversion last season was just under 50%. The 2-point conversion is an exciting play that requires effort from everyone on both sides of the ball. It's offense against defense - again. But teams rarely try them because the success rate for PATs is so high that a conservative coach will take the guaranteed 1 over the "double-or-nothing" chance at 2.

Moving the PAT back to the 20/25 changes the dynamic a bit. The success rate for a PAT will still be above 80%, but there will be a better chance that it gets blocked. The 2-point conversion suddenly becomes a more attractive option... an actual, legitimate option rather than a last resort used when the numbers indicate it just HAS to be used. It would make the game more exciting and less predictable. And it would return the PAT back to what it once was... a chance to tack on an extra point that WASN'T guaranteed to be successful.

 

[rcaido]

I like it, they should also make the goal post skinnier so its not only strength but accuracy.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Now it's going to be impossible to go for the fake for the 2pt conversion.

I was thinking about this one too...but I think it would be a bit easier. Everyone bunched up and a TE sneaks out and gets a pass for 2. I think it may be easier with that many yards. I have seen a lot of RED ZONE things that dont work...this may.??

:thirishdrinkers: :thirishdrinkers: :thirishdrinkers:

 

[Seahawkfan80]

I like it, they should also make the goal post skinnier so its not only strength but accuracy.

I am gonna guess that you want the distance between the goal post uprights to be Less than they are now.

:sarcasm_on: Maybe they should make them into a circle about 10 ft diameter??? :sarcasm_off:

 

[Seahawkfan80]

We can make it really really hard...Like Rollerball. LOL

 

[Chukarhawk]

They hate kickers, don't they?

Dude, everyone hates kickers.

 

[joeseahawks]

Seriously, why do teams practice extra points in pre-season? shouldn't they all be going for 2 in pre-season games ? Why practice something that has become so obvious?
The Oregon Ducks seem to always line up to go for 2 after they score a TD ... that should be the norm in the NFL too ...