Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

John Grasso wrote:While we're on the subject of ridiculous changes to American football
I think they should eliminate all instances where the foot touches the ball -

kickoffs - too dangerous - place ball at the 40 to begin
extra points - too routine - eliminate - make td worth 7 points
punts - too conservative - require teams to go for it on 4th down
field goals - too boring - eliminate

Then they could rename the game "McDonald's presents NFL ball" with the name
of the sponsor changing from city to city and week to week and NFL standing for
"New Fans League" since the league is no longer national but international
and the former "F" word is now verboten.

The whole message is meant to be sarcastic.

John Grasso wrote: punts - too conservative - require teams to go for it on 4th down

It's not unheard of, actually. Apologize ahead of time if this topic has already been dealt with but there's a high school coach who never punts, and his results and rationale have some merit. Regardless of where one stands on the matter, the articles are interesting.

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/spor ... /17213961/

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-you- ... nt-2013-11

by John Grasso » Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:52 am
"The whole message is meant to be sarcastic."

No?
Say it ain't so, John.
Sarcasm?
Here? In our cathedral of decorum? Never!
I just don't believe it.

Now... if you had said the holder flips the ball in the air and the kicker hits it with his head...

EDITED FOR NEWS FLASH...
Someone just called and said Bobby Knight, Eddie Murphy and Tim Tebow are claiming the "F" word is NOT former?

John Grasso wrote:
The whole message is meant to be sarcastic.

Still, the portion about the extra point being all but automatic, and, despite its one-point value, being pointless, is something that you'd referred to in a prior post -- I can't remember the stat that you had at that time, but it was a trend toward 98% and perhaps even 99.5% (only five misses out of 1,000 attempts).

I imagine that some of that is tongue-in-cheek. Regarding extra points, I've heard John express it, and I feel the same way -- I would be okay without the extra point, because it really is too routine right now (99% success rate) and kicking from 32 yards out (ball spotted on 15, snapped back to the holder on the 22) hasn't made it thrilling. As its been for 20+ years, let 'em run or pass if they want to squeeze eight points out of a touchdown, but let the default be 7.

Yes! The old WFL Action Point!
And let's have the players were different colored pants (yes, I know this never actually happened during a game) and Gary Davidson should be commissioner!

I've said it before, move the hash marks, and very close to sidelines. So, offenses would have to think of more plays, big deal. Field goals would be harder from the more acute angles. And if point afters were from the point the ball crossed the goal line on a touchdown, whatever the yardline the ball would be placed on, this would make the PAT harder, especially if they required it to be a drop kick (why they are so afraid of the drop kick that they really totally ignore the idea, is confusing. They seem to want to eliminate the kicking specialist anyway, so the players union seems uninvolved.)

Since they do intend on eliminating kickers and kicking specialists, they should also reinstate new substitution rules just for the point after. Only those in the game already should be allowed to kick. Not necessarily the guy who scored the touchdown, any player on the field when the last scrimmage play occurred. Perhaps other subs can be allowed, but no kicking specialist. The kicker would have to have been on the field when the TD occurred,

These ideas would make the kicking harder, and more interesting. Current ideas seem to make it duller and less interesting.

What do they intend to do, make a TD 7 points? Make it 6 without an EP? This would also eliminate any interest, excitement or controversies over whether to go for 2 points or not. If anything they should institute the college rule that the ball can be run back to other side for two.

They seem hell bent to eliminate it. It has to be sports casters or bettors. Why would anyone else care so much. It is change just for change sake. No reason. If eliminated, then the score is even more automatic, isn't it?

Plus if they eliminate kicking they eliminate so many commercial breaks, the sponsors might get mad. No more going to break after every score, then after the XP, no more break before and after the kickoffs. Etc.

I know that nowadays is automatic, but I like the XP. It has been always part of the game, and I think it helps the special teams to get ready for a FG. One thing I would suggest is to delay the snap, so the defensive tem has a better shot of blocking it.

luckyshow wrote:...if point afters were from the point the ball crossed the goal line on a touchdown, whatever the yardline the ball would be placed on, this would make the PAT harder...

I think this and eliminating some of the rules (no jumping? No over-laoding a side!? Really?!) that make it more difficult for a team to block a kick might solve the problem.

Mark L. Ford wrote:

John Grasso wrote:While we're on the subject of ridiculous changes to American football


Field goals might not be as interesting as touchdowns, but I wouldn't call them boring-- most games that come down to the wire have turned upon the suspense of "the kick is up and it's....."

And punts? A necessary evil. Every team that's painted itself into a corner ought to have a way out.

I used to have an Atari Football game in which you could never kick the ball, no XP. FGs or punts! Had the ball at your own 1 with 4th and 15? Tough luck, had to go for it. The only scoring was 7 for a TD and 2 for a safety. I don't recall the name of the game. [I'd be embarrassed if I ever found out there actually was a way to kick that I was unaware of.]