Kicks becoming automatic is a bad thing. I want to see more football plays and fewer kicking plays. The league recognized this when they moved the XP back. What drives me crazy is there’s such a simple solution that I believe would have no unintended consequences: move the goalposts closer together.
Right. You have two dimensions to work with: I'm sure they could dial in the success rate vs. distance distribution pretty much wherever they want. I like raising the crossbar in that it would disproportionately reduce success rate on longer kicks (I assume). You could also make the goalposts slide randomly back and forth along the back line of the end zone, which would have the added benefits of (1) being completely ridiculous and (2) fueling conspiracy theories.
They could let each team put the field goal posts in different locations, like how each park in baseball has the outfield walls at different distances and angles. And they wouldn't have to be the same at each end of the field, making the decision to take the ball or choose which end zone to defend more interesting.
getting more and more fumed that league offices have not replied to my disturbingly specific and spec'd out proposal for installing a giant putt-putt style windmill in the center of the endzone
Why stop there? I say we install some Thunderdome-style suspension harnesses from the top of the posts and have a couple of defenders strap up, bounce around, and try to bat away the oncoming FG.
Very much yes to your initial thoughts. It's really dulling down the game. If I want to watch dudes kick a ball really far with amazing accuracy, I can watch top-tier soccer leagues.
Narrower goalposts seem the most obvious solution. Either that or putting a cap on FG distances at something like 52 yards, so teams have to make it at least to the opponent's 35 yard line or so.
I'm not a fan of arbitrary constraints; I like keeping options open. Sure, you can try for that 55-yard FG, but we've adjusted the goalposts so that the success rate is back down to 30% or so. If you have a weapon like Brandon Aubrey, you can still deploy him, but the overall effect is that more teams will choose to go for it (actually play football) rather than kick. They should have made this change instead of moving XPs back: I hate that they took away the option to make a surprise 2-point try. (What they really should have done is eliminate the XP entirely: make TDs worth 7 points but let you gamble 1 (and maybe more) of those points on a try).
Its probably worth pointing out that for at least half a century “actually playing football” meant playing to set up a decent kick. Field goals used to be worth more points than touchdowns.
Can you elaborate? As far as I can tell the rule that TDs were worth 5(+1) points dates to 1897 or 1898. I don't think football as a recognizable sport was 50 years old then. The Harvard McGill game was 1874.
Ah, sorry, two separate but related points. Let me try in reverse order for clarity : when football and rugby were splitting on the evolutionary chain, the touchdown was originally used to set up kicks, which were worth more points. By the early 1900’s scoring rules had settled down to more or less something we’d recognize. However, until mid-century / pretty much the modern era, american football was still dominated by kicking and punting and field position. This is a paraphrase of dozens of fantastic posts on Football Archaeology, which is a great substack I am not being paid to promote. In any event, my rhetoric flourish aside, the idea that “real football isn’t kicking” is just ahistorical nonsense, even if we all prefer the modern iteration better.
Much more fun would be if kicking plays (field goals and punts, both) have to be executed by someone who was on the field for the previous play. It would discourage kicking plays AND be fun!
Yes, yes, the NFLPA would never allow 60 of its members to be booted from their jobs. So grandfather in all kickers and punters who have been on an NFL roster in the last two years. Consequence: some of those guys will end up staying in the NFL until they're past 50 (And the last handful remaining will be getting paid a lot of money, because the last few Real Kickers will be in such short supply). Also fun!
(A less fun possible side effect: a team could carry a kicker and, facing 3rd-and-16 from the 35, put him in at WR and hand off. Or get to the 40 in a two-minute-drill situation, put him in for one play to spike the ball, have him kick. Might be worth the roster spot, if the kicker is good enough.)
A less disruptive rule change from some guy at a bar I heard recently and actually like, by way of encouraging football plays over kicking plays: on a turnover on downs, the ball is backed up 10 yards (from the perspective of the team taking over possession), unless the 4th down attempt was from inside the 20. Go for it from the opposition 40 and fail, opposition gets the ball on their 30.
Not exactly the point you're making, but an excuse for me to mention how much I hate seeing coaches play for a field goal, much less a long field goal. Even with the best kickers they are not guaranteed! Sometimes teams seem to act like just getting into field goal range has already accomplished the goal!
This. Humans are bad at probability. Announcers (and coaches) act like once you get into "range", the field goal is assumed and if its missed, that's the kicker's fault. But per Mike's math above, a 50-yarder is a little less than a 75% chance of success, i.e. 1-in-4 chance of a miss (assuming "average" kicker skill, which is still somewhat overstated per Mike's comments on "survivor" bias based on whose kicks are actually going into those probability factors).
Mike, what's your guess/what's the scuttlebutt as to whether the owners/competition committee likes the idea of 65-70 yard figgies? If not, what might they do (besides narrowing the goal posts)?
There was a big foofaraw earlier this season about a FG attempt where the special 'kicking ball' was not brought into play by the refs. Would just using the same ball for all plays make a significant difference?
Potentially all balls could be delivered by Huntsman Transport 10 minutes before kickoff, but I think that would diminish completion percentages rather than shorten field goals.
When Tom Dempsey hit his 63 yard FG, part of the shock was that the previous record was 56. I wonder in this year of specialized K balls that teams can work on, that we might see a similar jump from the current record of 66. We already saw a 70 yarder in the preseason. Could something in the 70-73 yard range happen this season? I think so under the right conditions (indoor, at altitude, or a warm day with a favorable wind). Obviously this would be an end of half end of game play. But, yes, I will predict we will see a regular season 70 plus yard FG this year.
Kicks becoming automatic is a bad thing. I want to see more football plays and fewer kicking plays. The league recognized this when they moved the XP back. What drives me crazy is there’s such a simple solution that I believe would have no unintended consequences: move the goalposts closer together.
Wanna hear a good option? From a fellow at the bar? Instead of narrowing the goalposts, Raise the crossbar 5 feet.
Right. You have two dimensions to work with: I'm sure they could dial in the success rate vs. distance distribution pretty much wherever they want. I like raising the crossbar in that it would disproportionately reduce success rate on longer kicks (I assume). You could also make the goalposts slide randomly back and forth along the back line of the end zone, which would have the added benefits of (1) being completely ridiculous and (2) fueling conspiracy theories.
[deep inhale] no see how about you raise the bar one foot for each FG you make in the season
They could let each team put the field goal posts in different locations, like how each park in baseball has the outfield walls at different distances and angles. And they wouldn't have to be the same at each end of the field, making the decision to take the ball or choose which end zone to defend more interesting.
getting more and more fumed that league offices have not replied to my disturbingly specific and spec'd out proposal for installing a giant putt-putt style windmill in the center of the endzone
Why stop there? I say we install some Thunderdome-style suspension harnesses from the top of the posts and have a couple of defenders strap up, bounce around, and try to bat away the oncoming FG.
Let's get real "American Gladiators" with this.
Very much yes to your initial thoughts. It's really dulling down the game. If I want to watch dudes kick a ball really far with amazing accuracy, I can watch top-tier soccer leagues.
Narrower goalposts seem the most obvious solution. Either that or putting a cap on FG distances at something like 52 yards, so teams have to make it at least to the opponent's 35 yard line or so.
I'm not a fan of arbitrary constraints; I like keeping options open. Sure, you can try for that 55-yard FG, but we've adjusted the goalposts so that the success rate is back down to 30% or so. If you have a weapon like Brandon Aubrey, you can still deploy him, but the overall effect is that more teams will choose to go for it (actually play football) rather than kick. They should have made this change instead of moving XPs back: I hate that they took away the option to make a surprise 2-point try. (What they really should have done is eliminate the XP entirely: make TDs worth 7 points but let you gamble 1 (and maybe more) of those points on a try).
"but the overall effect is that more teams will choose to go for it (actually play football) rather than kick."
Or they'll punt.
Its probably worth pointing out that for at least half a century “actually playing football” meant playing to set up a decent kick. Field goals used to be worth more points than touchdowns.
Can you elaborate? As far as I can tell the rule that TDs were worth 5(+1) points dates to 1897 or 1898. I don't think football as a recognizable sport was 50 years old then. The Harvard McGill game was 1874.
Found it, the one about the scoring evolution: https://open.substack.com/pub/browntim/p/why-touchdowns-are-worth-six-points?r=7muz&utm_medium=ios
Ah, sorry, two separate but related points. Let me try in reverse order for clarity : when football and rugby were splitting on the evolutionary chain, the touchdown was originally used to set up kicks, which were worth more points. By the early 1900’s scoring rules had settled down to more or less something we’d recognize. However, until mid-century / pretty much the modern era, american football was still dominated by kicking and punting and field position. This is a paraphrase of dozens of fantastic posts on Football Archaeology, which is a great substack I am not being paid to promote. In any event, my rhetoric flourish aside, the idea that “real football isn’t kicking” is just ahistorical nonsense, even if we all prefer the modern iteration better.
I'd much rather see a 55 yard to 65 yard field goal than a punt.
Much more fun would be if kicking plays (field goals and punts, both) have to be executed by someone who was on the field for the previous play. It would discourage kicking plays AND be fun!
Yes, yes, the NFLPA would never allow 60 of its members to be booted from their jobs. So grandfather in all kickers and punters who have been on an NFL roster in the last two years. Consequence: some of those guys will end up staying in the NFL until they're past 50 (And the last handful remaining will be getting paid a lot of money, because the last few Real Kickers will be in such short supply). Also fun!
(A less fun possible side effect: a team could carry a kicker and, facing 3rd-and-16 from the 35, put him in at WR and hand off. Or get to the 40 in a two-minute-drill situation, put him in for one play to spike the ball, have him kick. Might be worth the roster spot, if the kicker is good enough.)
A less disruptive rule change from some guy at a bar I heard recently and actually like, by way of encouraging football plays over kicking plays: on a turnover on downs, the ball is backed up 10 yards (from the perspective of the team taking over possession), unless the 4th down attempt was from inside the 20. Go for it from the opposition 40 and fail, opposition gets the ball on their 30.
Not exactly the point you're making, but an excuse for me to mention how much I hate seeing coaches play for a field goal, much less a long field goal. Even with the best kickers they are not guaranteed! Sometimes teams seem to act like just getting into field goal range has already accomplished the goal!
Yes! And don't get me started on how an 8-point deficit is called "a one-score game."
A "one possession" game would be fine, but yeah, I view an 8-point deficit as requiring two scores.
This. Humans are bad at probability. Announcers (and coaches) act like once you get into "range", the field goal is assumed and if its missed, that's the kicker's fault. But per Mike's math above, a 50-yarder is a little less than a 75% chance of success, i.e. 1-in-4 chance of a miss (assuming "average" kicker skill, which is still somewhat overstated per Mike's comments on "survivor" bias based on whose kicks are actually going into those probability factors).
Mike, what's your guess/what's the scuttlebutt as to whether the owners/competition committee likes the idea of 65-70 yard figgies? If not, what might they do (besides narrowing the goal posts)?
Not sure. My first thought is that they will mess with kickoffs again. They don't like the game ending with Ball on 35, One Good Play, FG.
Not sure I love it, either. Though I wouldn't mind if if there was no substitution and the same 11 guys had to do all 3!!!
There was a big foofaraw earlier this season about a FG attempt where the special 'kicking ball' was not brought into play by the refs. Would just using the same ball for all plays make a significant difference?
The k-ball is an anachronism from a simpler time when the NFL thought only special teamers tampered with the ball
https://www.vice.com/en/article/nfl-kickers-talk-about-playing-with-their-balls/
Potentially all balls could be delivered by Huntsman Transport 10 minutes before kickoff, but I think that would diminish completion percentages rather than shorten field goals.
But then Brady's minions couldn't ...
When Tom Dempsey hit his 63 yard FG, part of the shock was that the previous record was 56. I wonder in this year of specialized K balls that teams can work on, that we might see a similar jump from the current record of 66. We already saw a 70 yarder in the preseason. Could something in the 70-73 yard range happen this season? I think so under the right conditions (indoor, at altitude, or a warm day with a favorable wind). Obviously this would be an end of half end of game play. But, yes, I will predict we will see a regular season 70 plus yard FG this year.
when missing a FG means your opponent can immediately attempt one 15 yards shorter