Death of the Long Field Goal?

From the Hamilton Spectator:

Field-goal attempts of 50 yards or farther have become rare the past few years, especially this season.

Heading into the Labour Day weekend, the halfway point of the CFL schedule, there had been only one field goal attempt from longer than 49 yards.


CFL field goals

Attempts from 50 yards or longer

2011: 21
2012: 13
2013: 2*

*Pro-rated for full season

Average length of attempts, in yards:

2011: 33.4
2012: 33.0
2013: 30.3

Percentage of completions

2003: 76

2008: 80.2

2013: 84.1

Source: CFL

Not a fan of this trend. Was wondering why all of a sudden we see multiple kickers re-writing the record books for accuracy. Its a lot easier when you only have to worry about shorter field goals. Kicks within 40 yards should be automatic. If you're only worrying about kicks up to 49 yards out, then the accuracy percentages should be even higher. I could not believe a few games ago when Edmonton did not attempt a 50 yarder at the very end of the half that may very well costed them a victory against Hamilton. Would much rather watch a missed field goal attempt than a punt that lands out of bounds.

In case anyone is wondering, the article the OP was talking about said the reason may be that on a punt the punting team is more prepared to stop a return than on a field goal, and because of which, teams are more afraid of a returner having a better chance returning a missed field goal for a touchdown than a punt.

I like it. It shows teams are being way more careful.

I approve of this trend. Offenses should have to move the ball inside the 40 to score any points.

Which begs to question the purpose of our OT format. They really need to start those at least from centre. You should at least have to gain a first down to be in FG range.

Or you flip it. You have teams kick field goals starting at the 40 and if both teams make it you move to the 45 then 50... and to make it fair you have them kick to the same side of the field. That could be interesting. Would make an interesting. Its so rare to begin with why not think outside the box.

big misses equate to bigger returns. It is simply evolution of the game.

you want to make OT go down to a kicking match? I think that putting shootouts in hockey is silly...taking a team sport and making it about individuals...this is taking a team sport and making it about 1 leg. I find something like this even worse that the NFL's sudden death format

Well there is a bit of an idea. Each team picks 5 guys to kick......... :wink:

I don’t like the idea of OT becoming a field goal contest. But what you’re suggesting gives me another idea.

Each team starts at the 40 to make points. If it’s tied after that, they each start at the 45, then the 50, … It wouldn’t be able to go unlimited, especially with it getting harder to get any points at all each time. But at least it starts to remove the (almost) guaranteed field goal if no TD is scored. And it might end up with punting contests on the longer plays trying to avoid the rouge.

OT, but how be we go back to the old OT format of two short halves? That way ALL aspects of football are included in it -- including punts, kickoffs, punt returns and kickoff returns -- big parts of our game that are completely eliminated by the current OT format.

Yes, I would be in favour of that pw. I do find the current OT exciting, maybe a bit like the shootout in hockey, but it should be more like the actual game I think.

Well I wish a few rules changes associated with field goals here for both Canadian and American football.

-If any field goal attempt goes out of bounds in the air such that a single point is scored, the team scored upon can elect to take possession of the ball at their 45-yard line (other than requesting the uncommonly selected kickoff options if they still exist) instead of at the 35-yard line. Basically if the kicker misses that badly and the kick could not be returned anyway, the other team gets also an extra ten yards.

-It'd be great if the end zones were each 15 yards so as to afford the return option a bit more often for an awesome play let alone open up the end zones for an offence, but that won't happen any time soon if ever. (Also related if not already, eliminate any bumping of receivers in the end zone before the ball is thrown even if the line of scrimmage is inside the 5-yard line).

-As is likely coming so as to eliminate more kickoffs, the scoring team should be able to have the option to allow possession by the other team at the 40-yard line instead of having to kickoff. Such a strategy would help in situations when the team is behind and wishes to save some time in the fourth quarter or avoid altogether the prospect of kicking off into a high headwind.

I don't agree.

you get the ball at the the point where the was at the time of the field goal plus the single.

no need to change the rules.

The problem with OT is mainly TSN. They don't like broadcasts to extend and not know how long it could take. Fans like it but broadcasters hate it. They get no extra money from advertising. Sat costs increase, and their other paid programming takes a hit, its also dangerous for players, they are tired and risk of injury increases with that. That's why I liked the kicking idea. It is short, lots of drama and your sure someone will win in a short time.

Not all fans like it. I tend to PVR a lot of games because anything on the West Coast doesn't even start until 11PM Atlantic. When games run long, I'm probably not going to have the ending. (As it is I need to add a half hour just to capture a game without overtime, because so many run long due to all the delays.)

For sure I've been victim of the same. Sucks to watch for 3.5 hours and be missing the last two minutes of a game.

Why not just make any f.g attempt from 50 or more yds out good worth 4 pts instead of 3 pts ????

It is a trend that is here whether we like it or not. After a lot of big FG returns last season the punter now is brouth on in many situations in order to flip the field even more by pinning back a team with a coffin corner kick something that was a big trend at one time and is now making a huge comeback.
With more and more teams now opting for a punting specialist and a place kicking specialist this will begin to even out.
The Riders are a perfect situation where using the best punter and the best place kicker to be on the roster and not one guy who does all average or eve worse one guy who is really good at one and really bad at the other.
That leads into the discussion of expanding rosters to be able to do this without cutting a corner else where.
It gets to begin t affect rosters in so many ways.
I think that the CFL at least during this CBA should seriously take a look at expanding rosters. Many detractors may say the cost may come into affect with the extra TV money going to the extrta roster spots and not to higher pay for players on the current roster size.
Taking a small page from the NFL strategy would be to add two more roster spots 44 plus 4. The two extra spots would be NI Spots and would go to rookie or second year Canadians who may have been a PR player the year before to come in at the minimum pay and be designated to be Special teams players not by any rule but just how it would work out and get some hungry rookies who will love to play on specials even for the Minimum.
You see a lot of NFL rookie free agents make teams just for this reason