Finally talking some sense down south ...

Just read an article regarding that utter waste of time known as the Single Extra Point ...

Anyone who has paid any attention to my posts knows I have been railing against the PAT for years now. I never thought in a million years of Sundays, though, that the NFL would have the courage to even consider it. Kudos to them.

While I believe the proposed scoring system (automatic 7 - with an option for 8 and 6 for a miss) suits the NFL quite well ... I am still of the belief that the CFl would be best served by an 8 or 6, all or nothing scoring system ... as a nod to the Rugby roots from which the game evolved.

Whether it happens , or not - I feel most vindicated in my attempts to raise this issue for the past several years.

what next ? moving the kick offs up so they go through the end zone :wink:

How about they move the goal post back to the goal line so a 45 yard field goal is a 45 yard field goal and not a 35 :roll:
and get rid of the fair catch rule so there are some run backs ?? and lets get rid of the tuck rule ? it's a fumble :x Oh ! how about 20 seconds in between plays :thup: How about making the field bigger so it's more wide open ?? :stuck_out_tongue:

I think streamlining the game to focus on regular scrimmage is what the NFL is going for and rule changes like this work for them. If the NFL is content reducing kick returns for player safety, I would go as far as to make kick offs a scoring team option should an onside kick be required. Otherwise the team scored against gets the ball on the 20. The current mandatory kickoff from the 35 is quite ridiculous in the NFL.

In the CFL, between the live ball both ways on the convert and the importance of kick/punt/missed field goal returns on special teams to the outcome of the game I wouldn't want to see any such changes. The status quo works for me in that regard.

I think that's a fantastic idea, and would love to see that in the CFL as well.

Or what about making the extra point kick more difficult. ie. line up the kick directly in line form where the TD was scored, ignoring the hash marks.

Or any TD scored from inside the 1 yard line, calls for an extra point from far out, say 50 yards. And any TD scored a yard farther than that, cuts that distance down from the 50 by the same amount. A 2 yard TD calls for a 48 yard convert, an 11 yard TD call for a 39 yard convert, a 33 yard TD calls for a 17 yard convert etc.

This would keep the kicking integral to game, if not making it more important.

I wouldn't be upset if they got rid of kicking for a single point after touchdown and made it mandatory that you go for two. So when you score a touchdown - you'll either end up with 6 or 8. It certainly would make that play after a touchdown more meaningful - since as the article state the one point thing now is virtually automatic.

It would create extra excitement and make for some critical plays that right now are sort of anti-climatic. For example a team is up by a field goal has a touchdown scored against them in the last minute to put the other team up by 3. Currently that next point is HUGE - to put them up by more than a field goal - yet because a convert is so automatic - as fans we more or less in our minds concede the single point already even though it hasn't been kicked yet. That's the reality of it and when you step back and think about that - isn't that a bit silly from an entertainment of fan perspective?

If in that situation the team who just scored to go up by three has to go for two - then we have an important two point convert play to watch. I think it just has the potential to add some real excitement to the game.

And its not really taking anything away from kickers - sure they don't get to come in and kick their automatic converts - but suddenly every field goal has a slightly elevated importance - because now in many cases two field goals that are good will be a tie score with a touchdown - because let's face it lots of two point convert tries should fail. Currently two good field goals 99.9% of the time leave you one point behind a touchdown (and its automatic convert).

So doing that it makes for an exciting and important play after each touchdown - and it in a sense it even makes your field goal kickers job more important. Get what I'm saying? (not sure I'm explaining that too well - lol)

I think it's a great idea. Who watches the convert anyway? It has to be the most unexciting, useless thing in football.

Agree a convert isn't the most entertaining thing in the world that's for sure.

NFL does this often to get people talking about something else.
This past Sunday it was a moron with roid rage running his mouth, some of the worst officiating I have ever seen, a horrible rule about a fumble that isnt challengable and talk about a lawsuit on concussions.
So like throwing a loaf of bread at seagulls they put this out there.

Keep the extra point. Just move it to the 35 or 40 yard line. Would give an opportunity to set up a return if missed.
And if you're going for 2, keep it where it is now.

I'd like to keep the convert, but making it more difficult probably wouldn't be a bad idea. Some ideas I've seen mentioned:

  • Kick from farther back.
  • Kick from a spot aligned with where the ball crossed the goal line on the touchdown.
  • Make the goal posts for converts narrower.
  • Make the player who scored the touchdown kick the convert.
  • Make the kicker use a dropkick rather than kicking from a hold.

Personally, I like the fourth option.

Any other ideas?

Keeping the convert -and then altering the parameters of it (in any of the aforementioned ways) is, in my opinion, too gimmicky to be taken serious - and would bring the game into disrepute.

The issue at hand is the complete uselessness of the single PAT ... it's 99.4% success rate makes the play perfunctory, boring, a waste of time, and virtually meaningless.

The best solution, in my opinion, is to simply eliminate it and use the ALREADY EXISTING rules and parameters for the 2 point conversion. The sublimity of the solution lies in it's simplicity. As an analogy ...

Rather than cutting the useless limb, and replacing it with a bionic one ... just amputate the dead limb, and carry on.

To start with random, arbitrary gimmicky alternates to the single point is messy and inelegant.

Seeing as there is talk about the uselessness of the convert why don't we take this opportunity to do away with the point for a missed field goal as well.. Another waste.

As a former participant in football PAT's myself, I would be sad to see the PAT go.....I like the idea of trying it from 30 or 40 yards out to make things more interesting.....

I for one, really get off on watching the trajectory of a well kicked or punted football and the associated physics of a well kicked/punted football traveling through the atmosphere. When factoring in angular momentum, atmospheric conditions, accel. due to gravity, initial horizontal/vertical velocity etc and other football specific projectile motion factors and how that can influence the flight of a football, really tickles my fancy... 8)

Id be sad to see the kicked PAT gone from football..... :expressionless:

Of all the suggestions I would like to eliminate these three from further consideration please. :stuck_out_tongue:

  • Kick from a spot aligned with where the ball crossed the goal line on the touchdown. This works in rugby where the 'convert' is an uncontested kick but you would have to change the convert to be like that - an uncontested type of kick otherwise how would you have a snapper and holder and line of scrimmage on a play where somebody scores right at the pylon. Potentially your holder would have to be out of bounds.

  • Make the goal posts for converts narrower. OK -so we would then have to not only have kids to raise the nets they do to prevent kicks going from into the stands but another 'team' of goal post attendants will have to run out on to the field with some sort of contraption to wind in or out the goal posts. That has delay written all over it and undoubtedly due to freezing or some other mechanical issue somewhere along the way the movable goal posts will malfunction causing a huge delay - no thanks

  • Make the player who scored the touchdown kick the convert - have our star running back pull a groin attempting a point after - no thanks.

Who cares what they do down South! Really! What's next? No FGs either? Just stupid talk!

To be fair Waldorfian - I think most people here aren't commenting about what the NFL might or might not do - although a comment by their commissioner was the impetus of this thread. All my comments at least were directed towards the CFL - and how to me at least - I think this is an idea worthy of discussion at least.

If I could decide choosing from these options

A - leave it alone with convert rules as they are today
B - make going for a two point mandatory
C- keep the single point with option of going for two but make the convert harder somehow

I would choose B. What about all of you?

@longtimefan … although I am certain you are being facetious , I’ll take the bait by saying - the rouge is not a single point for missing a FG - it is a single point for advancing a live ball over the goal line … and is an integral part of the history of the CFL, unique and completely unrelated to the issue at hand.

@TravelPatB … Option B without question … the layer of strategic play it would create cannot be overstated …

When I met resistance to this idea from a few of my friends - I proposed that we play Madden Football with my mandatory 2pt conversion rule implemented. By the end of the first game each and every one of them were convinced that it made for a far superior game ! The gravity of making or failing the conversion was real ! They understood immediately the impact it had on the game.

The adrenaline rush on both sides of the ball can not be denied … if you are the defense that stops the 2pt attempt it was an immediate morale boost after conceding a TD … or it became an additional crushing blow upon its’ success … Conversely, for the offense it was either an added rush of excitement when successful, or a stark slap back to reality upon failure.

Imagine the vicarious feelings derived by fans in the stands, and at home - living those moments with their respective teams!! The added rush of continued success , or the smack down of another consecutive defeat … after every TD ! The thought of it just confounds me even more as to why any football fan would argue against it !

I choose A. Leave it alone.

Option A, and maybe C, for me. Not B.

Another off-the-wall idea to make converts more difficult: a second set of goal posts at the back of the end zone to be used only for converts. Instead of an automatic 12 yarder from the five, it's now a 37 yarder from the same spot. With the added difficulty of having to kick it around the posts on the goal line, of course.

As I said - off the wall. I wouldn't be my first choice, or even my second or third, but I wouldn't scream too loud if they did it.