January 02, 2014

Get rid of the extra point? Or add a new "extra point"?

Get rid of the extra point? Or do something with it?

Pretty interesting piece here from NBC. Not sure which change I favor, but, in line with New England Patriot head coach Bill Belichick, I do favor some change. And, about any change would, per modern analytic football, make going for two more valuable yet. That said, per NBC's offerings, if you forced me to support one idea, I'd say put the extra-point conversion line at the 20. It makes an extra point somewhat less valuable, plus makes a blocked extra point a bit more likely to be returned by the other team for a point the other way.

That said, speaking of points, here's a change I'd like to see in the NFL, both coming from our friends up north.

Even with the smaller end zone, per Belichick's comment on special teams in general, allow the CFL's rouge point for punts the defense touches down in the end zone. Instead of coffin corner kicks, you'd want a boomer. And, would give coaches yet another strategy on fourth and 3 from the opponent 40. Now, instead of kicking a 57-yard field goal, going for it, or punting to try to down it inside the 10, punt to try to down it in the end zone.

Related to that, it would stimulate more quick kicks on some third and long plays.

That said, per CFL rouge rules, when the "single" is scored, the touchback comes to the 35, not the 20. If the NFL kept that part, too, it would force more of a gamble vs. coffin corner punts.

Unlike Canada, though, I wouldn't count it on missed field goals. And, because of the shorter U.S. field, I wouldn't count it on kickoffs. I might even tweak the CFL rule on touchbacks on punt rouges to put them at the 20 instead of the 35. It would still be an added twist to the U.S. game.

Speaking of, what about putting men in forward motion before the snap and allowing multiple shifts?

No comments: