The Colts are offering this up. Let’s hear it, what else could be proposed to f@ck up this game even more?
Field goals are worth 1/4 point per 5 yards. 2 yards added or subtracted for wind. Cross winds are 1 point for every mph over 10 unless attempted from beyond 35 yards. Extra 2 points for 36-50 yards while beyond 50 is worth 3 extra points.
Wanna hear about the Point After QB Sack?
Seems unnecessary. The gameplay isn’t suffering for lack of interesting scoring. Football is already immensely complicated by now.
Sounds like it came from the coke and pill addled mind of Indianapolis owner Jim Irsay.
After brief consideration NFL to reject nine-point touchdown.
Seems unnecessary and silly to me.
But, maybe they could fit in another commercial between the two-point conversion and the extra-extra-point. That would make it all worth it.
How about 18 points? After a touchdown you get to try a 2 point conversion, if that works you get to try a 1 point kick from the 32, and if that works you get to try for a 3 point field goal from the 50 and if that works another 6 point touchdown from your own 20.
We could even throw in another 2 points, the other team gets the ball on your own 1 yard line and you get 1 play to try to push them back over their own goal line for a safety.
You forgot to factor in the ‘distance from hashmarks’ factor. It’s a sliding scale, ranging from a 5% point penalty for kicks from the dead center of the field, to a 15% point bonus for kicks that are made from the hashmarks.
From the linked article in the OP:
I didn’t realise overtime in the NFL is sudden death. It’s not that way in the CFL. There are two mini-halves, with each team having possession in each mini-half, so even if the first team in the first mini-half scores a TD, the other team has an opportunity to do so when they get possession. That seems fairer; otherwise, the coinflip to determine who gets the first possession may be the most important part of the OT.
Sounds like the proposed change to OT would be in line with the CFL (and I think, College play in the US?)
Oh, sure. Make it complicated.
Currently, it’s “modified sudden death” where a team wins if they score a touchdown, or are ahead after both teams have had the ball. (It’s got way more technical rules, but that’s the gist of it.)
It was only recently that it straight up first score wins. However, getting the ball first did not actually result in a significantly better win percentage.
I like the college system, aka the Kansas Plan. Teams take turns trying to score from 25 yards out and keep going until one team ends up ahead. For the NFL, the yardage may have to get pushed back. Detractors argue it reduces the game to only redzone play, elimating most special teams and full-field play, but the team’s had a whole game for that.
The 9 point TD/2pt/long 1pt thing is silly.
I think the CFL relied on the college system for its overtime rules. During regular season, there are two mini-halves, and if the game is tied after that, it ends in a tie. If it’s post-season, they keep playing mini-halves until there’s a winner. (The Grey Cup was actually decided under this formula in 2005 - went to overtime for the first time ever.)
Hmm, never mind.
These proposals are starting to sound like Calvinball.
I hate the college OT system. First, it’s still a huge advantage to go second, and secondly, yeah, it’s just red zone. Why is that good? Of course they have the whole game to play football. If that ends tied, why shouldn’t they play football in overtime too? Basketball overtime isn’t settled as a slam dunk competition.
Totally agree. Why is this being considered? Does the NFL have to consider any half-baked idea proposed by a team?
That’s not really very fair. Calvinball is far simpler.
I’m often reminded of a (hilarious, filthy, in poor taste) flash video from years back about D&D. To paraphrase slightly: “Ahh, American football. A weird shaped ball and fucktons of rules.”
What the Colts really needed was a 50 point touchdown rule, to give themselves a chance in the playoffs against New England.