+- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com)
+-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards)
+--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More)
+--- Thread: Falcons: Peter King Is An Idiot (/Thread-Falcons-Peter-King-Is-An-Idiot)
Peter King Is An Idiot - AUTiger7222 - 10-16-2012 04:11 AM
Quote:Factoid of the Week That May Interest Only Me
Why does the NFL kick extra points anymore?
Through the Sunday night game, the 90th game of the season, kickers had made 429 of 430 extra points this year.
Since the opening days of 2010, including playoffs, kickers have made 2,976 extra points out of 2,996 attempted -- 99.3 percent -- in 624 games. Twenty misses in 624 games. That means an extra point has been missed, on average, once every 31-and-a-quarter games. What exactly is the purpose of making fans, TV viewers and bored special teams go through the motions of 45 seconds spotting, lining up and booting a 19-yard kick through the uprights? It's anachronistic. It's a waste of time for everyone.
Some coaches, most recently Bill Belichick in 2011, have railed against the meaninglessness of the extra point. I think it's time for the Competition Committee to discuss during committee meetings next spring a good alternative. Either move the line of scrimmage for the extra point back to the 25-yard line, or force teams to go for two after a touchdown, or force teams to dropkick the extra point, the way the Patriots did with Doug Flutie in the last game of the 2005 season. But it's time to do something.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/10/15/week-6/index.html#ixzz29RnPh5Rx
Really? This idiot wants to get rid of extra points because they take too much time? Since when is 45 seconds too much time to kick an extra point?
The question he should be asking is why TV networks are allowed to go to commercial before and after a kickoff after a score has been made? That would cut 2 1/2 minutes out of the time it takes to play a game. 2 1/2 minutes times say 10 is almost 30 minutes of time that could be cut from the length of games.
I mean if he's this concerned about the length of games that extra points aren't important enough for him that he would just get rid of them if he had his way.
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - Drathdon - 10-16-2012 05:06 AM
He's not complaining about the time itself, but rather the time being used for something that is practically guaranteed, and not competitive. Extra Points are as exciting as watching a person drink a glass of water... sure someone may choke eventually, but 99.3% of the time, it's nothing worth watching/doing.
He is bringing up the point others have made to make it competitive again, either by making people go for 2, or making the kick further away or kicked differently (drop kick), making it a competitive part of the game again.
I can see his point, and agree that change would make the games more interesting and competitive (imagine the strategies available), but don't mind the traditional way enough to lobby for change (though I would like it if it was implemented).
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - AUTiger7222 - 10-16-2012 06:54 AM
(10-16-2012 05:06 AM)Drathdon Wrote: He's not complaining about the time itself, but rather the time being used for something that is practically guaranteed, and not competitive. Extra Points are as exciting as watching a person drink a glass of water... sure someone may choke eventually, but 99.3% of the time, it's nothing worth watching/doing.
He is bringing up the point others have made to make it competitive again, either by making people go for 2, or making the kick further away or kicked differently (drop kick), making it a competitive part of the game again.
I can see his point, and agree that change would make the games more interesting and competitive (imagine the strategies available), but don't mind the traditional way enough to lobby for change (though I would like it if it was implemented).
I just don't understand how it is such a problem all of a sudden. Ok so it is practically guaranteed that it's going to be good every time. Guys do miss every blue moon. Jason Elam missed an extra point for the Falcons against the Dolphins in 2009. Remember the game the Saints lost to the Jaguars in 2005 because John Carney missed the extra point at the end of the game? I've seen more missed extra points in college football this year than I've ever seen in my life.
But why is there the need to change something that's been that way for half a century if not longer? That would be be like someone saying the free throw in basketball is too easy. The players need to start bouncing the ball into the hoop.
I just think this is an unnecessary change that doesn't even need to be up for discussion.
Peter King Is An Idiot - juraitwaluzka - 10-16-2012 07:22 AM
Didn't the Falcons miss a playoff spot once due to a missed extra point at the end of a game, or am I dreaming?
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - Drathdon - 10-16-2012 07:41 AM
If players were making 99.3% of free throws, I guarantee you there would be complaints to change the system, and fouls would be overpowered.
The original idea of an "extra" point was an added risk/reward of 1 vs 2 points, and the strategy it involved as each team tried to stay inches ahead of their competition. Go for two? Or try the easier (but still challenging) kick and risk the opponent going for two to take the lead? That avenue of strategy back when the game was much more focused on the ground game, and running it in for 2 was more finesse (not a line of 300 lb defenders), lead to a much more tactically difficult job for coaches. Now that everyone always kicks (almost), and they always make it, it makes little tactical sense in the game. The strategy is so much more important when the points come from exceptional play, and not automatic rituals.
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - AUTiger7222 - 10-16-2012 07:52 AM
(10-16-2012 07:41 AM)Drathdon Wrote: If players were making 99.3% of free throws, I guarantee you there would be complaints to change the system, and fouls would be overpowered.
The original idea of an "extra" point was an added risk/reward of 1 vs 2 points, and the strategy it involved as each team tried to stay inches ahead of their competition. Go for two? Or try the easier (but still challenging) kick and risk the opponent going for two to take the lead? That avenue of strategy back when the game was much more focused on the ground game, and running it in for 2 was more finesse (not a line of 300 lb defenders), lead to a much more tactically difficult job for coaches. meow that everyone always kicks (almost), and they always make it, it makes little tactical sense in the game. The strategy is so much more important when the points come from exceptional play, and not automatic rituals.
Part of me mentioning the free throw thing was to make fun how how awful NBA players are at making them.
And the extra point was in place long before the 2 point conversion in the NFL. The NFL didn't go to the 2 point conversion until 1994. Why did it take them so long when the AFL had in back in the 60s and college football before then? I don't know.
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - pauliwood - 10-16-2012 12:31 PM
you complain alot
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - Anomaly - 10-16-2012 02:40 PM
(10-16-2012 12:31 PM)pauliwood Wrote: you complain alotYou noticed that too?
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - pauliwood - 10-16-2012 02:54 PM
(10-16-2012 02:40 PM)Anomaly Wrote: You noticed that too?
indeed I did.
RE: Peter King Is An Idiot - AUTiger7222 - 10-16-2012 04:31 PM
Ok. So now I complain too much? I guess I'm not just going to have to force myself to stop posting on message boards. There's just too many people that can't just make a comment about the topic at hand without criticizing the person posting the topic. I expect that crap over on TATF but not here. But whatever.