Dan Daly used to be a sports columnist for the Washington Times; he describes himself on his Twitter page this way:
“Unrestricted free agent sportswriter, NFL Films talking head, author of The National Forgotten League.”
[Aside: I recommend his book, The National Forgotten League, for anyone who is interested in the origins, evolution and development of what we call the NFL these days.]
One of his recent Tweets sparked some thinking here in Curmudgeon Central:
“Some NFL numbers for ya (total for both teams):
“1948 6.48 TDs per game (all-time high) 0.76 FGs per game
“2024 4.28 TDs per game 4.4 FGs per game
“And yet, how much time do we spend talking about kickers? Analyzing kickers? Trying to understand how they’ve gotten to be so good?”
About 10 minutes after seeing that Tweet, I ran across this stat:
“A record was set in Week 2 for most field goals in a slate of NFL games, with 73.”
Those two items combined with a self-evident fact – – field goal attempts on average are far less exciting that plays from scrimmage – – led me to think that there might need to be some rule changes to disincentivize field goal tries thereby encouraging more potential fourth down tries from scrimmage or punt returns. Naturally, I have come up with some ideas to do so. Fortunately for all, no one involved with NFL rulemaking pays attention to these rants.
Let me begin with a simple rule change:
- Raise the crossbar from 10 feet off the ground to 20 feet – – or even 25 feet – – off the ground.
- And narrow the width of the goal post from 18 feet 6 inches to 15 feet.
Either or both of those alterations would discourage lots of 60 or 70-yard attempts. In the case of a 60-yard attempt, that means the ball was on the “plus-43 yardline” leaving it to the offensive mavens to decide to go for it or punt it away.
If you want a far more radical rule change, modify the goal post structure itself.
- Make the width 15 feet and set the crossbar height at 15 feet. Then add a second crossbar at 30 feet. A successful field goal has to pass over the lower crossbar AND under the upper crossbar to be successful. That change will also make PAT tries more interesting.
And if you think there needs to be an even greater risk associated with ultra-long field goal tries, consider changes to the scoring system.
- For the sake of argument, assume that you want to add more risk to any field goal try over 55 yards. Then make a field goal from 55 yards or longer worth only 2 points instead of 3 points for shorter tries.
Since there were 73 field goals made last weekend (4.5 per game) that means there were even more attempts since there had to be a couple of missed tries. [Aside: I remember that Justin Tucker missed one in the Ravens/Raiders game…] So, in addition to Professor Daly’s suggestion that we spend time analyzing kickers and trying to figure out how they got so proficient, perhaps a rule change or two might be in order?
Switching gears – – sort of – – I’ll take a moment here to suggest an NFL restructuring of its divisions. Obviously, what exists today works just fine, but I believe that there is a principle that is not sufficiently recognized in the current structure.
- Proximity enhances rivalry.
So, in order to increase “proximity” among division teams and therefore enhancing rivalries, consider this realignment:
- Left Coast Division: Seattle, SF. LA Rams, LA Chargers
- Flyover División: KC, Denver, Arizona, Las Vegas
- Deep South Division: Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee
- Midwest Division: Minnesota, Green Bay, Chicago, Indy
- Rust Belt Division: Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit
- Megalopolis Division: New England, NY Jets, NY Giants, Philly
- Mid-Atlantic Division: Washington, Baltimore, Carolina, Cincy
- South Division: Atlanta, Jax, Tampa Bay, Miami
OK, I admit that the “Flyover Division” is a bit of a stretch as is adding Cincy to the “Mid-Atlantic Division”, but look at all the close packed geography in the rest of the divisions for developing rivalries…
Finally, since today’s rant has been about change, let me close with Charles Darwin:
“It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”
But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………
So who would be AFC and who would be NFC?
I find it instructive that the NFL is all over on-field injuries and rules to prevent them, but the owners think nothing of entire teams flying 6,000 miles in a matter of days.
Would the owners have to agree on this–just as Baltimore, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh so many decades ago.
TenaciousP:
I would place a North/South demarcation line and make the AFC the Western teams and the NFC the Eastern teams.
Yes, the owners would have to approve such a realignment. No one will ever bring such an idea to their attention so they will never get a chance to bote it down.
The realignment will do nothing to avoid that Miami/Seattle jaunt every four years or so. That journey is locked in so long as there is one team in Miami and another in Seattle.
They already narrowed the goal posts once years ago – high schools use wider posts, they didn’t change. I’d rather see the 55 yard FG try from the 47 than a punt out of bounds or a short high punt that gets a fair catch.
And not all the extra FGs are long – your locals just kicked 7 FGs in a game, and 6 were from the red zone, and the other scrimmage was inside the 30. Those weren’t going to be punts
Ed:
I have no problem with field goals on 4th and 5 or more no matter where they are. I just think that field goal tries are pretty bland stuff and anything that will turn more of them into plays from scrimmage – – or even punts which are only slightly less bland than field goal tries – – is a good thing.