boyst Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) I know this is not going to happen, but what if? Field position means a lot and it makes sense. Somewhere out there a team has a lousy field goal kicker and a good enough OL that they may consider. It makes sense to cut your FG kicker or just use a punter who can kick off then go for two points most of the time. In our case we have two kickers. I love Carpenter and he is money, I do not know if Gay will be on the final roster, like some say or not - but he has had 11 touchbacks this preseason - that was after kicking two in the Steelers game so maybe he has more. But, I would totally be fine with us going for two points instead of going for the long kick in most cases. Is this crazy? Is there a team that may do this? Edited August 31, 2015 by Boyst62 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 But what about actual FGs? Do we go on 4th or punt every time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorom Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Worst idea ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted August 31, 2015 Author Share Posted August 31, 2015 But what about actual FGs? Do we go on 4th or punt every time? I'd love to say go for it on 4th downs, but if we have Gay as a kicker or just one kicker, or the punter that can also kick - let him cut it? I know its absolutely crazy. But, I don't want to think about Fred anymore because I am out of tissues and I don't want to think about EJ/Meh/Tyrod anymore because I am out of booze. So, I still have some crack and this seemed worth a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackInDaDay Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 how about one Center and 5 pairs of holders/placekickers lined up across the field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 sounds like you may have already gone those 10 rounds with Ms. Rousey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'd love to say go for it on 4th downs, but if we have Gay as a kicker or just one kicker, or the punter that can also kick - let him cut it? I know its absolutely crazy. But, I don't want to think about Fred anymore because I am out of tissues and I don't want to think about EJ/Meh/Tyrod anymore because I am out of booze. So, I still have some crack and this seemed worth a thought. But wouldn't it be more logical to simply keep the better FG kicker (Carpenter) and cut the KO specialist (Gay)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted August 31, 2015 Author Share Posted August 31, 2015 But wouldn't it be more logical to simply keep the better FG kicker (Carpenter) and cut the KO specialist (Gay)? Gay had been nailing FG's all camp. Cheaper and a numbers game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm not sure I totally agree with this, but I think there is value to the idea of going for two every time. I saw a report that said teams convert 48.4% of the time, and apparently teams convert 33yd FG 94% of the time. Makes sense to me that a competent red zone offense could come out ahead by going for two each time, especially with shaky kicking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardinalScotts Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 what works in high school doesnt work in the NFL. Defense is about discipline and at 16-17-18 they are not disciplined so you can take advantage of things. That goes away was they get older. Go watch a high school game it's tough to sit through Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 what works in high school doesnt work in the NFL. Defense is about discipline and at 16-17-18 they are not disciplined so you can take advantage of things. That goes away was they get older. Go watch a high school game it's tough to sit throughI don't think anybody has said anything about high school teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted August 31, 2015 Author Share Posted August 31, 2015 what works in high school doesnt work in the NFL. Defense is about discipline and at 16-17-18 they are not disciplined so you can take advantage of things. That goes away was they get older. Go watch a high school game it's tough to sit through Nothing to do with high school. it's potentially forward thinking. With the elimination of kickoffs forthcoming the value of the kicker diminished now that the kicks are moved back. Not much, but some. The elimination of a kickoff could create a new position of a shared position for a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills Fan in MD Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Um, so what happens the next time they are down by 1 with the ball on the opponent's 30 with seconds remaining in the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Um, so what happens the next time they are down by 1 with the ball on the opponent's 30 with seconds remaining in the game? No one ever said forward thinking didn't have it's flaws... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I'm going to bookmark this topic and whenever you say something in another thread that's silly, I'm just going to post this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 But wouldn't it be more logical to simply keep the better FG kicker (Carpenter) and cut the KO specialist (Gay)? Gay is 8th best in touchbacks last year--so 7 guys who also kicked FGs were better than a "kickoff specialist". I would be surprised if Rex believes in this goofy roster spot like Marrone did. I'm not sure I totally agree with this, but I think there is value to the idea of going for two every time. I saw a report that said teams convert 48.4% of the time, and apparently teams convert 33yd FG 94% of the time. Makes sense to me that a competent red zone offense could come out ahead by going for two each time, especially with shaky kicking. That 48.4% is just as likely to go down over time if it done by every team all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Gay had been nailing FG's all camp. I remember reports of his missed FGs and then the missed FG in the preseason game. Bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtDart Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I know this is not going to happen, but what if? Field position means a lot and it makes sense. Somewhere out there a team has a lousy field goal kicker and a good enough OL that they may consider. It makes sense to cut your FG kicker or just use a punter who can kick off then go for two points most of the time. In our case we have two kickers. I love Carpenter and he is money, I do not know if Gay will be on the final roster, like some say or not - but he has had 11 touchbacks this preseason - that was after kicking two in the Steelers game so maybe he has more. But, I would totally be fine with us going for two points instead of going for the long kick in most cases. Is this crazy? Is there a team that may do this? I like it, especially if you are 50% on the attempts. It would work itself out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WotAGuy Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I like it, especially if you are 50% on the attempts. It would work itself out. Yes it will......95% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah John Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Cutting the kicker is a terrible idea. FGs are important. Go for it on 4th down, and even if you pick up the yards you still haven't scored. You have to keep going and going, giving the defense more chances to stop the drive. BUT, going for two point conversions a lot does make sense. The stats show that in past years teams averaged almost 50% on 2 pt conversions and almost 100% on 1 pt conversions. Over time, the odds are that you came out about even if you were going for 2 regularly. This year with the 1 pt moved back to snap from the 15, expect the success rate to go down. That's now a 33 yard kick, which is probably successful 80-85% of the time. Now, if you can keep converting 2 pt conversions at about 50%, you'll come out ahead going for 2 most of the time. (I can see going for 1 in particular situations, for example if you score a TD to tie near the end of the game, and just need 1 pt to take the lead, the kick has better odds.) Say a team scores 6 TDs a game. If they try six 2 pt conversions and make three of them, they'll have six points from conversions. If they try six 1 pt conversions at 80-85%, they'll make five of them, getting five points. OTOH if a team is scoring six TDs per game they're winning a whole lot anyway. If you're only getting a couple of TDs per game, a coach would really put himself on the hot seat if he loses more points by going for 2 a lot. Will teams keep converting 2 pts at about 50%? That's not clear. I think defenses will devote more time to preparing to stop 2 pt conversions, and offenses will devote more time developing plays for the situation. I can't predict which (if either) will gain an advantage from familiarity. Edited August 31, 2015 by Utah John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts