Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Sybeck1

No they shouldn’t. The target should be smaller. Automatic success on a largely uncontested play is boring, boring is bad for sports.


5 posted on 07/19/2016 12:22:57 PM PDT by discostu (Joan Crawford has risen from the grave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: discostu

endless commercial time outs.

sloooooooow game movement. Prima Dona players.

PC BS

They might as well create profession grass growth watching leagues.


8 posted on 07/19/2016 12:25:50 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: discostu

The 16% provides the drama.


27 posted on 07/19/2016 1:11:45 PM PDT by Scrambler Bob (As always, /s is implicitly assumed. Unless explicitly labled /not s. Saves keystrokes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: discostu

Doesn’t it really boil down to coach’s discretion and the definition of “field goal range”.

The coaches collectively have determined that the definition of “field goal range” is “the area where 84.5% of attempts are completed”. If they narrow the goal posts, then “the area where 84.5% of attempts are completed” will become smaller. Thus, they just won’t attempt field goals until they are closer in.

My guess is that it will result in more punts and more failed 4th down attempts which would make it a lower scoring and more boring game.


39 posted on 07/19/2016 2:12:49 PM PDT by nitzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson