Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

rhickok1109 wrote:

Rupert Patrick wrote:I still like the horizontal top bar idea, a bar on top of the goal post, and it has to go inside the rectangle to be good.

It may be apocryphal, but I read a story about Efren Herrera, who was a soccer player at UCLA when he was asked to try out as a placekicker for the football team. In the tryout, all of Herrera's kicks were accurate, but they all went under the crossbar.

The coach told Herrera that they couldn't use him because he didn't seem to have the leg strength to get his kicks over the crossbar.

Herrera responded, "They're supposed to go OVER the crossbar?"

"I keeeck a Touchdown". Sounds made up to me, but never let the facts get in the way of a good story, and that's a good one!

I was born in England and my family came here when I was very young, I remember in the 70's my dad saying, why dint they just bring some rugby players over they can run and kick better than these guys. I don't think he'd say that today.

To Ruperts' idea, its interesting in that id there was a max height it would seem to bring down the field goal percentage on shorter kicks but not on longer kicks. What would that do for strategy, teams would go for it more often close in - a good outcome. But kick a field goal just as freely from 40 yards out. I don't love the concept myself, but the strategy implications are interesting, you'd go for it much more often on 4th and 1 at the 30 than at the 15.

Are there no Detroit fans in here to respond to this thread?

The Lions were 5-for-15 with three different kickers through the first six games of the season.

rhickok1109 wrote:Are there no Detroit fans in here to respond to this thread?

The Lions were 5-for-15 with three different kickers through the first six games of the season.

That may explain why there are no Detroit fans who want to respond to a thread that asserts that "kicking is just too easy"....

Mark L. Ford wrote:

rhickok1109 wrote:Are there no Detroit fans in here to respond to this thread?

The Lions were 5-for-15 with three different kickers through the first six games of the season.

That may explain why there are no Detroit fans who want to respond to a thread that asserts that "kicking is just too easy"....

Touche'

[quote="luckyshow"]Somewhere above someone posited the idea of a 1-0 game where the defense runs a point after (XP) back and the original TD was nullified by the league for some violation.

No, not really.

1) There is no such animal in the NFL, run the PAT back the other way and all you get is excercise. No points. It isn't allowed, it isn't a rule.

2) It is in the NCAA, but it would be 2 points, not one. Unless the guy stops and drop kicks it for one point (but drop kicking from anywhere is only allowed in the CFL, where there already is a way for a 1-0 score, using the rouge (point, single))[quote]

The last CFL game to end with a 1-0 score was played on Sunday October 30, 1966:

MONTREAL 1, Ottawa 0 - A single, scored on a wide field goal attempt In the fourth quarter by Peter Kempf, gave the Alouettes the win and gave the Alouettes their first .500 season since 1958. Kempf ended with 67 points for the season and a share of second place in the scoring race.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=qI ... %2C6932328
The 1966 Alouettes averaged only 11 points per game on offense, but still managed a 7-7 record and a berth in the Eastern Semi-Final playoffs.

rhickok1109 wrote:Are there no Detroit fans in here to respond to this thread?

The Lions were 5-for-15 with three different kickers through the first six games of the season.

That was also my point in the first response to the original post.

No doubt a case of having seen an interesting fact in the thread and not recalling who posted it... five of 15 was bad even 50 years ago, and sounds like the reason that the New York Giants had to sign Pete Gogolak away from the AFL.