Jim Mullin
CFL.ca
Nothing in life should be as automatic as a convert in the Canadian Football League.
CFL placekickers made 364 of 366 converts in 2010. Hang your heads in shame Grant Shaw and Sandro DeAngelis for missing one of those fish in a barrel last year.
Over the last five seasons, there has been 1752 covert attempt with only seven misses.
| Three-point safety |
|
|
|
In the first installment of Jim Mulin’s five part series on rule changes he suggests changing the value of the safety. |
That’s a 99.6 conversion rate, which is as close to routine as can be imagined in the game of football.
In other words, it’s too damn easy.
The point after has to be more of a challenge. Many of you who have both feet encased in concrete when it comes to change will no doubt oppose any idea which alters the rules. To you I say, turn the page.
For people who are less than satisfied with a throw away play for points, the convert needs to be reinvented. The rule can be redrafted in a fashion which is unique to the Canadian game.
There should be strategic options either available to or forced upon the coaches.
It should be noted in American Football the ball is spotted at the two-yard line in the NFL or three-yard line at the amateur level. That makes for a 19 or 20-yard placekick for a point after. Not that using the American game as a template should always be a guide for change.
Here are some alternatives:
1. Move the convert to the 10.
PLUS: This would create a 17 yard place kick for a point, which is slightly more challenging for kickers, and could increase the failure rate, making coaches consider a two-point conversion more often.
MINUS: At 10 yards, unless the quarterback scrambles, it’s highly unlikely a play running could earn two points. The two-point attempt essentially becomes a second and long situation.
2. Multiple choice. Allow two-point conversions from the five yard-line, and one point conversions only from the 20 yard-line.
PLUS: There’s a fair bit of strategy to comb through here. Do you pick a five yard offensive play for two points or try for a 27-yard place kick? That would be a kick that is around an average field goal placement from 2010? Do the elements play a role? Does the consistency of your kicker play a role? What if the kick is wide and returned for two points?
At least there are questions and a real challenge where there previously was none. There is slightly more incentive to go for two points in the same way the CFL has since they lifted the rule from the NCAA in 1976.
It’s also a Made in Canada solution unique to the Canadian game.
MINUS: Traditionalists would hate it. Some would view a field goal length convert as ‘gimmicky’.
3. No more kicking. The World Football League of 1974-75 did away with kicked converts all together. “Action Points” could only be scored via a run or pass play and were worth one point on a seven point touchdown. The ball was placed on the five yard line for an Action Point. This rule was a revival of a 1968 preseason experiment by the NFL and American Football League.
PLUS: There would be no more predictable converts. The play after touchdown would be compelling to watch.
MINUS: Traditionalists would hate it. It would have an impact on the individual scoring race, as leading kickers have been called upon to contribute anywhere from 35 to 55 extra points in a season.
So there are some new ideas for you to chew over or spit up, depending on your position on rule changes.
