Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

We should not be kicking extra points.


MHS831

Recommended Posts

Since the extra point was pushed back to become a 35-yard attempt, the percentage of two point conversions needed to "break even" is 47.6%.  Gano sucks at extra points.  Contrarily, the percentage of converted 2-point conversions (on a study from 2017) was 48.8%. 

The percentage of extra points made is approximately 95% (2015 study), down over 4% from when they used to kick 20-yard extra points.  Gano, however, over the past 3 seasons has been BELOW 92% in each season.   Since the extra point is the equivalent of a 35-yard FG, it is important to note that Gano's career percentage from 30-39 yards is only 82.2%--his exact same career percentage from 40-49 yards.  However, in the last 4 years, Gano's average from 40-49 yards is actually higher than his average from 30-39 yards.  Gano struggles to execute kicks in the 30-39 range more than most kickers in the NFL.

So why are we kicking extra points?  It is stupid, mathematically. 

https://www.boydsbets.com/nfl-two-point-conversion-success-rate/

https://rileykolstefootball.com/2018/07/08/two-point-study/

http://www.nfl.com/player/grahamgano/71309/careerstats

It seems to me that if we spent more time working on the two-point conversion, not only would it help us in goal line situations, we would score more points going for 2 than kicking for 1 over the course of a season.  I realize there are other factors--like game situations where 2 points does not help you in the fourth quarter--in that case,  you kick. 

image.png.66f5f59f27d1a4f0d21fcd76d432cee4.png

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or we could simply move on and roll with a kicker worth a poo at kicking XP's. Are other teams having this much difficulty with this? This shouldn't even be a topic of discussion if we have a top paid kicker on the books. The offense has other things to worry about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you forget who our coach is?

Ron Rivera: Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe Play it safe ..........

Ron Rivera on the hotseat: Randomly get super aggressive at weird times with one of the most dynamic playmakers in NFL history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheRed said:

Or we could simply move on and roll with a kicker worth a poo at kicking XP's. Are other teams having this much difficulty with this? This shouldn't even be a topic of discussion if we have a top paid kicker on the books. The offense has other things to worry about.

In the last few years, he is averaging about 9 of 10 on extra points and he misses nearly 20% of FGs from 30-39 yards.  Than means we are (approximately) coming away with points in the red zone after stalling only about 8 of 10 times.  That is inexcusable.  You should be around 90% in that range. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am confused how a shorter kick, is less accurate than a longer kick? Does he kick it differently, or not as hard on shorter attempts? Does the ball curve differently on longer to where it finishes the curve cycle? I fingered when Kickers kick the ball, they kick with the same force rather long or short, or maybe they don't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at super bowl 38 and see how going for two went.

There is a reason most coaches don’t go for two. It works until it doesn’t and then you have to answer why you made a mistake. Pure math doesn’t account for circumstance or consequence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Devil Doc said:

I am confused how a shorter kick, is less accurate than a longer kick? Does he kick it differently, or not as hard on shorter attempts? Does the ball curve differently on longer to where it finishes the curve cycle? I fingered when Kickers kick the ball, they kick with the same force rather long or short, or maybe they don't?

All I can figure is the hook.  I notice he kicks extra points from the right hash--he does not have that option on FGs.  Does he line up as he would on a 50 yarder and kick the same way at 35?  If so, the ball does not have the time to come back around.  I kinda relate it to golf--some people are better with their five iron than their nine iron?  I dunno.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

In the last few years, he is averaging about 9 of 10 on extra points and he misses nearly 20% of FGs from 30-39 yards.  Than means we are (approximately) coming away with points in the red zone after stalling only about 8 of 10 times.  That is inexcusable.  You should be around 90% in that range. 

 

I'm not against going for 2 more, I think that's actually an aspect we could use work on. That I agree. In general we have either done well in the red zone or outright struggled over the years, not much wiggle room. That's an issue that has continued through different offensive coordinators.

As far as kicking, Rivera has held Gano back on multiple occasions the last few seasons from long range when we had an opportunity to put points on the board, it's plainly obvious what must happen. There is no pretty way out of this unfortunately. With the OL woes, we need some kind of stability in the kicking game, we cannot fug this up like we did with Butker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my view, the realistic expectation for this team to compete will start 2027.  At that time, I think we could be looking at the following (this is HIGHLY speculative):   QB:  You know, Bryce.  I am not a fan, but they don't ask me.  But there is reason for hope--and here it is.  Bryce will be entering his prime.  Since we are likely to pay him, there will be changes that I include throughout this exercise--I realistically speculate on what they are going to do with Bryce and then I realistically speculate on what means in terms of the cap and other positions. Bryce HAS IMPROVED.  The idea is that if you give him more weapons and protection, that will continue.  His career:   At this rate, if his growth continues, by 2027 we should expect nearly 30 TDs and about 12 Interceptions and a Rating of about 98.  His completion percentage should settle at 65-66% or so.  If that happens, you can win with it. The following stats demonstrate how the Panthers will be able to afford it (and re-sign Ickey) My guess is they will require about $60m per year. This is why rookies who can play are important.  It also helps us see the blueprint.  You may disagree, but this is the cruel realities of the salary cap. Robert Hunt:  Cut post June 1 and save $19m.  Who do you replace him with?  Ickey. Tershawn Wharton:  Cutting him saves nearly $15m.  We should all hope to see Aaron Hall (UDFA) make the roster and play well.  Regardless, this is a position we would likely have to address in the next draft. Trevin Moehrig:  Cutting Moehrig as the starting SS saves this team $16.5m.   Ransom will be on year 3 of a cheap rookie deal and should be more than ready to take the reins.  their styles are similar.  Furthermore, FS Wheatley (R, 4th round) will be starting. Taylor Moton:  So much depends on his knee, but I have an idea that he can play another 3 years.  extending him could save the team about $5m per year.  Cutting him outright would save the team about $21m. In the most drastic situation, we have to cut Moton and the other three players mentioned.   We would need (in all likelihood) a starting DT and RT.  It is possible that the DE would be addressed, but Wharton's production (so far) could be equaled by a rookie.  Look for a cut free agent and a 2027 draft pick here.  If you cut Moton, you save $21m, and that would be the only big hole to fill.  Having Ickey at RG gives you some depth at T, and Ickey could be the guy.  T could be pick in the 2027 draft (first round), fwiw.  It saves you $21m while costing you $5m, for example. We get younger, creating a core of Freeling, Hecht, and the RT first rounder in 2027) along with Ekownu (second contract in the $15m range, and Lewis, whose contract would be in the $16m range if not extended.)  The OL cuts (Hunt, Moton) would save $40m.  The OL would get younger and still solid with veterans at G.   By cutting Wharton (no brainer if his play stays the same) and Moehrig (good player--but we have Ransom on a rookie contract who would not be that much of a drop off--if any) in addition to Hunt and Moton, we would save over $70m in cap room. We would be able to give Bryce bag  and we would have enough to re-sign Ickey (if the knee is not too risky) to a Guard contract (probably at a discount, coming off that injury).  Furthermore, we could add a RT in the draft (or a RG if Ickey moves to RT) and that would be the only large hole to fill. Correct my logic if you see issues-- On defense, in addition to the aforementioned, Scott ($2m contract) is out, replaced by a 4th round rookie contract. CB Jackson's contract ($7.8m) expires and he is (possibly) replaced by a rookie contract.  At Edge, patrick Jones II's $10m contract expires and he is likely a reserve, and his role is absorbed by Phillips, Scourton, Princely, and possible an UDFA like Isaiah Smith or a 2027 draft pick.   These productive developmental players over the past 2 drafts will pay huge dividends.  On paper, I see the team getting much younger and possibly better while cutting nearly $100m and reallocating that money to get more production.          
    • If everything played out and that last thing happened, I probably just quit. 
×
×
  • Create New...