D. L. Hot-Flamethrower

On another tag, we have been talking about the Extra Point proposal from Goodell. It was suggested we have a new topic on the width of the goal posts-currently 18-6 , and the relationship to the overall place kicking in the NFL. Currently, Field Goal% is at an all time high with over 85% of all field goals made. We all know Extra Points are all but automatic at over 99.5%. I proposed reducing the goal posts first before eliminating it. Others also supported this view as well. I did a little research before starting this topic. The goal is to find how much change might be needed. A scatter plot of all field goals would be ideal. You could then, a la Homeruns Data of ballparks in baseball on ESPN, determine how much to reduce the width of the posts and the desired %made. This data was not available as far as I could tell, it has to exist somewhere. So...The current width in college and the NFL is the same 18-6. This was not always the case, the college width was 24-3 until 1990. Some extrapolation will be required later, but when the NCAA made this change FG% dropped from 67% to 60%. However, comparing the 5 years before to 5 years after tells a little different story. The drop was from 67% to 63%, only 4% points. OBVIOUSLY-doug. Therefore a reduction in the width of about 20% only gave about a 4% drop in FG%. I should also point out an omission, the NCAA also eliminated the use of a 1" tee at the time. Not sure how much impact this had, my guess is that it was slight because the kicking surfaces have improved so much. Extrapolation part: Changes to the goal post below: Reducing the goalposts 4.5' to 14' a reduction of 24%, or 5.5' to 13'a reduction of 30%, or 6.5' to 12'a reduction of 35%,and 7.5 to 11' a reduction of 41%. We are at 85% success rate in the current NFL, I would think something like a 70-75% rate would be better, made even 67%. When they were reduced in the 1990 NCAA, a 20% reduction brought about a change of 4%. Does this mean that if we reduced them 7.5' to 11' the drop would be something like 8-10% to somewhere in the 75-77% for the NFL. And, probably double that the first year to perhaps 65-69%? My gut tells me it will be more. Amd, a cut to 12' feet may be enough. An interesting point, the college data showed most of the drop in under 50 yard field goals! Longer field goals stayed practically the same. I would not have guessed this. Your thoughts? Bring it on! I would also add, that to obtain a larger reduction in FG%, you could place a hortizontal bar at a height of something like 10-12'. Pretty drastic - I know.

Try reducing the width and height of the goalposts first. The whole place kicking game is too easy. All the coaches rely on it too much. Lets have more fourth down attempts in opponents territory!

All I could think of watching Richard Sherman and Erin Andrews, was Dave Chappelle going, "I'm Rick James B word!"

AMEN!!!!!

That's all that matters. Your whats wrong with the world

That's all that matters! Grow the !@#$ up.

You can have that piece of ****. Id rather lose than have no brain

I'm surprised that Mosley would even be an option! Guy is listed at 6-1,232, he looks like a strong safety to me when I see him. Plus the fact he has been hurt, and is another of the Alabama seniors who has been beat up for 5 years. Not what we need next to Kiko.

Where is Evans?

Interesting prospect, I'd never heard of him.http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1754185/kyle-van-noy

I think this clearly reflects how bad the Browns job is perceived to be. No reflection on Pettine, but in reality, he is way down the list of candidates at this point in his career. Everyone else is saying f-you to Haslam. I just hope that a good coordinator who wants to be a head coach doesn't fall into a trap. Nobody will win, including The Bills. He should just use it as interviewing experience!

This is definetly the way to go!

And the Browns made the right move firing Belichik. Oh and Of course The Giants should have fired Coughlin instead of keeping him and that would have been the right move according to some of you guys. The only problem with your logic is of course, the Giants went on to win 2 supper bowls by being patient.

Fan patience with coaching staff= playoffs.

Just writing off a player who has shown ability at the highest level is a decision-making error. This can be a potential opportunity. As a matter of fact, I would favor attacking a perceived weakness with redundancy. Without getting in to a lot of decision-making philosophy, there is a fair amount of research stating that much of the risk today is self-inflicted. Over-optimization or efficiency creates unnecessary risk ,in the fact ,that all your eggs are in one basket. In the Nicks case, at the right cost, he could provide upside. Hedged with a top draft choice(Watkins, Evans, Benjamin, Ebron etc.), and this approach could prove successful for the Bills. The rest is good coaching, and good fortune (no guarantees). Some of the better organizations, ie NE seem to approach problems in this manner. The "ALL IN" approach is a long-term recipe for disaster. The other approach I am talking about requires more patience.

Really good thoughts! I don't care where, but we absolutely need a red zone target or two. The teams that are successful in this area all have guys who they can lob/fade to in an iso route. Maybe free agency offers this guy, I doubt it though. If that guy is available at 9, we should take him. If not trade down and garner draft picks.

"I think it is so funny how we forget this is a team sport. QB is a major part of the team, the biggest part, but this is still a team sport. People here can't grasp this pretty easy concept it seems" Amen. Another common sense view is always welcomed.

"They've got Mike Mayock and he's about as good as you'll find. I've also come around on Chris Collinsworth since he's toned down his douche factor. They know a lot about the game. " Yes ,2 more I would support bigger roles for!!

It seems that to get one of these jobs you either have to be full of yourself (Dilfer), a former star who isn't very bright (Faulk, Irvin), or full of yourself and a star (Lewis, Deion, Keyshawn etc.). Or an old has been front office type or coach. The act is tired and old. 4-5 of these guys hashing out the same things over and over. There has to be some better, more informed acts out there. Or keep fewer of these guys, get ride of the above ones. Why not Pat Kirwan(fresh approach), Aaron Schatz (different approach), or somebody new for crying out loud. The old boy kiss ass network at work again!!

I just heard Cowherd and Hasselbeck on the Radio, don't normally listen to ESPN. I cant believe these guys get paid to do what they do, which is spew BS. The conversation goes something like this, Cowherd " is it just me or has Aaron Rodgers only been able to win 1 playoff game in 3 years?" Hasselbeck" yeah and that was over Minnesota, he didnt' play well yesterday, and he was a big reason they lost!!" .Cowherd "you have to question his performance on the playoff, other than the Super Bowl year" Hasselbeck " yeah and we have to start considering how much these guys are paid, as far as what is left to build the rest of the team." Andy Dalton is only paid 750,000 a year, so the Bengals can put a really, really good team around him" Are you kidding me? If Rodgers had been on the Bengals and played the way he did yesterday, which was good (97.8 and QBR scrambled for first downs), they would have beaten San Diego by 2 touchdowns. Rodgers is worth every penny they are paying him...so is Dalton! It has become to easy for these lazy analysts and media hacks to fall back on the QBs. You can put Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Manning etc. on a team like Jax or Oak and they don't all of a sudden become Super Bowl contenders. You put these guys on a team with ordinary talent and they become playoff teams.ie Rodgers and GB. Likewise you put Andy Dalton on talented team, good enough to contend for a Super Bowl, and you get beat in the playoffs!

I don't like the cherry-picking about draft choices. You can do that for ANY team. At the same time, in total, the Bills draft choices in years prior to 2013 were indefensible. As for Andy Dalton, I believe if he had been the QB of the Bills the last 3 years, they would have finished 6-10.

"Not 1 free agent prior to June 1. Not 1 flipping one. You want a FA, sign Byrd. Everything else is overpriced garbage. You want to spend some $$? Then sign Glenn. Sign Wood. " We signed very useful guys like Lawson last March 13th!!

Andy Dalton=Ryan Fitzpatrick

"Dalton has taken his team to the playoffs three years in a row. What have the Bills QBs done? " It is a team game!!! Quarterbacks don't win and lose by themselves.

Andy Dalton is a very ordinary QB, he has a lot of weapons, a good line, and an excellent defense to support him. Context is very important, and he is in a situation setup for him to succeed. We need to do the same thing for EJ. Clearly, IMHO he has more upside than Dalton. The context they play in is very different right now. Keep improving the team...get some more playmakers. You can improve the lines in FA.