The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 01, 2008, 06:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,593
Let's hope not. That has to be the most convoluted of all differences between the codes. Consider than the concept of a PAT is that the team that has scored a TD (only a TD) is rewarded with the opportunity to "try" and add another point, by meeting certain conditions.

The defense has not earned any reward opportunity, other than the fact they have the opportunity to prevent the scoring team from adding these bonus point(s). Why should the team that has allowed their opponent to score a TD be afforded any opportunity to score themselves?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 01, 2008, 06:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,305
Just playing devil's advocate since I work under NCAA rules only but...

The extra point is danged near automatic now. So it is almost a gimmee. Why not make the offense be somewhat concerned that an error on their part could result in a score by B?
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 01, 2008, 11:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXMike View Post
Just playing devil's advocate since I work under NCAA rules only but...

The extra point is danged near automatic now. So it is almost a gimmee. Why not make the offense be somewhat concerned that an error on their part could result in a score by B?
Thast's an argument for abolishing the try, not glorifying it.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 01, 2008, 11:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc View Post
Let's hope not. That has to be the most convoluted of all differences between the codes. Consider than the concept of a PAT is that the team that has scored a TD (only a TD) is rewarded with the opportunity to "try" and add another point, by meeting certain conditions.

The defense has not earned any reward opportunity, other than the fact they have the opportunity to prevent the scoring team from adding these bonus point(s). Why should the team that has allowed their opponent to score a TD be afforded any opportunity to score themselves?
I agree for the same reasons, and beyond that I'd like to see the try abolished. 2-way scoring is going in the exact wrong direction.

Eliminating the try would considerably shorten the rule book, simplify scoring, shorten games, and finally get rid of something that was on an asymptotic trend toward elimination until it was reversed 50 years ago. The try is a way to decide games via a fluke. No other major game (unless it's a relative -- rugby) provides an opp'ty for a minor score following a major score.

Robert
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 02, 2008, 05:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman View Post
Eliminating the try would considerably shorten the rule book, simplify scoring, shorten games, and finally get rid of something that was on an asymptotic trend toward elimination until it was reversed 50 years ago. The try is a way to decide games via a fluke. No other major game (unless it's a relative -- rugby) provides an opp'ty for a minor score following a major score.

Robert
Where do you get the info from re the trend towards eliminating the try. I do not read it that way in Nelson's book. The try has been in since the game's inception (I suspect owing to the game's spinning off from rugby). I see where there were many discussions and changes related to where try would be attempted from and point values but nothing related to the elimination of the try.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 02, 2008, 06:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXMike View Post
Where do you get the info from re the trend towards eliminating the try. I do not read it that way in Nelson's book. The try has been in since the game's inception (I suspect owing to the game's spinning off from rugby). I see where there were many discussions and changes related to where try would be attempted from and point values but nothing related to the elimination of the try.
The try originally started as a continuation from a punt-out (and potentially a series of punt-ons), so abolishing that (which was done earlier in Rugby Union than in American or Canadian football) reduced the try to a much simpler and less time consuming affair. I call that a step toward elimination.

Then, the fact that the try became a kind of digression from the game, rather than a link in a scoring effort, reduced its importance, so I call that another step toward elimination.

The reduction in scoring value of the try vs. the touchdown that caused it to be awarded, I call a step toward elimination. From the time an unconverted try first got a scoring value, until the 2 point conversion was introduced, that ratio had declined from 2:1 to 1:6 -- a factor of 12 -- so is it much of a stretch to project that trend down to 0?

Robert
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NFHS SB Rules Survey Andy Softball 11 Fri May 23, 2008 10:05pm
NFHS Survey Grail Basketball 29 Tue Feb 12, 2008 09:05pm
NFHS Survey tjones1 Basketball 25 Tue Feb 20, 2007 10:32am
Another Pay Survey WhistlesAndStripes Football 17 Tue May 30, 2006 03:29pm
NFHS Survey Grail Basketball 13 Fri Feb 24, 2006 01:51pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1