Peter King's Four Point Stance Makes Him an Idiot of Crap

(to comment, click the green number to the right of the title above)

Peter King unrolled another lame one today:

Make long field goals more valuable: Simple: Any field goal 50 yards or further is worth four points. No traditionalist would want it. But no traditionalist wanted the three-point shot in basketball, and look how much fun it is to see Dwyane Wade or Vince Carter go wild from 28 feet. Electric stuff. Imagine the Lincoln Financial Field crowd at a 14-10 game, Philadelphia trailing Dallas, late fourth quarter, Eagles' ball, fourth-and-six at the Cowboy 35. "A-kers! A-kers! A-kers!" the crowd shouts, serenading David Akers as he runs on the field. And now the game's in his hands. Or on his foot. It'd add value to the long field goal, and make more games competitive late.

Most of his suggestions in this article were tolerable. but the suggestion that 50+ yard field goals should be worth more points is further evidence that Peter King either smokes crack, doesn't know football from a hole in the ground, or both.

While he describes the advent of the three point shot as an initially disliked, but now welcome addition to the sport of basketball, an implementation of this type of scoring would be devastating to football.

Imagine this scenario, if a 50+ yard field goal was worth 4 points. The clock is winding down below 30 seconds left in regulation. Team A is behind by four points, and has the ball on the 40, essentially a 57 yard field goal. What team A wants at this point is to be between the 33-35 yard line, a 50-52 yard goal for a four point field goal to send the game into OT.

So they need between 5-7 yards. Not more, not less. What is the defense of team B supposed to do? Fall over and let them have eight yards, ruining their chance for 4 points? I suppose they could always have a longer snap, but that would screw with kicker's heads for sure, and make the whole situation a little more prone for error. A longer snap has greater chance to miss.

What if the player from team A with the ball gets close to the 33-35 yard line, and appears ready to down it? If the defender from team B is behind, should he try to push them FORWARD to the 32?

NO. That's not football. Football is about the gridiron, about defending your turf and attacking theirs. IN NO WAY should you ever want the opponent closer to your goal line. Never. It's part of football menatality. To create a magic zone in the middle of the field, that the defense either needs to keep them from crossing, or to push them beyond, goes against the fundamental principles of football.

Defenders would always have to worry about that special range during the whole game. Offenses would be doing "catch and kneel" drills in preparation for that scenario. Which is just sissy. When you catch, it is pure football to try to get to the end zone. Wetting your pants and dropping at the 33 is for (felines). Get closer to the goal, that's what football is all about.

Another result of this is the increased emphasis on the kicking game, which is just WRONG. The kicking part of football is ancillary to offense and defense. That's why special teams players are paid less, and 2nd and 3rd stringers make the bulk the unit. Increased emphasis on kicking is not good for football. In other countries, that is all they cheer for, but they are all limp wristed soccer lovers, and kicking is all they know. But this is American Football, and it built on running around and beating each other's brains out, not KICKING.

I hope I made my point.