Safeties should be worth more than touchdowns

[Happy Panther]

As Alex Kirshner of SBNation’s Banner Society recently pointed out, Walter Camp’s foundational 1893 rulebook assigned 2 points to a safety without any real rationale. Unlike just about every other football rule (including the point values of touchdowns and field goals), the point value of a safety hasn’t been touched in the intervening 127 years. Kirshner argued that because harder, rarer sports feats are usually awarded more points, the safety should be worth a whopping 11.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...an-touchdowns/

[LinvilleGorge]

The NFL is currently doing everything they can to make the rules favor high flying, high scoring offenses. I wouldn't anticipate any changes to help defense anytime soon.

If anything needs changing right now, it's the fumbling out of the endzone equaling a turnover and touchback. That's one of the worst rules in all of sports.

[Eazy-E]

I’ve always felt it should be counted as a defensive touchdown. 6 points, kick the extra point or go for 2, and then a regular kickoff. No more keeping possession and the weird safety kickoff.

[MHS831]

I also read an article a while ago that stated FGs should be worth a higher number of points the longer they are--all worth three points, but a FG from 50+ is worth 4 points. 

 

[Snake]

It really should be changed to 3 pts and return of the ball because it's basically just a sack. 

[MHS831]

5 minutes ago, Eazy-E said:

I’ve always felt it should be counted as a defensive touchdown. 6 points, kick the extra point or go for 2, and then a regular kickoff. No more keeping possession and the weird safety kickoff.

 

Sorta tug of war rules.   The goal line should be where both teams score equally--who has the ball is immaterial.  Whose goal line that ball lands behind is not.

[Snake]

2 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I also read an article a while ago that stated FGs should be worth a higher number of points the longer they are--all worth three points, but a FG from 50+ is worth 4 points. 

 

That's just a laughable concept. Football is all about pushing your way down for a TD. No one wants to see FGs. Long distance FGs just mean your teams offense sucks. Now changing two point conversations to 4 points would be cool. 

[Snake]

Another cool concept would be instead of a coin flip each team would kick a unblocked FG. Whoever gets the longest distance gets ball or can take the ball in the second half. Would make kickers much more important. 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Snake said:

Another cool concept would be instead of a coin flip each team would kick a unblocked FG. Whoever gets the longest distance gets ball or can take the ball in the second half. Would make kickers must more important. 

Yeah, that's what everyone is tuning in to watch - a FG kicking contest. Yikes.

[Snake]

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, that's what everyone is tuning in to watch - a FG kicking contest. Yikes.

So just dumb luck is better. Let's just flip a coin which takes no skill at all. Brilliant. 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Snake said:

So just dumb luck is better. Let's just flip a coin which takes no skill at all. Brilliant. 

It's quick. No one wants to see FG kickers play horse until one misses.

[Snake]

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's quick. No one wants to see FG kickers play horse until one misses.

It would be two kicks. The longest would win. If both missed you could just give the ball to the visiting team. Two kicks would be quicker than one replay in the NFL to determine what is a catch so stop being a dick. It's just hypothetical. 

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, Snake said:

It would be two kicks. The longest would win. If both missed you could just give the ball to the visiting team. Two kicks would be quicker than one replay in the NFL to determine what is a catch so stop being a dick. It's just hypothetical. 

[Snake]

5 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said: