Silly Draft Question

[PatsDparty]

This is a question I always ask some of my friends, and get different answers. It may not be humanly possibly, but for sake of discussion, let's play along.

If there was a Kicker who could consistently hit FGs from 80 yards away, how high would you take him? Would you take him 1st overall? You would basically be able to score everytime you got the ball (obvious risk that he misses a FG and your D is backed up). Some people have said they'd take him 1st, others somewhere in the 1st round, just wondering people's opinions. As I said, its silly and very far fetched.

 

[WhiZa]

I would take a kicker #1 overall if it means scoring every time your on the field. Spend the rest of the money on defense and you can win it all.

 

[A.C Vegas]

nbever ever ever ever take a K in the first round no matter what only oakland is dumb enough to do that probaby 3rd round at the earliest

 

[jeffbiologist]

You have to play the %s. What % is he going to hit? Figuring that he would have to be alot better than 2/3 because that is the break even point(figure on the other team scoring every time from that close). If he hits 85-90%, SURE, first overall no problem. But as a kicker who hit 50yd FGs in high school, over 50yds you have to be exponentially stronger to gain small distances. There is a reason that 63 is the longest....It has to do with weather, air(IE Denver), and of course trajectory.
Just like there is a limit you can get in golf ball distance, same with football. Unless they change the type of ball it can never happen.

 

[My2Cents]

This is a question I always ask some of my friends, and get different answers. It may not be humanly possibly, but for sake of discussion, let's play along.

If there was a Kicker who could consistently hit FGs from 80 yards away, how high would you take him? Would you take him 1st overall? You would basically be able to score everytime you got the ball (obvious risk that he misses a FG and your D is backed up). Some people have said they'd take him 1st, others somewhere in the 1st round, just wondering people's opinions. As I said, its silly and very far fetched.

If you're the Jets or Bengals, you take him even if he's a chain smoker.
If you're Al Davis, you trade up for him. If you're anybody else, you wait and find him still on the board in round two.

 

[ALP]

u siad consistently...

if constistently means 90% + from 80 yds back, i would defenetely contemplate taking him 1 overall...

but it depends on the offense as well, if my offense is like the pats, where they can score TD's very easily, then no i wont

if i have any other offense, i prob would

if we had such a guy in the SB, we would have won

 

[NePatriots]

To me, if he hits 90% from 80 yards, he must be 95% + from 60 and in. I'd take that first round in a heartbeat.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Okay, he's consistent from 80, what is he at each intermediate stage down to extra points? Can he kickoff the way you want consistently? AV the dome stooge wasn't a hot commodity at 50, but he won games with his ice inside the 50. Your big leg needs a more thorough evaluation - but if he can be consistent from 0-80 in weather & domes, in crunch time or when it won't make a difference, yeh that's a #1 overall pick.

 

[Deus Irae]

That kicker would be a top ten pick. If he were available this year, he'd have gone #1.

Zero kickoff returns + 80 yard field goals = multiple wins per year.

 

[dryheat44]

We had this argument on football outsiders a couple of years back, where I maintained that a punter who could punt the ball to the 1 yard line with such hangtime as to be non-returnable would be the #1 pick in the draft.