Redskins sign kicker Neil Rackers

So now kickers are responsible for their own blocking. Got it.


I understand that he was inconsistent his first year, but wasn't David Akers when he was here? I'm sure guys like you were wanting him pushed out of town too. He did fine last year with kicks under his control (read...not blocked) so let's let the guy develop please.

Is there any evidence that kickers get better with age/experience? I'm not so sure how much developing a kicker can really do.

I would be curious to see the breakdown and percentages with each distance.

Ask and you shall receive. From last season:
Rackers:
18-29: 14/14, 100%
30-39: 10/11, 90.9%
40-49: 4/8, 50%
50+: 4/5, 80%
Gano:
18-29: 14/15, 93.3%
30-39: 5/9, 55.6%
40-49: 8/11, 72.3%
50+: 4/6, 66.7%

(source: Sports Illustrated)


EDIT: Formatting

Ask and you shall receive. From last season:
Rackers:
18-29 30-39 40-49 50+
14/14 10/11 4/8 4/5
100% 90.9% 50% 80%

Gano:
18-29 30-39 40-49 50+
14/15 5/9 8/11 4/6
93.3% 55.6% 72.3% 66.7%

(source: Sports Illustrated)

I wonder how those numbers shake out if blocked kicks are removed.

2010 NFL Player Kicking Stats - National Football League - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/kicking/sort/fieldGoalPct/year/2010)

go to kicking percentages: 2010: 68% worst in the league

2011: massive improvement: 3rd worst in the league at 75.6%


oh then the Sushi arguement: 74.2%, worst in the league last year for Pittsburgs. Guess I was right bout him too.

Gano numbers


(without blocks)


FGA - 41
FGM - 36 (add 5 due to blocks)


FG % - 87.8%




That's a 12% increase from the 75% he's currently at due to those blocks. You do realize if those 5 kicks aren't blocked he's ranked as one of the best FG kickers in the league? It's amazing what a 12% swing on your stats will do. From goat to hero.

oh so you automatically count the block field goals as makes? brillant.

Well with Gano's historical percentages, you should right?

Can't believe it hasn't been posted yet:

sZghatdM8mo

Gano's percentage is pretty bad. I thought it was interesting that he was near the top at the 40-49 range, while he is near the bottom or in the middle below that range. A low FG percentage shouldn't guarantee you a spot on the team, and I welcome competition. Still, I feel that Gano gets a hounded more for those blocked FG (which are not his fault).

In the end, I really don't want the team to depend on FGs anymore, so I am not going to get worked up over whether we should keep Gano or Rackers.

oh so you automatically count the block field goals as makes? brillant.

Well with Gano's historical percentages, you should right?

Well, probably makes more sense to take the attempts away, so 31 out of 36 non blocked attempts. Still gives Gano an 86%. That's not bad, but you may argue that he's responsible for half his blocks (too slow to the kick, too low a kicking angle) so then 31 out of 39, which would put him at 79%. I don't know where that puts him in terms of the league. In my mind, it certainly doesn't equate with an unchallenged spot on the team, but it also doesn't equate to being let go as a failed kicker.

I do remember the GB overtime game where he came on and won it, just one game, but it was an extremely clutch kick, and I think he has the make up to be a long term kicker in this league.

oh so you automatically count the block field goals as makes? brillant.

Well with Gano's historical percentages, you should right?

I don't care about Gano nor I am an apologist, but I do like to argue just for the sake of argument. Have you seen those blocked FGs? Have you seen the terrible job players in the line did in all of those situations? You make good points on the low FG pct and the missed FGs. And that alone should call for a FG competition...but just let the blocked FGs go.

If you want to call out mediocrity, see Will Montgomery getting blasted and allowing two FGs to be blocked in the Seattle game.