Simple question:
What is the minimum value of X that would make the following proposition true?
If the worst team in the league had a field goal kicker that was automatic from inside X yards, they would immediately be the favorite to win the championship.
Some things to consider as you formulate an answer:
(1) How much does the answer change when we consider high school vs. college vs. NFL. The genesis for this question is the fact that the high school we live behind has a kid this year who is expected to routinely make 40 yarders. That’s a huge advantage in high school, where many teams are going for it (and failing 90% of the time) on 4th and goal from the opponents 9 yard line. One the other hand, the disparity between individual high school teams is much higher than the disparity between the best and worst NFL teams (with college in the middle); therefore, a massive advantage at kicker in the NFL (say, someone who could make 80 yarders) is likely to translate better. There are high school teams that are so weak that even a guaranteed 3 points on each possession would not make them a favorite over state-champion level teams. Bonus question: at what distance X would a college team with said kicker become competitive with an NFL team?
(2) I’m almost positive that the answer for the NFL is always less than 117, but I’m not certain. If the ’76 Bucs got three points every time they got the ball, could the ’07 Pats score enough to beat them? I don’t think so, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility. Still, I would think that in the vast majority of cases, the NFL answer must be less than 80, and probably less than 70. But I’m open to arguments that it’s as low as the mid-50’s or higher than 117 (i.e. not possible)(side note: can you attempt a field goal from inside your own endzone? Where is the ball spotted if you miss?)
(3) How sensitive is the answer to the value of the rest of the team? That is, what portion of your salary cap space in the NFL could you give up to get the kicker at distance X? One reason kickers aren’t paid like QBs is that there is little difference between the 3rd best kicker and the 30th best kicker. Once you don’t have the very best or worst, you basically have the same thing. (As opposed to an alternate theory, that kickers aren’t that valuable because kicking isn’t that important to winning. That’s wrong, I think, and if we had serious differentiation at the top end, it would be empirically proven, I think).
(4) How much would a success rate less than 100% change things? For instance, if you were only 75% from 95 yards, that’s a problem, because any miss is basically giving the other team somewhere between 3 and 7 points.
