Brandon Fields cut

[MikeO]

You're right I have no vision into the future to know exactly how many FG's rookie kicker might miss relative to how many FG's Sturgis might miss.  Its called an estimate for the sake of qualifying my original point, and accuracy is not a requirement for future speculation.

no it just makes your point silly and laughable. Sturgis was the 27th ranked kicker. You make it sound like the Fins are replacing a superstar IF they do replace him. They aren't.

[Rich]

We all know this is false, but this is exactly what I mean.

I am aware of the importance of field position, but let's be realistic - guys run the ball out of the end zone now.  What's the difference if you run it out and get tackled on the 23 or if you don't let them return it and its placed on the 20.

Are you prepared to risk 5% of your FG's in exchange for 3 yards of field position?

It seems you are not aware that Caleb Sturgis was near the bottom of the league in field goal percentage two years in a row...

[Pappy13]

I am aware of the importance of field position, but let's be realistic - guys run the ball out of the end zone now.

Not if it's kicked through the endzone they don't. Franks has the leg to put it through the endzone and not allow a return.

What's the difference if you run it out and get tackled on the 23 or if you don't let them return it and its placed on the 20.

The difference is they can't take it back 100 yards. It's not the return to the 23 you are worried about it's the missed tackle that allows a TD that you are worried about.

[Rich]

Franks is a risk, his field goal percentage in college was not good. But it isn't as if being the 27th best kicker in the NFL equals job security for Sturgis.

[Brian Fein]

Franks is a risk, his field goal percentage in college was not good. But it isn't as if being the 27th best kicker in the NFL equals job security for Sturgis.

Fine but if this guy is potentially WORSE than Sturgis, he could be the 32nd best kicker in the NFL.

But, hey, he gets a lot of touchbacks!

If its me, I teach my other 10 guys on special teams how to tackle and grab a kicker that can hit a dime from 50 yards.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Fine but if this guy is potentially WORSE than Sturgis, he could be the 32nd best kicker in the NFL.

Or he might be better.  From what I am reading he has progressively gotten better.  A guy like Franks (div III) school potentially has greater upside than a kicker with the exact same stats from a div I school.

A div iii school has less resources and Franks probably didn't get much coaching, he got some but not the level a player gets in the NFL or div I.  Assuming the kid is coachable and his past performance is based on raw uncoached talent, he has the potential be the #1 kicker in the NFL. 

With Sturgis he now has two years and three camps of experience.  While he might improve slightly, where he is now is pretty close to his ceiling.

[MikeO]

Fine but if this guy is potentially WORSE than Sturgis, he could be the 32nd best kicker in the NFL.

But, hey, he gets a lot of touchbacks!

If its me, I teach my other 10 guys on special teams how to tackle and grab a kicker that can hit a dime from 50 yards.

You seem to think Franks has had a worse training camp than Sturgis. You clearly haven't been paying attention Brian

[Dolphster]

There has always been the mentality in football that kickers are not valued and a dime a dozen.  I've never understood that.  Given how many games are decided by a point or two, a quality kicker can make a big difference on a team.  I don't know enough about the new guys (at punter or the rookie kicker) to have a valuable opinion on the Fins specific situation.  But I do know that the importance of kickers is often overlooked in football.  I get it that they are looked down on by the other players for not being "real athletes", but that doesn't make them less important to the success of the team. 

[Rich]

Fine but if this guy is potentially WORSE than Sturgis, he could be the 32nd best kicker in the NFL.

But, hey, he gets a lot of touchbacks!

If its me, I teach my other 10 guys on special teams how to tackle and grab a kicker that can hit a dime from 50 yards.

So far, he has performed as well or better than Sturgis in camp and in games. In games, he has hit everything if I remember correctly.

So, if he is performing as good or better and he is DEFINITELY better at kick offs, I don't understand why this is even a worth discussion.

[Rich]

By the way, if you look at the college stats for Franks, he missed a lot of field goals yes, but he was also asked to kick a lot of field goals from 50 yards plus and that is where most of his misses came.

50+ yard field goals are typically the exception to the rule for kickers, not the majority of the kicks attempted.

[masterfins]

So far, he has performed as well or better than Sturgis in camp and in games. In games, he has hit everything if I remember correctly.

So, if he is performing as good or better and he is DEFINITELY better at kick offs, I don't understand why this is even a worth discussion.

I think the reason for the discussion is that with Sturgis you know what you are getting - the guy's not a super star, but he's not terrible.  Sure he'll miss some longer kicks, but he's pretty reliable on the ones that should be made.  With any new kicker you just don't know how he will turn out.  There is nothing like REAL NFL games on the road to rattle kickers, especially when the game is on the line.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I think the reason for the discussion is that with Sturgis you know what you are getting - the guy's not a super star, but he's not terrible.  Sure he'll miss some longer kicks, but he's pretty reliable on the ones that should be made.  With any new kicker you just don't know how he will turn out.  There is nothing like REAL NFL games on the road to rattle kickers, especially when the game is on the line.

The guy is in the bottom 20% of the league on FG and is one of the few kickers who can't consistently boot it out of the end zone.  If the question is Sturgis vs the guy behind door #2, you take door #2. 

[masterfins]

The guy is in the bottom 20% of the league on FG and is one of the few kickers who can't consistently boot it out of the end zone.  If the question is Sturgis vs the guy behind door #2, you take door #2. 

If Sturgis was making BIG money I'd be all for it.  However, I don't think it's a good idea to go into the season with TWO rookie kickers.  If the new guys were both to perform poorly it could cost a game(s).

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

If Sturgis was making BIG money I'd be all for it.  However, I don't think it's a good idea to go into the season with TWO rookie kickers.  If the new guys were both to perform poorly it could cost a game(s).

Exactly why NOW is the time to do it.  If one of them preforms poorly it could cost you games.  Find out what you got. If Franks sucks replace him next year.  You are gonna have to replace Sturgis next year if you keep him. 

[Rich]

I think the reason for the discussion is that with Sturgis you know what you are getting - the guy's not a super star, but he's not terrible.

Sturgis is below 80% for his career and has been ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league both seasons he has played.

If you do not consider this terrible, what do you consider terrible?