NFL

The game theory and play balancing of the kicking game is kinda interesting if you think about it. American Football is a game of ratcheting progress to a degree that no other football is, and if include Canadian with it (and maaaaaybe... if you squint... Rugby League), in a manner that no other football is. If you push a pile two more yards, you get to reset and do a set-piece from your new static location. If you manage to cobble together ten yards in four tries of this, you get four more. Field goals are a way to say "nice try, you got halfway there," and therefore there's a minigame, with such a different skillset that it's almost random, to see if your progress should be ensconced in the score. That's pretty unusual in sport, though I know Aussie rules has their wider goal post that gives you fewer points.

The challenge to balance it almost feels analogous to an online game's developers: do the rewards incent the kind of play that people want to see? There are obviously issues of attachment to legacy and physical safety that you have to manage in an IRL sport, but the parallels are neat to me. At an extreme, I guess if every team can eventually make 95% of their 60-yard field goals, does that disincentivize bold offensive play to a degree that fans will enjoy the games less? If so, what do you do? Make the FG 2-points? Ban FG attempts until you're in a certain zone? Narrow the goal posts? This last has been done before in the NFL, as has moving them from the front to the back of the end zone (also a player safety issue).