Changing the Extra Point

Not sure what you mean. There would be no more rushing plays under this scenario than we see currently, while there would be hundreds of fewer kicking plays every season.

I was talking about this portion of your post...
"but allow a team to try for an additional point by running what is currently a 2 point conversion play."

I assume that more two point attempts would happen than currently happen, under that scenario.
 
I was talking about this portion of your post...
"but allow a team to try for an additional point by running what is currently a 2 point conversion play."

I assume that more two point attempts would happen than currently happen, under that scenario.
Why? The risk would be even greater than today, as the extra point is already on the board. Teams would be risking a point already on the scoreboard.
 
Why? The risk would be even greater than today, as the extra point is already on the board. Teams would be risking a point already on the scoreboard.

In my opinion, the "extra point" would not already be on the board if the TD is worth 7 points. The attempt at the extra point becomes a more dangerous play than it is today, should a team decide to attempt the extra point by running an additional play. Granted, the stakes are higher since you could actually lose a point - and the stakes are higher in that a player injury is more likely than on a kicking play. We may never agree -- that's just how I see it.
 
Last edited:
That's just the thing. Some folks feel that when points are as automatic and as little of a challenge as the PAT is, it is pointless, and therefore is broke. I don't have the 2013 stats on it, but in 2012, among 5,425 FBS attempts, 5,234 (96.5%) were made. That's one miss every 28.4 attempts. One miss every 4.3 games. That's pretty pointless. Why not just make a TD worth 7 and be done with it?

I like the idea of leaving the PAT, but adding a 2pt option from the 20yd line (37yd attempt). Maybe even a 3pt option from the 35 (52yd attempt).

Um... I think the 1999 team might disagree with that thought process.

http://www.rolltide.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/1999-2000/bama05.html

We both scored TDs in our Overtimes. Florida missed their XP; Alabama missed ours, but a penalty against Florida gave us another shot, which we won. One of the best games I can remember. Final Score - Alabama 40, Florida 39
 
In my opinion, the "extra point" would not already be on the board if the TD is worth 7 points. The attempt at the extra point becomes a more dangerous play than it is today, should a team decide to attempt the extra point by running an additional play. Granted, the stakes are higher since you could actually lose a point - and the stakes are higher in that a player injury is more likely than on a kicking play. We may never agree -- that's just how I see it.

Or we could require that teams have to run the XP play within 10 seconds after the touchdown
 
Um... I think the 1999 team might disagree with that thought process.

http://www.rolltide.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/1999-2000/bama05.html

We both scored TDs in our Overtimes. Florida missed their XP; Alabama missed ours, but a penalty against Florida gave us another shot, which we won. One of the best games I can remember. Final Score - Alabama 40, Florida 39

I remember that game vividly - awesome game and a great ending for Bama.

I'm sure you also remember the twist of fate that caused us to lose to Michigan in the Orange Bowl that season. Crushing!
 
I quite like the rugby conversion, you can kick the conversion from whatever distance you like, but the spot is pulled straight back from where the TD is scores. Dive for the pylon? Good for you, now your kicker hates you.
 
It would require younger coaches or more 2 point attempts. But in all seriousness I like the game the way it is,different skill set instead of all Brawn keeps the mental part of the game in place.
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads