Attention Football Fans, PAT likely to change

[Carsman]

"Point-After-Touchdown" could feature new ways of scoring.
The league’s 32 teams agreed—almost unanimously—that the point after touchdown was passé, and had to go. It was too automatic.

It was said, the league can’t go another year with a 99.6 percent extra-point efficiency—the league average for the past three years. No real excitement anymore.

This is what was said to be the most likely way the league will amend how teams can score after a touchdown:

Teams will have a choice whether to go for one or two points after a touchdown, from different distances.

If the offensive team chooses to kick for one point, the scrimmage line will move from the 2-yard-line to the 15-yard line, making it a 32- or 33-yard attempt.

If the offensive team chooses to go for two points, the scrimmage line will be either the 1-1/2 or 2-yard line. Putting it at the 1-1/2 or leaving it at the 2 would increase the chances of a real football play with some drama.
The defensive team would be able to score two points by either blocking the PAT and returning it downfield to the end zone, or by intercepting the two-point attempt and running it back, or recovering a fumble on the two-point play and returning it all the way.


There will be those who don’t want the scoring system to change, because of tradition, or the attitude that football’s not broken, so why fix it? But the PAT is brokenand cries out to be fixed. It’s simply not a competitive play anymore. Fifteen teams have not missed a PAT this decade. Doing nothing would be the mistake.

So what do you think, should the PAT be updated?

[Duchess]

So what do you think, should the PAT be updated?

I don't care one way or another.

[Midwest Spy]

I think changing it is a good idea.

[HairOfTheDog]

When the 3-pointer was proposed for basketball, I thought it would hamper a traditionally great and exciting game.

I was wrong; the game is much more exciting and strategic as a result of that change.

I don't watch enough football or know enough about the management impacts of such a change to feel strongly either way. But, the PAT is such a predictable play that immediately after a touch-down is usually when I make a fridge run or bathroom break during the play-off games.

[Carsman]

When the 3-pointer was proposed for basketball, I thought it would hamper a traditionally great and exciting game.

I was wrong; the game is much more exciting and strategic as a result of that change.

I don't watch enough football or know enough about the management impacts of such a change to feel strongly either way. But, the PAT is such a predictable play that immediately after a touch-down is usually when I make a fridge run or bathroom break during the play-off games.

Exactly, it's just about a given point, so changing it up somewhat and making it more difficult is kind of a good idea! Sometimes games are won by just "1" point, so.

[Jimbone]

I don't mind the change, but the math says the kicking the extra point still will make the most sense...

The current extra point is made 99.6% of the time when kicked currently. Field goals from the 15 yard line are made 94% of the time.

Is a 5-6% difference going to lead that many more coaches to line up and go for two points instead, which are converted at a rate of 65.5% from the one yard line... 46.9% from the two yard line?

Not sure it will have the intended effect. I think coaches will still be considering points on the board more important than fan or league satisfaction.

[Midwest Spy]

In rain or snow and as the season moves into November and December (for outdoor games) you'll see more consideration given to the 2-pt conversion.

It'll be fun.