If the NFL makes it so there's a better than 50% of making the 2-point conversion, why would anybody kick?  I bet that was the risk if the 2-point conversion was moved to the 1.  A simple off-tackle dive probably has a better than 50% chance of gaining a yard. 

 

Instead, what they've done is put a bit more strategy into the scoring.  Before, score 100 TDs and you'll make 99 or 100 of the PATs.  Now that number might be more like 94 or 95 with the PAT at the 15.  So, that means even a 47% success rate on the 2-pointer would match what your kicker could give you. 

 

Looked at another way, the most points you can get after 100 TDs, attempting the PAT every time, is 100.  That's the best you can do even if you are perfect.  But there's the potential for 200 points if you try the 2-point conversion every time.  To score more points than a perfect kicker, you would only need to convert 51% of your 2-point conversions. 

 

What if you could convert 60%, 70%, or more of your 2-point conversion attempts?  Would that be worth signing a specialty player?  Do you think Brady to Gronk could gain 2 yards 60% of the time?  Think of the demoralizing effect it could have on a team whose coach will only try PATs, to go against a team that likes to hang 8-point TDs on the scoreboard.

 

So we might see teams experiment with a 275-lb fullback or a 6'10" TE.  There may be a place again for the bruising back who gets reliable yardage after contact but can't break the long one.  We may see more gimmick plays, naked bootleg, flea-flicker, jump pass, shovel pass, etc. 

---