PATs will be moved from the two-yard line to the 15-yard line. 2 point conversions will stay at the 2.

Defenses will also have the ability to score on 2 point conversions, as well.

---

"It was Blake Bortles the whole time. They believe in this kid. He reminds me a bit of a young Ben Roethlisberger." ~Mike Mayock

Im fine with these changes. Not much else to add

---

:thanks: Extra Life 2016 is 11/05/16 :thanks:

I don't understand the point. Perhaps it is that players get hurt on a worthless play, but we can't get rid of the play, so let's make it slightly less worthless. Won't stop players from getting hurt, but fret not, the play has more meaning now.


And if the defense can score on a two point conversion now, why not on the one point try, as well. Could add a little more meaning to the now slightly less worthless play.

---

Heard an interesting thing yesterday on the radio. They said Chip may have seen this coming so he signed Tebow as a 2 pt specialist. Honestly it may not be that bad of an idea to bring him in on the 2 yard line and power it up the middle. Based off his time in Oregon, Chip showed that he loves going for two.

---

I don't understand the point. Perhaps it is that players get hurt on a worthless play, but we can't get rid of the play, so let's make it slightly less worthless. Won't stop players from getting hurt, but fret not, the play has more meaning now.


And if the defense can score on a two point conversion now, why not on the one point try, as well. Could add a little more meaning to the now slightly less worthless play.

 

It's my understanding that the defense can score (2 points) on a blocked extra-point attempt.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

It's my understanding that the defense can score (2 points) on a blocked extra-point attempt.

You're right, according to this.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://tbo.com/sports/bucs/nfl-to-change-extra-point-kicks-to-longer-distance-20150519/?page=1'>http://tbo.com/sports/bucs/nfl-to-change-extra-point-kicks-to-longer-distance-20150519/?page=1</a>

---

I don't understand the point. Perhaps it is that players get hurt on a worthless play, but we can't get rid of the play, so let's make it slightly less worthless. Won't stop players from getting hurt, but fret not, the play has more meaning now.


And if the defense can score on a two point conversion now, why not on the one point try, as well. Could add a little more meaning to the now slightly less worthless play.

The point IS that its a worthless/boring play. Now its slightly more exciting, and could potentially lead to more 2 point tries, which is infinitely more exciting then a PAT.

---

I don't understand the point. Perhaps it is that players get hurt on a worthless play, but we can't get rid of the play, so let's make it slightly less worthless. Won't stop players from getting hurt, but fret not, the play has more meaning now.


And if the defense can score on a two point conversion now, why not on the one point try, as well. Could add a little more meaning to the now slightly less worthless play.

 

The point is that TV viewers will sit through the commercial after the TD since the PAT now has a reasonable failure rate.


 

It's always about the money.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Did they thin the FG posts? Thought that was a possibility

---

I love it 

---

The point is that TV viewers will sit through the commercial after the TD since the PAT now has a reasonable failure rate.


 
It's always about the money.

I don't understand. The PAT comes right after a TD, with no commercial in between. Perhaps you're thinking of after that, where they go from score to commercial, back to kickoff, then back to commercial.

---

The point IS that its a worthless/boring play. Now its slightly more exciting, and could potentially lead to more 2 point tries, which is infinitely more exciting then a PAT.

So, I nailed it then, yes?

---

Heard an interesting thing yesterday on the radio. They said Chip may have seen this coming so he signed Tebow as a 2 pt specialist. Honestly it may not be that bad of an idea to bring him in on the 2 yard line and power it up the middle. Based off his time in Oregon, Chip showed that he loves going for two.

There are any number of 230-lb. running backs who can take a snap out of the wildcat and pile-drive it in. Tebow was signed as a camp arm, not a gimmick player.

 

I wish the rule had changed to move two-point attempts to the one yard line. That would really tempt coaches to go for two.

---

Heard an interesting thing yesterday on the radio. They said Chip may have seen this coming so he signed Tebow as a 2 pt specialist. Honestly it may not be that bad of an idea to bring him in on the 2 yard line and power it up the middle. Based off his time in Oregon, Chip showed that he loves going for two.

The Eagles actually proposed a rule where extra points are moved back to the 15yard line but move the 2point conversions to the 1yard, if that had come in Tebow definitely would of been extremely valuable.

---

There are any number of 230-lb. running backs who can take a snap out of the wildcat and pile-drive it in. Tebow was signed as a camp arm, not a gimmick player.


I wish the rule had changed to move two-point attempts to the one yard line. That would really tempt coaches to go for two.

Tebow as a camp arm vs Tebow as a gimmicky power back at the goal line? Hmmm I'll go with my guess.


Something tells me that Kelly did sign Tebow for his arm.

---

I don't understand the point. Perhaps it is that players get hurt on a worthless play, but we can't get rid of the play, so let's make it slightly less worthless. Won't stop players from getting hurt, but fret not, the play has more meaning now.


And if the defense can score on a two point conversion now, why not on the one point try, as well. Could add a little more meaning to the now slightly less worthless play.

I fail to see why it is a worthless play. Any play where a point can be earned or defended is hardly worthless.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

I fail to see why it is a worthless play. Any play where a point can be earned or defended is hardly worthless.

Well, that really isn't my word. Just my speculation as to why the NFL decided to change it after all of these years. There was talk from the league a year or two ago about eliminating it all together, right? And at issue was players being hurt on a play that was as mathematically close to a guarantee as possible.

---

Well, that really isn't my word. Just my speculation as to why the NFL decided to change it after all of these years. There was talk from the league a year or two ago about eliminating it all together, right? And at issue was players being hurt on a play that was as mathematically close to a guarantee as possible.

The issue of being hurt has been kickoffs. Guys getting a full steam created some big collissions. I don't think so much the PAT. That is why the league moved the spot of kickoffs up, less returns.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

The issue of being hurt has been kickoffs. Guys getting a full steam created some big collissions. I don't think so much the PAT. That is why the league moved the spot of kickoffs up, less returns.

This is from an article from early last year. I'm putting quotation marks around the part from the article as I don't see any post tools like add a quote.


"NFL kickers have made a really, really high rate of kicks over the past few years. The extra point is essentially automatic but there's still risk of injury that comes with the play.


Rob Gronkowski, who was injured blocking for an extra point during a Patriots blowout of the Colts, comes immediately to mind. That may explain why Pats coach Bill Belichick proposed the change, citing the lack of "competitive" nature within the extra point."

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24501405/nfl-experimenting-with-extra-points-from-20-yard-line-during-preseason'>http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24501405/nfl-experimenting-with-extra-points-from-20-yard-line-during-preseason</a>

---

This is from an article from early last year. I'm putting quotation marks around the part from the article as I don't see any post tools like add a quote.


"NFL kickers have made a really, really high rate of kicks over the past few years. The extra point is essentially automatic but there's still risk of injury that comes with the play.


Rob Gronkowski, who was injured blocking for an extra point during a Patriots blowout of the Colts, comes immediately to mind. That may explain why Pats coach Bill Belichick proposed the change, citing the lack of "competitive" nature within the extra point."

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24501405/nfl-experimenting-with-extra-points-from-20-yard-line-during-preseason'>http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24501405/nfl-experimenting-with-extra-points-from-20-yard-line-during-preseason</a>

I don't understand the risk of injury thing. The risk of injury is on any play whether it be an extra point, or 3rd and 7 from the plus 43. It's football. To cite something like that is simply an excuse as to why some would like to abolish, or change what a current rule is.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"