Most boring play in football?  Did you miss the John Carney extra point?  Because he did, and that made for one of the most memorable moments in Jags History.  Assuming you are a Jags fan, I'd think you would remember it.  If not, I posted it in this very topic.

 

You must not watch many sports if you think it's the most boring play in all of sports.  Cricket is the most boring play in all of sports.  

 

Don't forget this: What if not PATs had been scored earlier in the game? If the PAT did not exist, the score would not be 20-19.

---

I keep seeing people state change for the sake of change but the reason they are talking about changing it is because the extra point is virtually a gimme play and very boring with no real drama. You may not agree with changing it, but they have a reason for wanting to change it and it isn't changing it for the sake of it. It is changing it to make it more exciting and to add real skill to the extra point(s). As usual, if someone doesn't agree with pirk the almighty he has to result to belittling.

---

Most boring play in football? Did you miss the John Carney extra point? Because he did, and that made for one of the most memorable moments in Jags History. Assuming you are a Jags fan, I'd think you would remember it. If not, I posted it in this very topic.


You must not watch many sports if you think it's the most boring play in all of sports. Cricket is the most boring play in all of sports.

99.9% of the time it is the most boring play in football. You can always find an example where it changed the outcome, but extremely rare.

---

I keep seeing people state change for the sake of change but the reason they are talking about changing it is because the extra point is virtually a gimme play and very boring with no real drama. You may not agree with changing it, but they have a reason for wanting to change it and it isn't changing it for the sake of it. It is changing it to make it more exciting and to add real skill to the extra point(s). As usual, if someone doesn't agree with pirk the almighty he has to result to belittling.

 

I agree 100 percent. However, the NFL sometimes disagrees with its fans on what changes make the game better.

---

99.9% of the time it is the most boring play in football. You can always find an example where it changed the outcome, but extremely rare.

 

Guess we should just stop playing once teams go up by 21 points.  After that you'll always find an example where the outcome was changed, but extremely rare.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Guess we should just stop playing once teams go up by 21 points. After that you'll always find an example where the outcome was changed, but extremely rare.

Apples and oranges comparison. I get why people want to keep it. I understand the tradition aspect. I'm simply saying that the NFL gave a reason for wanting to change it and it isn't changing it for the sake of it

---

It's not apples and oranges though.  Many fans leave when the score gets out of hand -- home team winning or losing.  Players of both teams continue to play and put themselves at risk for injury.  Therefore there is a reason for wanting to change it.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

It's not apples and oranges though. Many fans leave when the score gets out of hand -- home team winning or losing. Players of both teams continue to play and put themselves at risk for injury. Therefore there is a reason for wanting to change it.

Yes, it is. Most obvious difference is you are making the argument that when a team goes down by 21 then the game should end since most teams don't come back. The extra point would be replaced and both teams get the same opportunity. The game isn't ending. It isn't the same thing hence apples to oranges comparison.

---

Yes, it is. Most obvious difference is you are making the argument that when a team goes down by 21 then the game should end since most teams don't come back. The extra point would be replaced and both teams get the same opportunity. The game isn't ending. It isn't the same thing hence apples to oranges comparison.

 

Both teams get the same opportunity to go up by 21.  

 

Most teams make the extra point (except the ones that don't)

Most teams won't make a comeback from 21 point deficit (mercy rule)

 

Heck getting rid of the extra point does nothing but take away a 'boring' part of the game.  Mercy rule would preserve player health.  You could even make it 24 points and the game must be in the 3rd quarter just to prevent too quick of games.


I mean, I don't know about you -- but I've never sat through an extra point attempt, and thought "My god, won't they get this over with?"


I have sat through a game with a huge deficit and thought "Gee, why won't this just end?"

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I suppose what's being overlooked and curiously left out of scope is how often teams use this opportunity to go for two.

 

Taking that option away has a drastic affect on strategy when teams are fighting to win close football games.

 

Why stop there?  Finish what they've started with kickoffs.  Eliminate those, too.  Toss the coin and start the ball at the 20.  Wouldn't want guys getting hurt on kickoffs and onside kicks now would we?  Make everyone wear a skirt like the QBs.  Just slowly and methodically pare it all the way down to flag football over the next 10 years so nobody gets hurt and there's no need for today's pads and helmets that aren't working anyway.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Guess we should just stop playing once teams go up by 21 points.  After that you'll always find an example where the outcome was changed, but extremely rare.

 

Without the PAT, teams would not be up by 21 points. They would only be up by 18.

---

Without the PAT, teams would not be up by 21 points. They would only be up by 18.

They're not eliminating the PAT.  They're giving it automatically.  (Unless you opt to go for 2 I guess, in which case if you fail you only get 6 points)

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Without the PAT, teams would not be up by 21 points. They would only be up by 18.

 

JW, the proposal is to give the full 7 (instead of 6) for all touchdowns.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Both teams get the same opportunity to go up by 21.


Most teams make the extra point (except the ones that don't)

Most teams won't make a comeback from 21 point deficit (mercy rule)


Heck getting rid of the extra point does nothing but take away a 'boring' part of the game. Mercy rule would preserve player health. You could even make it 24 points and the game must be in the 3rd quarter just to prevent too quick of games.


I mean, I don't know about you -- but I've never sat through an extra point attempt, and thought "My god, won't they get this over with?"


I have sat through a game with a huge deficit and thought "Gee, why won't this just end?"

You don't like the change. I get it, but it isn't the same as your example. One is giving 7 points instead of having extra point and the other is ending the game. Two different things.


I don't necessarily agree with the change unless they did something like make the extra point more difficult. To me that would make more sense.

---

Jeff Fisher was on The Dan Patrick Show this morning discussing this topic. He's on the NFL competition committee, through which this change must pass, so his words have merit. Basically, he says he likes the extra point as it is now, and sees no reason to change it.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

I don't necessarily agree with the change unless they did something like make the extra point more difficult. To me that would make more sense.

 

I agree that's an interesting option, and was thinking about that too.

 

Only hangup with me is that you most likely have to make it a longer kick (move back the ball spot.)  Which... would make the 2 point conversion much harder.

 

1 point for the kick, 4 for conversion?  (assuming a significant change in the current LOS)

 

Only other idea I could think of is require it to be a dropkick.  As automatic as it may seem, the point(s) are still valuable.  If it's changed, the change must bring some value as well (such as requiring more skill to earn the points)

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

@Pirkster, I completely agree.  How about if they leave the extra point the way it is, but have the 2-pts conversion become 3-pts?  I think that would give teams a little more incentive to gamble for it at the 3-yard line.  Otherwise, just leave the 1 pt conversion as a tradition.

---

JW, the proposal is to give the full 7 (instead of 6) for all touchdowns.

 

That was one proposal suggested. It does not mean it is the only option being considered.

---

I agree that's an interesting option, and was thinking about that too.


Only hangup with me is that you most likely have to make it a longer kick (move back the ball spot.) Which... would make the 2 point conversion much harder.


1 point for the kick, 4 for conversion? (assuming a significant change in the current LOS)


Only other idea I could think of is require it to be a dropkick. As automatic as it may seem, the point(s) are still valuable. If it's changed, the change must bring some value as well (such as requiring more skill to earn the points)

Right which goes back to why change what isn't broken. I get that sentiment. But I also agree that the extra point is pretty much a gimme and doesn't offer much excitement other then that is how it has always been.

---

The proposal is to award a team 7 points for a touchdown, then award them 2 pts for a conversion or if the conversion fails the team sacrifices one point and is only awarded 6 for the TD. I like it. It makes the decision to go for the 2 much more risky! It brings a lot of excitement to the play after a score.

 

As it stands now, the PAT is boring and brings no excitement to the game. The players "go through the motion" on the play and the single point is automatic. I don't understand how people can be so adverse to changing an otherwise boring play?

 

Regards.....................the Chiefjag

---