No vote yet, but owners want to change extra points this year


The NFL made no changes to extra point rules at this week’s league meeting, but a change may be coming soon.

Competition Committee Co-Chair Rich McKay said after his group met with the owners today that no vote was taken on any proposals to change extra points. But there is a good chance of some type of change being made to extra points at the next league meeting, in May.

“We did not vote on the extra point,” he said. “We did have about a 30- to 40-minute discussion on the extra point, a very interesting and lively discussion with a lot of ideas. Clearly, positive, in support of making a change. I think in the next 30 days you will see the Competition Committee, in conjunction with a lot of coaches, develop a lot of alternatives and be ready to put something forward for potentially a vote in May.”

The problem, however, is that the NFL just hasn’t been able to come up with the right alternative to the current rule of lining up at the 2-yard line, which for NFL kickers is an extremely easy kick.

“The alternatives explored today were all over the place, but some very consistent: The idea of moving the extra point to the one and a half, as opposed to the 1-yard line, incentivizing people to go for two,” McKay said. “I think all teams pretty much said the same thing: It’s time to make this play a football play, and the way to make it a football play is No. 1, allowing the defense to score. So really adopt the college rule that says if you block the kick or you stop a two-point play and the defense happens to get control of the football, they can score two points. I think there was a lot of consensus to the idea of the alternative, that being move the ball to the 1.5, or kick from the 15, you make the choice: One point for kicking, two points for going for two. But it was a very good discussion. I think there’s clear sentiment that there’s a movement to want to change and change this year. The charge to us as a Competition Committee was, come back with a recommended proposal, do it within the next 30 days, and give everybody a chance to look at it and vote on it in May.”

That sure sounds like the NFL is about to make significant changes to the extra point, changes that will be implemented for the 2015 season.

65 responses to “No vote yet, but owners want to change extra points this year

  1. Narrow the goal posts, move the hash marks towards the sidelines.

    Problem solved.

  2. I absolutely hate the idea of moving the line to the one or one-and-a-half yard line.

    You move it to the one and all that’s going to result is that instead of people complaining that PATs have become too easy, now they’ll be complaining that 2-point conversions are too easy.

  3. Why not have the person who scores the touchdown have to kick the extra point? The Kicker would then only kick field goals. Example: Gronk catches a TD pass, then tries the Point After Touch kick. You would have the fun of watching people like Beast-Mode, DeMarco Murray, Jamaal Charles, Dez Bryant, etc trying to kick extra points.

  4. Ryan Leaf has a message for the league regarding their incessant compulsion to try and change things for the sake of change: “KNOCK IT OFF!”

  5. While the current PAT is a boring play and only becomes relevant in the case of a blunder, it seems to work just fine. I am not sure how any change to this play makes the game any better or more marketable. These guys must be bored.

  6. patsrule59 says:
    Mar 25, 2015 1:33 PM
    I absolutely hate the idea of moving the line to the one or one-and-a-half yard line.

    You move it to the one and all that’s going to result is that instead of people complaining that PATs have become too easy, now they’ll be complaining that 2-point conversions are too easy.

    Tell that to the Seahawks.

  7. The extra point just HAS to change apparently, but we still can’t come up with a working definition for what a catch is. What a bunch of clowns.

  8. Yes, of all the things that need to change in our incompetent referee, steroid bloated league, it’s the extra point attempts.

  9. Do it. Why the hell not, rules can be changed, it’s not the Bible. Even the Bible has changed hundreds of times while we are on the subject.

  10. I’vs been following and playing football since I was about 5 years old-I love it, always have-always will. Don’t make things more complicated than they already are. Move the extra point attempt back ten yards-no more. If an extra point is blocked and returned for a touchdown-it’s six points with the extra point attempt to follow (I should be commisioner and I’d do it at a bargain too, you don’t have to be an ex-lawyer 🙂

  11. How many new viewers will you get? None. How many games will be decided outside the regular rules of play? Some. Nobody wants the “golden snitch” quidditch rule in the NFL.

  12. Narrowing the goal posts and/or moving the hash marks would have an effect on field goals.

    It would not have an effect on extra point attempts from the 2 yard line, which is what the NFLCC is actually discussing.

  13. Goodell needs to fire the owners, then resign. He has the power to do it, so do it already. How dare they make changes every year. #aintbroke #nofixisin #firedemfools

  14. People complaining about change in the NFL forget that this game has always been evolving. The good ol’ days had goal posts in front of the end zone, no forward pass, no two point conversions, etc. Change is what has made the NFL the national pastime in stead of mlb, which has constantly fought change.

  15. its easy and that was the original point!!! setting up a chancier 2 pt conversion when a need for more that one would help…. easy vs hard… hard vs hard is not what the founding fathers intended!!!!!

  16. teams shouldn’t lose because they couldn’t convert the 2pt they should lose because they couldn’t score a touchdown…that’s all we care about are touchdowns…and field goals are fine also but I think it would be horrible for the game to have a ton of future games decided by the stupid extra point or 2 pt conversion…id honestly prefer they eliminate it all together rather than ruin the game

  17. Why does the league keep trying to change things to “make the game more exciting”? If somerging works leave it alone. Plus, kickers will get phased out as more teams go for two

  18. If it looks like Canadian Football and acts like Canadian Football, then it might as well be canadian Football. Years of tradition thrown out for what, an ill placed believe that is what the fans want? How about polling the fans and see what they think, before doing something regretable. I would rather these same owners take off their dunce caps and vote to accept that a challenge flag can challenge ANY play…at least that makes sense.

  19. I’ve always thought it made no sense that a team couldn’t intercept a two point conversion and return it for 2 points. Good to see that they’re finally using common sense.

  20. “The idea of moving the extra point to the one and a half, as opposed to the 1-yard line…”

    Because that half yard will make a difference.

  21. So, the message from the NFL is this: “We want to make a change, but have no idea what it will be, but we want to make a change, so we’re thinking about it really hard”.

    How about this: if/when someone comes up with a great idea, then you start considering changes. This is purely change for change’s sake.

  22. If Thay move it to the one do ya think Peet Carrol will run or pass? Making That decision after every TD will be torture for him. I bet he runs every time.

  23. Eliminate the extra point. Teams can either take the automatic 7 points or try to convert for 8 points with the risk of only getting 6 if they fail.

  24. Well I’m sure all 32 owners slapped themselves on the back and announced “this was a very productive trip”. Oh cameras no they cost money…The extra point move is free..

  25. Real problems are ignored. Non-problems are being addressed.

    These clowns should run for congress.

  26. 3 Extra Points – Go for it at the 10 yard line

    5 Extra Points – Go for it at the 10 yard line, but you have to run it or pass to a TE

    7 Extra Points – Go for it at the 15 yard line, but you lose one offensive player before the snap

    10 Extra Points – Backup QB has to take the snap at the 15 yard line

    15 Extra Points – From the 15 yard line, but JaMarcus Russell has to take the snap and Trent Richardson has to be in the backfield.

    20 Extra Points – From the 20 yard line with an overly-inflated, hard to handle football, the water boy has to take the snap and you have to give Drew Brees an explanation of why you ran the play and why it’s justified. If he doesn’t like the explanation, you don’t get the points.

    25 Extra Points – From the 2 yard line, the pass has to go to a WR and you can only have players from the 2014 Kansas City Chiefs offense.

    30 Extra Points – From the 2 yard line, you need to score, but after you score, you need to go to the nearest camera and say you support Ray Rice.

    50 Extra Points – From the 2 yard line, you need to score, then you need to go to the camera, and say Roger Goodell is a good commissioner without laughing.

  27. If the intention is to change it into a football play, then do just that. Make it a play. After a touchdown, have the scoring team run a play from the 1 yard line for a 1 point conversion, or let them run a play from the 5 yard line for a 2 point conversion. Makes it lively and more tense, if that’s the objective of this.

  28. They don’t know what a catch is, much less what to do with a simple extra point. Stop with the nonsense.

  29. I see lots of 2 point tries where we have goal line calls. Lots of replays on 2 pt conversions to see if the ball crosses the goal line on run plays. Yep, thanks for finding another reason to slow the game down.

  30. skiier4384 says:
    Mar 25, 2015 2:29 PM

    50 Extra Points – From the 2 yard line, you need to score, then you need to go to the camera, and say Roger Goodell is a good commissioner without laughing.


    Colts could have used this one

  31. The only change needed is the defense should be allowed to score on an interception return, fumble return block return. How awesome would that be if a qb went down the field 5 of 6 style, throws a clutch td, then throws an int that makes the game out of reach(instead of being down 2 they are now down 4). It would be awesome.

  32. Also rules are so stacked against defense throw them a bone. Make safeties a 4 point play, it would really put more importance onkilling punts on the 2 or 3 yard line.

  33. If a team makes a choice on which conversion they prefer, then you lose the possibility of a fake of the kick then running or passing it in for two. I still prefer my idea of placing the ball on the five-yard line for the PAT. Then teams could still decide to go for one or two and defense wouldn’t know and the PAT kick would be slightly more difficult.

  34. The extra point is supposed to be easy. That is why one touchdown (with the PAT) is worth more than two FGs. If I want to see gadget stuff I will watch Arena League, Canadian Football or wait for the USFL/XFL/UFL to return.

    Sometimes the best trade you make is the one you pass on. Pass on this change and leave this alone.

    I also think the reason that the quality of officiating goes down every year is that the rules change each year. Keep things consistent and watch the quality of officiating go up.

  35. If you want to make the points after a touchdown exciting, then make it a risk or reward play. The offense can go for 1, 2 or 3 points but whatever they go for, they risk losing to the defense if they’re unsuccessful. They have to convert from the 1 to get 1 point. From the 3 to get 2 points and from the 5 to get 3 points. That would make it more exciting for fans of both teams.

    If you want to keep more of a traditional approach then I agree with gromit45. Take an automatic extra point or go for 2 by risking the 1 point if you fail.

  36. nopepper123 says: Mar 25, 2015 2:51 PM

    I see lots of 2 point tries where we have goal line calls. Lots of replays on 2 pt conversions to see if the ball crosses the goal line on run plays. Yep, thanks for finding another reason to slow the game down.
    Bingo. I knew there had to be a way they could squeeze in more commercials. You hit it right on the head. Mandatory review of all XP plays gets it done.

  37. If there is a single idea they like better then go ahead and change it. But it sounds like they have no firm idea what they want to do beyond not liking the current extra point. That just sets them up for something even worse taking its place.

  38. Just make a touchdown worth 7 points automatically, then allow teams to go for an 8th point with what is now the 2-point conversion play. If they make the play, they get the 8th point, but if they don’t, that touchdown is then only worth 6 points.

  39. Why should the defense get a chance to score on an extra pt. when they just gave up a touchdown? What a dumb idea. For the guy that says he should be commish for coming up with this…keep your day job.

  40. I like it that when the snap is bad, or if a team desires to fake the PAT, the two-point conversion is just as in-play as ever.

    I don’t like us messing with distance for that reason.

    That leaves us with two other options, both of which are entirely reasonable to modify, in my opinion.

    1. Angle (as stated above) and/or
    2. Width of goal posts

    So, (1) the PAT simply would be attempted from the spot on the field between the hashmarks perpendicular to the TD play was originally snapped. (So, if the TD play started at the far right hashmark at the 18, then the kick would be snapped from the far right hashmark at the 2 yard line).

    Then, (2) bearing in-mind that the goal posts already have went through some aesthetic changes through the years, someone has suggested a new era set of posts that are dual-pronged.

    The current 18-ft width would remain applicable for FGs, but then an inner set of new posts would extend at a 12-ft width, specifically for PATs.

    I’d like to see both, personally, but even just one of the two would be an improvement.

  41. That ‘No Points’ for a returned conversion has been an embarrassment forever. Changing the rule is actually human-like.

    For the owners to do something that is good for the game – a thing they haven’t done in 9 years – could be an indication that some of the old dinosaurs have become extinct and that more evolved mammals have taken their place. There has been some turnover in sales as well.

    As bad as the Goodell-appointing, lockout-enacting, kick return banning, contact-avoiding, team-slandering is, any turnover in those ranks is good. A new owners group would be better by default.

    There’s still time for this gang to blow it, but just the fact that they know something needs fixing is encouraging. We’ll see.

  42. Just allow the defense to stack their players up in a human pyramid, just like cheerleaders do. Then, if they can block the extra point, they get to keep the point.

    Unfortunately having your defense stacked 4 or 5 guys high will make defense of the sneak 2 point conversion nearly impossible to prevent.

    Other options include a 50-foot inflatable Godzilla (if you make his face look like Roger Goodell, that’s up to you), a 4-foot wide moat at the goal line (great for 2-point conversion defense) or simply move the net used for kicks in front of the goal posts, instead of behind.

  43. Just do away with the extra point. Why the heck do you need an “extra” point for anyway?

  44. The reduction to the absurd arguments are not an argument, but a joke.


    Change is neither good nor bad simply based on it being change.

    If it were always only bad, we’d have never seen the 2-pt conversion.

    If it were always only good, we’d have never seen all of these whimsical unnecessary fluctuations to what constitutes a catch.

    Accordingly, there may be some very good ideas about modifying the extra point rules, and certainly there may be… no, make that, “are”… some very bad ideas…

    But all I’m saying is… don’t tell me it’s bad just because it represents change and you personally just don’t like change.

    And by the way…

    Same principle applies to anyone who might dismiss the dual goal posts idea on the simplistic basis that they don’t like change… don’t tell me it’s bad just because it looks different… you’d get used to the new era look not much different than some of us got used to the transition from the old H posts. Rather, it serves a purpose, and pretty much solves the whole riddle by rewarding accuracy.

  45. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. This will result in PATs being slightly less automatic, but it ultimately will result in mid-range field goals being much MORE automatic. When kickers are regularly hitting 35-yard PATs throughout the games, they will become even more proficient with field goals. Currently, kickers attempt field goals in the 30 to 40 range an average of around ten per season. Imagine how much better they will be at field goals of that distance when they get to do it after nearly every touchdown. We will be looking at the same problem in five years, only it will be “What to do about field goals being too automatic.”

  46. Here’s what needs to happen. Following a touchdown, the defense lines up in a goal line formation whilst the offense line up at the proposed 1 to 1.5 yard line. Screw the kicker, his services are no longer required. At this point, the ball is taken completely out of the equation and off the field entirely . Now for the good stuff folks. Each team or “crew” picks a song of their choice for an ensuing dance off, judged by literally, the one and only , Roger Goodell. This allows the games most high profile and polarizing figuires to truly showcase their best moves for a chance at not just 1 or 2 points.. But up to Three and a half POINTS! LEGGO!

  47. Let’s not marginalize the kicker in a game called FOOTball any more than we already have, please.

    So many of these ideas make the 2 point conversion attempt more likely, and while I like that the NFL finally adopted it from the college game many years ago, I don’t want it to become so difficult to kick PATs that the 2 pt becomes the norm.

    There needs to be some counterbalance that makes both the 1 pt and 2 pt slightly more difficult than they currently are, and too… importantly for the 2 pt conversion… keeping the run and the pass both as nearly-equal viable options.

    For the 1 pt

    DISTANCE is *not* the variable to be messing with, imo. I prefer messing with variables that reward ACCURACY.

    Sooooo…. I like what spook1320 said earlier:

    (1) Spotting PATs to be on a line with where the TD play was snapped, and

    (2) Constricting the width of successful PATs with a new-era dual-prong goal post… we might argue whether 12 feet is the right width, but I like it in principle. I agree, who cares, if it looks different than we’ve been used to seeing for a few decades, as long as it is functional and serves its purpose, that’s all I care about.

    So, if we’re adding to the 1 pt difficulty, what about that counterbalance thing? Here you go…

    For the 2 pt

    It’s all about line of scrimmage placement, and as opposed to having a static line, it works this way…

    – 1 YARD LINE: Touchdown scored on any down that is NOT a goal-to-go down

    – 2 YARD LINE: Touchdown is scored on 1st-and-goal

    – 3 YARD LINE: Touchdown is scored on 2nd-and-goal

    – 4 YARD LINE: Touchdown is scored on 3rd-and-goal

    – 5 YARD LINE: Touchdown is scored on 4th-and-goal

    Reward the defense for making plays in goal-to-go situations, which in turn, adds to the drama for offenses to score.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.