Column: The Extra Point Is Boring. Here’s How to Fix It

Kickers made 95.4 percent of extra points last season. A play that almost never fails is not a play — it is a commercial break with a holder. Every Sunday, millions of fans watch a touchdown, cheer, and then turn to their phones, their snacks or their kitchen while the most predictable play in sports unfolds. It is the one moment in a football game when almost nobody is paying attention, and that should bother the people who run the league far more than it seems to.

I do not say this lightly. I grew up loving the rhythm of a football game, including the small rituals. But a sport that prides itself on tension and strategy has allowed one of its most frequent plays to become a formality. We can do better, and the fix is simpler than most people think.

A play nobody watches

Think about how a typical extra point looks from the stands. The offense jogs off, the kicking unit jogs on, the snap is clean, the hold is clean and the ball sails through the uprights from a distance most high school kickers could handle. The crowd barely reacts. On television, the broadcast often cuts to a replay of the touchdown or to a shot of the coach on the sideline. The extra point itself is an afterthought.

That would be fine if it happened once a game. But a typical game includes four to six touchdowns, which means four to six of these near-automatic plays. Across a full season, that adds up to more than a thousand snaps in which the outcome is almost certain before the ball is snapped. No other part of the game is so predictable.

The league did make one change several years ago, moving the kick back from the two-yard line to the 15. Accuracy dipped for a while, then climbed back up as kickers adjusted. Today’s kickers are simply too good for a 33-yard kick to be a real test.

Why it matters

Some fans will ask why we should care. If teams are making the kick, aren’t they simply doing their job? The problem is not that kickers are good. The problem is that the play no longer asks anything of anyone. It does not test strategy, nerve or creativity. It does not change how coaches think about a game. And it does not give fans a reason to watch.

Football at its best is a series of decisions under pressure. Should you go for it on fourth down? Should you run the clock or attack? Should you kick a field goal or keep pushing for a touchdown? Those choices are what make the sport compelling, and they are what fans argue about on Monday mornings. The extra point, as it stands, removes a decision from the game instead of adding one.

There is also a business case. Broadcasters sell advertising around the moments viewers are most likely to be watching, and teams sell tickets on the promise of excitement. A play that sends fans to the kitchen is a lost opportunity for everyone. If the league could turn even half of those dead moments into real drama, the game would be more engaging for the people who pay for it, whether they sit in the stands or on the couch at home.

The fix

Move the kick back to the 25-yard line and give teams a choice: kick for one, run or pass from the two for two, or go from the ten for three. Suddenly, every touchdown asks a question. Here is how the options would work:

• Kick for one point from the 25-yard line, making the attempt a 43-yard kick that even good kickers miss now and then.
• Go for two points with a run or pass from the two-yard line, exactly as teams do today.
• Go for three points with a run or pass from the ten-yard line, a bold option for teams that are behind late or confident in their offense.

Each option carries risk and reward. A longer kick would make the one-point try something fans watch again. The two-point play would remain a familiar gamble. And the new three-point option would give trailing teams a dramatic way back into games, creating moments that would be replayed for years.

Imagine the scenarios. A team trailing by nine late in the fourth quarter scores a touchdown. Does it kick and pull within two, go for two and pull within one, or take a shot from the ten to tie the game? Every coach would have a different answer, and every fan would have an opinion. That is the kind of debate that makes a sport worth talking about all week.

Make the coach think, and you make the fans lean forward.

Former kicker Sam Whitaker

Whitaker, who spent nine seasons in the league, told me he would have welcomed the challenge. He said that longer kicks would reward the best kickers and expose the ones who rely on short, easy attempts. He also said, with a laugh, that he would have liked a few more chances to be the hero.

Answering the objections

Whenever someone proposes a rule change, the objections come quickly. Here are the most common ones, and why I do not find them convincing.

It would change the record books

Yes, it would. So did moving the hash marks, changing pass interference rules and moving the extra point back the first time. The game has always evolved, and the record books have always adjusted with it.

It would hurt kickers

It would hurt mediocre kickers. The best ones would become more valuable, not less. A team with a kicker who makes 43-yard tries reliably would have a real advantage, and that is exactly the kind of skill the game should reward.

The three-point option is a gimmick

I understand the concern. But football already has plenty of plays with different point values based on distance and difficulty. A touchdown, a field goal and a safety are all worth different amounts. Adding a harder, riskier conversion that is worth more is consistent with that logic.

Key takeaway: A small change to the extra point could add strategy, drama and attention to a play that has become a formality.

A single meeting away

Rule changes take years. This one would take a single owners’ meeting. The league’s competition committee could test it during preseason games next summer, gather data and present it to owners in the spring. Several minor leagues and spring leagues have already experimented with versions of this idea, and early reports suggest fans enjoyed the extra drama.

I would also suggest a modest trial period. Adopt the change for two seasons, measure how often teams choose each option and how fans respond, then decide whether to keep it. If it fails, the league can always go back. If it works, the sport gains a new layer of strategy without changing anything fundamental.

The extra point used to matter. Coaches once agonized over whether to go for two, and kickers once felt real pressure on every attempt. We can bring that tension back. All it takes is moving the ball back and giving coaches a real choice. Football has never been better than when it makes everyone in the building lean forward. Let’s give fans one more reason to do it.

Agree or disagree? Vote in this week’s fan poll on our home page, and tell us which option your favorite team’s coach would choose with the game on the line.