(For all Inside Slant posts, follow this link.)
The NFL has spent much of the past year discussing its near-automatic extra point and experimenting with ways to make it more difficult. The Indianapolis Colts? They'll see your degree of difficulty and raise you some crazy.
Among the 23 playing rule changes proposed by teams this spring is one from the Colts that would, uh, change what happens after a touchdown. In essence, it goes like this:
A team scoring a touchdown would still get the option of a 1-point kick or a 2-point scoring opportunity from the 2-yard line. If the team goes for two and makes it, that team would then get a chance to kick an extra (extra?) point from -- yes -- its opponent's 32-yard line. If it converts what would amount to a 50-yard field goal, it would receive one additional point and a total of nine points between the touchdown (six), two-point conversion (two, obviously) and extra point (yeah, one).
Why such a convoluted suggestion? The Colts, according to the wording of their proposal, want to add incentive for teams to go for two points rather than an extra point. Is the chance for a 50-yard one-pointer worth going for two points? Discuss among yourselves.
For those who like numbers: NFL teams converted 99.3 percent of their extra points in 2014, 47.5 percent of their two-point attempts and 61 percent of kicks from 50 yards and beyond.
I wouldn't spend too much time figuring out the win probability of the possible "two plus one" extra point versus a single point-after-touchdown. Shockingly, the Colts' proposal was not endorsed by the NFL's powerful competition committee. That makes it unlikely to be approved by the NFL's general membership. But it was fun while it lasted, right?