> - I see that the defense can now score two points by intercepting a two-point play and returning it. Doesn't this lower the utility of the two-point play as u

> - I see that the defense can now score two points by intercepting a two-point play and returning it. Doesn't this lower the utility of the two-point play as used in the article? Or have I misunderstood? It's such an unlikely event that it shouldn't enter into anyone's calculation except in extreme cirumstances (e.g., you only need 1 point for certain victory, so why risk it). I doubt it will happen once per season. > It isn't hard to imagine that teams will get better at executing two-point plays if they attempt more. Teams will get better at defending it too. Teams might acquire personnel especially for the play, both on offense and defense. > am I right in thinking that they are typically attempted by a team in a desperate position at the moment? Often but not always desparate. Generally teams defaulted to extra points (1 point) and only used 2-point conversions when there was some certainty it would help. For example, if you are ahead by 1 point and there is time only for one more drive (offensive possession) by the other team, an extra point, which would increase your 1 point lead to 2 points, won't help you because the other team can score either 0 or >=3 points (i.e., scoring 1 or 2 points is impossible, except in a very unlikely event). You might as well go for 2 and earn a tie in case the opponent scores 3 (a field goal). Also, a little vocabularly help so you look smart around the water cooler: > one-point field goal "extra point" > match "game"