> 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 use

> 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? Probability of a 100-yard interception return is very low. > Teams will get better at defending it too. Teams might acquire personnel especially for the play, both on offense and defense. There really isn't a functional difference between a stopping a 2pt conversion and stopping a red zone drive from the 2 yard line. Defenses already know how to do this. It's a matter of play calling, reading, execution, and the raw will of each team at this point. > Am I right in thinking that they are typically attempted by a team in a desperate position at the moment? No, not at all. You can reach certain score combinations that favor a 2pt conversion. Say the score is 13-14, and the team with 14 just scored a touchdown. Now it is 13-20. That team might elect to attempt a 2pt conversion to raise their score to 13-22, which would require the other team to score TWICE in to get ahead or tie the game. If they don't make the 2pt, they're still up by a touchdown.