I don’t think it sells more commercial time, but it will get more eyes on the commercial after the score. Let’s face it when a team scores and you know they’re not going for two that’s generally the signal to start the bathroom or kitchen run early (thanks to 45 seconds for an automatic point and 2 minutes of commercials and a kickoff you know is going to be kneeled in the end zone there’s time for both).
But it IS broken. It’s the most boring play in sports and people have been complaining about that for decades. Defensive scoring is a ripple they might put in later, it doesn’t seem to add or subtract much to the college game. But you really need to get rid of a play that’s successful 99% of the time. FG kicks aren’t terribly exciting in the first place (unless it’s really long, or for the win), FG kicks from the 2 for 1 point that never miss are just dull. PATs are an ignorable play, never a good thing for a sport, especially not one that juices a billion dollars from each of its broadcasters (almost 2 billion from ESPN).
I got no problem with kneel downs, that was other folks complaining.
Anybody that really thinks the PAT should stay should find the Eagles-Lions snow game (only 1 PAT attempted in the whole game) on the net and explain how much better the game would have been with PATs. This issue has been bandied about for a long time, but I think that game is the one that put the final nail in the coffin, it was a better more exciting game with more dynamic scoring results (TDs not being automatic 7s but shifting between being 6 and 8) because they couldn’t kick.
The NFL sells 3 hour games to TV. If we eliminate PATs do you think we get more regular plays or more commercials?
Remember the NFL changed clock rules (re-starting after an out-of-bounds play, for example, except in final minutes of each half).
This was to shorten the games, lower number of plays, to fit more commercials in that 3 hour window.
I don’t see that this would be anything different. I would rather a boring play to more commercials.