I oppose the "Action Point"
I figure that most of the rest of you do as well.
However, Kanga keeps focusing on this and bringing it up in his posts, and I'm looking for a way to make him stop obsessing over it.
The action point will never come back Kanga, so you should focus your concern on something else.
Here is why the AP is dead forever:
The nature of football scoring is based on 3-point margins between scores. A touchdown is 6 points and a field goal is 3 points. The 2 point and 1 point conversions make it so a team has an option to go for 2 at a significantly higher risk than 1. The NFL did not use the 2-pt conversion until 1995. The AFL used it between 1960 and 1969, but when the two leagues merged it was removed. The 2-point conversion has been a part of gridiron history and is an integral part of lower-league football as well as that of the NFL and CFL brands. The Action Point would remove this choice and variation in the game, giving coaches and players less choices and options when playing their game.
Tradition makes the game a counting-by-sevens-and-threes phenomenon. Giving a team an average of 7.4 points per touchdown would give you some football-stupid scores like 23-18. While it's simply a matter of a policy change, traditionalists and lower leagues wouldn't want this change at all.
The kicking game in both the NFL and CFL is an important part of the game. The objective of the old WFL was to de-emphasize the kicking game to blasphemous proportions, making a kicker's duty even less while still requiring him to fill up a full roster spot. In all likelihood you could have a highscoring game where a first-string kicker has absolutely no duties.
Add any more?