PetermansRedemption

You would have no shortage of men risking their body for millions of dollars a year. That’s the opportunity cost that they can weigh. If they don’t want to risk it they are more than welcome to go work anywhere else they can secure employment. It’s completely up to them. With all the studies and medical information available today it is pretty easy to make an informed decision.

I would think it would be the teams option. They are allowed to line up for a traditional kick (and do a surprise onside) or go for the 4th and 15 option.

The 7.5% is somewhat misleading because of how little it was attempted. There were a grand total of 4 successful attempts last season. That number is far too low. By my calculation 256 regular season games were played. That means an onside kick was converted in 1.5% of NFL games last season.

To elaborate more on why this has to happen. The historical fumble rate for kickoffs is 3.1%. Last year onside kicks were converted at a 7.5% success rate. Down from a 21.7% success rate the year before. Right now, it is nearly a better proposition to kick it deep and try to force a fumble! 4th and 10 conversion percentages hover around 20-30%. 4th and 15 conversion percentage is 10-20%. Therefore, by eliminating the onside kick and allowing a 4th and 15 try you are really just going back to pre-neutered onside kick numbers. Albeit a much safer alternative. Unfortunately I don’t think the NFL will consider that with today’s emphasis on player safety. Hence the alternatives start to fly. This one is actually a good alternative.

Because the onside kick has become a near 0% proposition and it is bad for business to not have some late game comebacks.

Couple this rule change with allowing coaches to challenge everything.

Absolutely needs to happen. The onside kick is completely pointless now. It has been completely neutered by the NFL. You are better off kicking it deep and hoping to force a fumble. In light of that, the NFL must adopt a new policy to keep games somewhat interesting in the end. This is that policy, this is the solution. Only a matter of time before it passes IMO.

?

The thing is, if the NFL followed their own rules, the games would still be 3 hours or less. If the call doesn’t have conclusive evidence then it is supposed to stand. So why stare at 100 different replays twenty times? If it is that subtle then it should stand. The solution is to put a time limit on officials reviews. 2-3 minutes in my opinion. If you can’t find evidence to overturn in 2-3 minutes the call should be standing anyways.

That’s impressive drive. I need to start doing that myself.

I am of the mindset nothing should be an automatic review. Not within 2 minutes, not scoring plays. Let the coaches challenge anything they think is wrong. The booth shouldn’t get involved unless they are requested to do so. We say “coaches” but thats really a broad term in this sense. The coach is really just the guy throwing the flag. I am sure he has about ten guys upstairs looking at it that tell him to challenge or not.

I’ll never understand how a man that burns thousands of calories running for a living can develop a gut.

I feel like every complaint is beyond simple to fix. Allow coaches to challenge anything, boom, problem solved. Inconsistent refereeing? Doesn’t matter, your coach should have challenged it. I would advocate for giving coaches 2 or 3 challenges, total, for the entire game. You don’t get any back if you win 2 of them. Also, there needs to be a time clock on reviewed plays. Something like 2 minutes to review the call. If it isn’t clear after 2 minutes then do what the rule intends, stick with the original call on the field. Coaches would have to be careful about what they challenge. Absolutely everything should be reviewable. The phantom PI call on the Bills a few years back comes to mind. I think it was against the Raiders. Their WR slips going over the middle and the Bills get a PI call. Then you have the no call on the Rams against the Saints. It is simply time to allow everything to be challengeable. Let’s be honest, the game moves at a snails pace anyways. Adding an extra 2 minutes for a challenge won’t kill it.

He will never replicate his end to last season. In addition to that, the current Bills depth chart at RB is McCoy-Gore-Ivory-Murphy and I think they will draft one in rounds 3-7. At the worst you sign an UDFA. There is no where to fit in another RB, especially a relatively expensive one like CJ Anderson will be.

Don’t scare me like that. I fully expected to read another article like the Zay Jones TMZ where he fought for Jesus. Then I see it’s about Basketball ?

Isn’t there a cap minimum? Are they even going to make it?

I’m sure they will add to the DL next month. Im not sure it’ll be through free agency. Very confident pick 9 is going DL

In this draft, most certainly. Especially if the two QBs they will be choosing from are Lock or Jones. I will happily take a 2nd so you can choose your likely bust of a QB 4 spots higher. Might even push to make it a 2020 2nd. They should be absolutely terrible next season.

To me, logically, both St John’s and Arizona would be in. This playoff game would be for the 11th seed. The loser gets 12, 12 goes to 13, etc. 16th seed would obviously get bumped then.

I was just wondering today how the seeding works. Wouldn’t it make sense to have a play in game for a 16th seed? How do they do a play in game for an 11th seed. Isn’t that basically admitting that a team (St Johns in this case) isn’t making the tournament while a worse team (a 12-16 seed) makes it?

I just don’t see it with him. I feel the risk is entirely too large. Russel Wilson comparisons are somewhat valid, but he was worth the risk in the 3rd round. The problem for those NFL teams who have Murray as their top QB is they are falling for recency bias. Russel Wilson and Baker mayfield are fairly recent. Teams might not weigh it as them being the anomaly they are, rather than the norm. I have Haskins as my top QB. I imagine many NFL teams would be the same. There is a reason the protypical NFL QB frame exists. Murray will be fighting factors not to bust, he has so many risk factors. By far my top QB in this draft. It isn’t even close as far as I’m concerned. I’ve watched game tape, combine, pro-day and nothing has changed my mind. I think Haskins will have a good career. I think Murray is a bust waiting to happen.

I think that realistically 2 QBs could go before pick 9. Haskins and Murray (debateable) are the only 2 QBs worthy of going in the top 15. If Arizona doesn’t go QB at 1 I think we only see 1 QB go before pick 9.

Man, Bobby Hurley seems like a total douche. Hopefully UB can wipe the floor with Arizona State.

I thought that Baker looked a lot like the real one too

The Alliance Football League has to be on line 1.