New Alliance of American Football League eliminates kickoffs

[Big Turk]

Teams will get ball at their own 35. For onside kicks they will face a 4th and 10 at their own 35. If they convert they get to keep the ball if not the other team gets it.

 

IMO, a team has much better odds of converting a 4th and 10 than recovering an onside kick...I would like to have seen it be like 4th and 15 or whatever the equivalent conversion rate would be for that distance.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/league-without-kickoffs-nfl-watch-085216538.html

[without a drought]

Seems pretty gimmicky to me. Like an off-season scrimmage. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Converting 4th and 10 has to be as difficult to convert as an insides kick.

 

Its kind of why you hear the phreae.  

 

there is no play for 3rd and 20.   

[Big Turk]

13 minutes ago, The Drought said:

Seems pretty gimmicky to me. Like an off-season scrimmage. 

NFL is apparently watching closely and the main sticking point for them eliminating kickoffs has been what to do about the onside kick from what the article says...

[US Egg]

The AOAFL ?.....sounds like awful, which it likely will be.

[What a Tuel]

2 minutes ago, Ifartalot said:

The AOAFL ?.....sounds like awful, which it likely will be.

 

AAFL or AAF.

 

I am interested to see a new league and what it will do. Maybe it crashes and burns, maybe it doesn't. I wonder what cities they will be in.

Edited April 8, 2018 by What a Tuel

[artmalibu]

Also, one less thing the new teams will need to work on. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

22 minutes ago, The Drought said:

Seems pretty gimmicky to me. Like an off-season scrimmage. 

 

...what color flags are they wearing?.............

[DriveFor1Outta5]

44 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

NFL is apparently watching closely and the main sticking point for them eliminating kickoffs has been what to do about the onside kick from what the article says...

This is why they should never eliminate kickoffs. I already spend my days listening to music that was created well before I was born, now I worry in the near future I’ll only be watching rerun football games from years ago. The possibility for a new era of NFL football is becoming increasingly real. Lets just hope they don’t completely ruin the game. Recent rule changes have already compromised the integrity of the game. 

 

Additionally, what is the real purpose of this new league? Incorporating new rules into the league seems like a decent idea at first glance, but I’m not convinced this is the type of uniqueness that fans crave. The NFL becoming increasingly soft is one of the most frequently heard fan complaints. How much of a demand is there for a second tier league that appears to be even softer? The survival of an additional pro football league depends on their ability to differentiate themselves from the NFL. Eliminating kickoffs appears to be their first attempt at doing so. I don’t see this as the correct way to differentiate themselves. Old school style football is more likely to appeal to die hard  football fans. These are the people who should be the target audience of a new league who wants to challenge the NFL. Casual fans will continue to gravitate solely to the NFL, until a second league can truly establish themselves. 

 

Edited April 8, 2018 by DriveFor1Outta5

[Big Turk]

23 minutes ago, DriveFor1Outta5 said:

This is why they should never eliminate kickoffs. I already spend my days listening to music that was created well before I was born, now I worry in the near future I’ll only be watching rerun football games from years ago. The possibility for a new era of NFL football is becoming increasingly real. Lets just hope they don’t completely ruin the game. Recent rule changes have already compromised the integrity of the game. 

 

Additionally, what is the real purpose of this new league? Incorporating new rules into the league seems like a decent idea at first glance, but I’m not convinced this is the type of uniqueness that fans crave. The NFL becoming increasingly soft is one of the most frequently heard fan complaints. How much of a demand is there for a second tier league that appears to be even softer? The survival of an additional pro football league depends on their ability to differentiate themselves from the NFL. Eliminating kickoffs appears to be their first attempt at doing so. I don’t see this as the correct way to differentiate themselves. Old school style football is more likely to appeal to die hard  football fans. These are the people who should be the target audience of a new league who wants to challenge the NFL. Casual fans will continue to gravitate solely to the NFL, until a second league can truly establish themselves. 

 

 

Yeah, I mean why would the league want to put player safety ahead of drunk guys and casual fantasy football fans wanting to see players get manhandled all game long?  Players increasingly don't want to end up like the guys from the '70s and '80s did---with debilitating injuries, with deteriorating brain functions, with memory loss, with extreme quality of life issues.

 

Pretty sure the real world consequences are more important than drunk guys complaining the game is "soft" as they sit on their couch with their beer bellies hanging over the edge having not set foot in a gym or done any type of exercise other than lift a piece of pizza into their mouths in the last 10 years...pretty sure many of their wives would make the same statement about them being "soft"...

 

It isn't about differentiating themselves, its a player safety issue.  But perhaps they are going to try out proposed NFL rule changes and see how they pan out with the NFL watching...might be smart, NFL might want to use them for testing out rule changes and create a long term partnership with them...

 

Edited April 8, 2018 by matter2003

[without a drought]

Is the onside kick a live play? Can you score or just convert with no advancement. What kind of defense do you play against 65 yards of field?

 

I think they're on to something.

[Mr. WEO]

New league will go without viewers, and NFL will watch with mild delight.

 

Anyway, in 2016, there were only 60 onside kicks attempted.  I don't see there being too much effort to change this rule by the NFL.

[DriveFor1Outta5]

4 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

Yeah, I mean why would the league want to put player seafety ahead of drunk guys wanting to see players get manhandled all game long?  Players increasingly don't want to end up like the guys from the '70s and '80s did---with debilitating injuries, with deteriorating brain functions, with memory loss, with extreme quality of life issues.

 

Pretty sure the real world consequences are more important than drunk guys complaining the game is "soft" as they sit on their couch with their beer bellies hanging over the edge having not set foot in a gym or done any type of exercise other than lift a piece of pizza into their mouths in the last 10 years...pretty sure many of their wives would make the same statement about them being "soft"...

 

It isn't about differentiating themselves, its a player safety issue.  But perhaps they are going to try out proposed NFL rule changes and see how they pan out with the NFL watching...might be smart, NFL might want to use them for testing out rule changes and create a long term partnership with them...

 

The NFL will be dangerous until they convert the game to touch football. The quality of the game has declined due to rule changes. Many of these rules have done little to decrease injuries. Injuries will continue to exist as long as tackle football is played. Research involving CTE and football related injuries are ongoing. One can reach whatever conclusion they choose from this research that is only in its infancy. No longer can any player say they were unaware of potential risks associated with playing football. This should eliminate any moral quandary pertaining to football. Modern football players are grown men who are aware of potential/alleged risks. This isn’t about “drunk guys with beer guts” trying to be tough. This is about a game that no longer exists if the rules are changed extensively. Football is a brutal game by its very nature. The game seizes to exist once that nature is taken away. 

Edited April 8, 2018 by DriveFor1Outta5

[without a drought]

Or you can slip on a matter or have your leg broken in practice by your teammate.

[What a Tuel]

2 hours ago, The Drought said:

Is the onside kick a live play? Can you score or just convert with no advancement. What kind of defense do you play against 65 yards of field?

 

I think they're on to something.

 

If they got rid of kicks all together it would make the 3 and outs which are downers more exciting but the scoring would go up which would probably be bad.

Edited April 8, 2018 by What a Tuel

[BobbyC81]

6 hours ago, matter2003 said:

NFL is apparently watching closely and the main sticking point for them eliminating kickoffs has been what to do about the onside kick from what the article says...

 

I somewhat understand the safety angle of it, but, to me, eliminating kickoffs is eliminating one of the most exciting plays in sports.  The crowd goes nuts before the opening kickoff, especially for college games, and sets a high energy level for the home team.  This has already been reduced by the NFL moving the yard line for kickoff up, resulting in many anticlimactic touchbacks. You could say that players shouldn't need the crowd to get them up for the start of the game but it's human nature that they feed off the energy of the crowd.

[DriveFor1Outta5]

2 hours ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

I somewhat understand the safety angle of it, but, to me, eliminating kickoffs is eliminating one of the most exciting plays in sports.  The crowd goes nuts before the opening kickoff, especially for college games, and sets a high energy level for the home team.  This has already been reduced by the NFL moving the yard line for kickoff up, resulting in many anticlimactic touchbacks. You could say that players shouldn't need the crowd to get them up for the start of the game but it's human nature that they feed off the energy of the crowd.

Agreed. I really don’t like to overreact, but I’m just a traditionalist by nature. I’m not one who adjusts well to change. Eliminating kickoffs would take a portion of the experience away. It’d be difficult to see the game change this much. The only way to ensure safety is by eliminating the sport itself. 

[Boatdrinks]

2 hours ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

I somewhat understand the safety angle of it, but, to me, eliminating kickoffs is eliminating one of the most exciting plays in sports.  The crowd goes nuts before the opening kickoff, especially for college games, and sets a high energy level for the home team.  This has already been reduced by the NFL moving the yard line for kickoff up, resulting in many anticlimactic touchbacks. You could say that players shouldn't need the crowd to get them up for the start of the game but it's human nature that they feed off the energy of the crowd.

Referring to NFL kickoffs as an exciting play is already in the past tense. Touchbacks are already the norm, the wedge was eliminated and if that wasn't enough they now spot receiving teams the 25 yard line. It's amazing anyone attempts to return kicks as it is. The play is on its last legs in the NFL, existing only because they can't come up with a workaround for the onside kick. They feel it's the most dangerous play in football and have taken just about every step to eliminate returned kicks altogether. At one time though, the kickoff was an exciting play and guys like white shoes Johnson and Mel Gray were in the NFL because of it. 

[mikemac2001]

Penalize the kicking team if they can't make it into endzone 10 yard after the return 

 

see less if the stupid high high kicks at the 2 yard line 

 

this is all the patriots do and they get a turnover or holding call so often 

[KW95 - JA17]

2 hours ago, LittleJoeCartwright said:

 

I somewhat understand the safety angle of it, but, to me, eliminating kickoffs is eliminating one of the most exciting plays in sports.  The crowd goes nuts before the opening kickoff, especially for college games, and sets a high energy level for the home team.  This has already been reduced by the NFL moving the yard line for kickoff up, resulting in many anticlimactic touchbacks. You could say that players shouldn't need the crowd to get them up for the start of the game but it's human nature that they feed off the energy of the crowd.

 

 Could we not keep the kickoff for start of game and start of half and eliminate after Td's and field goals?

[/dev/null]

The Alliance of <whatever> League sounds like a cheesy super hero club

 

Excelsior!

 

[GreggTX]

I think starting at the 35 is overly generous.I'd start them at the 20 or 25. I guess they figure more points equals more fans. Personally, I'm tired of seeing all these 30 or 40 point games. Stop flagging DB's for contact 5+ yards downfield when the QB still has the ball. Let them play defense instead of just being spectators.

2 hours ago, KW95 said:

 

 Could we not keep the kickoff for start of game and start of half and eliminate after Td's and field goals?

I'd like to see the PAT changed too. They could put a 2nd set of uprights just behind the 1st set and closer together. That way you still have the optionof faking the kick for 2. I also think the scoop and score for only 2 pts on PAT's is bogus as well.

[row_33]

13 hours ago, The Drought said:

Seems pretty gimmicky to me. Like an off-season scrimmage. 

 

The worst gimmick ever is the college football overtime system. And it considers a TD during this farce as counting the same in stats as one in regulation.

 

 

[RiotAct]

12 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

Yeah, I mean why would the league want to put player safety ahead of drunk guys and casual fantasy football fans wanting to see players get manhandled all game long?  Players increasingly don't want to end up like the guys from the '70s and '80s did---with debilitating injuries, with deteriorating brain functions, with memory loss, with extreme quality of life issues.

 

Pretty sure the real world consequences are more important than drunk guys complaining the game is "soft" as they sit on their couch with their beer bellies hanging over the edge having not set foot in a gym or done any type of exercise other than lift a piece of pizza into their mouths in the last 10 years...pretty sure many of their wives would make the same statement about them being "soft"...

 

It isn't about differentiating themselves, its a player safety issue.  But perhaps they are going to try out proposed NFL rule changes and see how they pan out with the NFL watching...might be smart, NFL might want to use them for testing out rule changes and create a long term partnership with them...

 

What a bizarre post.  I’m sure it made sense in your head as you typed it out...

[The Frankish Reich]

5 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

Referring to NFL kickoffs as an exciting play is already in the past tense. Touchbacks are already the norm, the wedge was eliminated and if that wasn't enough they now spot receiving teams the 25 yard line. It's amazing anyone attempts to return kicks as it is. The play is on its last legs in the NFL, existing only because they can't come up with a workaround for the onside kick. They feel it's the most dangerous play in football and have taken just about every step to eliminate returned kicks altogether. At one time though, the kickoff was an exciting play and guys like white shoes Johnson and Mel Gray were in the NFL because of it. 

Exactly.

 

Question: What was the Bills' longest kickoff return in 2017?

Answer: 29 yards.

Question 2: How many kickoffs did the Super Bowl champs return in all of 2017?

Answer 2: 18. Just about one per game.

 

I'm not sure I like the "AAF" solution to the onside kick, but they're barking up the right tree here ... you'll want to eliminate kickoffs but preserve some substitute for the onside kick that is roughly as likely to succeed, with the kicking team taking over at roughly the same spot on the field.

 

[Zerovoltz]

I prefer to see an NFL kick off.  However, I do understand there is a stat somwhere that says something like injuries are 5 or 6 times more likely on that play than any other regular play. (that makes sense...lots of guys running full speed and colliding)  So, my thoughts on this.

 

I understand that there are way fewer returns now since they have moved the ball up and most kicks sail deep into, or through the end zone.  A kicking team still has the option to onside kick, squib kick, kick short on purpose daring the other team to try a return, etc.  On the flip side....you may be down a score late in a game and instead of kneeling at the back of the end zone, you may opt to bring that out hoping for a great return.  LEAVE THE OPTION to the teams how they want to handle kicking and returning kicks.  The onside kick is a an exciting play, the return is an exciting play.  the term "Kickoff" is specific to this sport and is a transcendant term...we have "kickoffs" for all sorts of things besides football.  

 

2nd point.  NFL football is enjoyable because we are watching modern day gladiators.  We marvel at the size, speed, toughness, and strategy of the game...and by it's nature, as has been mentioned, is dangerous.  Instead of having all these changes to rules etc....keep improving the helmets etc...that's great...but have every NFL contract contain a clause in it about how the sport is dangerous and perhaps remind the players that while they are playing a dangerous sport and many of them may suffer later in life, they can make a ton of money to take those risks.  I don't play NFL football because I am short and slow and fat.  But if I could run a 4.2 and throw a ball 70 yards etc...and someone offered me life changing money....there is a 99.9 percent chance I will accept those risks and play football. I would suppose 99 percdent of those playing now would continue to as well.

[Ol Dirty B]

1 hour ago, Zerovotlz said:

I prefer to see an NFL kick off.  However, I do understand there is a stat somwhere that says something like injuries are 5 or 6 times more likely on that play than any other regular play. (that makes sense...lots of guys running full speed and colliding)  So, my thoughts on this.

 

I understand that there are way fewer returns now since they have moved the ball up and most kicks sail deep into, or through the end zone.  A kicking team still has the option to onside kick, squib kick, kick short on purpose daring the other team to try a return, etc.  On the flip side....you may be down a score late in a game and instead of kneeling at the back of the end zone, you may opt to bring that out hoping for a great return.  LEAVE THE OPTION to the teams how they want to handle kicking and returning kicks.  The onside kick is a an exciting play, the return is an exciting play.  the term "Kickoff" is specific to this sport and is a transcendant term...we have "kickoffs" for all sorts of things besides football.  

 

2nd point.  NFL football is enjoyable because we are watching modern day gladiators.  We marvel at the size, speed, toughness, and strategy of the game...and by it's nature, as has been mentioned, is dangerous.  Instead of having all these changes to rules etc....keep improving the helmets etc...that's great...but have every NFL contract contain a clause in it about how the sport is dangerous and perhaps remind the players that while they are playing a dangerous sport and many of them may suffer later in life, they can make a ton of money to take those risks.  I don't play NFL football because I am short and slow and fat.  But if I could run a 4.2 and throw a ball 70 yards etc...and someone offered me life changing money....there is a 99.9 percent chance I will accept those risks and play football. I would suppose 99 percdent of those playing now would continue to as well.

 

It's because clauses like this rarely hold up in court. Also, why would players ever allow things like that to be agreed upon in a CBA. You can sign all the agreements you want, but if you are readily proven criminally negligent those agreements will not matter. Waivers don't solve everything and shouldn't. That thinking is just out of touch with reality.

[Zerovoltz]

by your line of thinking then, anyone who pays someone to play football is now criminally negligent.  Clearly it's a dangerous game, but people will watch it and those who participate at the highest level can make a lot of money.  This isn't as hard as it's made out to be.  Everyone can agree it's dangerous and there are risks.  The NFL should just agree to part with some cash and set up a pension/care fund for dudes because chances are they will need it later on...separate from the fat paychecks.  Then we can get back to watching big fast dudes smash each other and run fast.  

[formerlyofCtown]

20 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Teams will get ball at their own 35. For onside kicks they will face a 4th and 10 at their own 35. If they convert they get to keep the ball if not the other team gets it.

 

IMO, a team has much better odds of converting a 4th and 10 than recovering an onside kick...I would like to have seen it be like 4th and 15 or whatever the equivalent conversion rate would be for that distance.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/league-without-kickoffs-nfl-watch-085216538.html

This League may end up being a farm system for the NFL.