PetermansRedemption Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said: No a surprise onside could still apply with this option but it would eliminate onside kicks in the obvious situations and replace them with a 4th and 15 instead 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 18 minutes ago, frostbitmic said: Restore the onsides kick to the way it used to be. So much this it isn't funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetermansRedemption Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Gugny said: Here's my idea: Make every NFL player sign a piece of paper that states, "I will not sue the NFL if I am injured while playing, or suffer any long-term negative health-related effects of playing after I exit the league." Then let them play the ***** game if they so choose. The way it's supposed to be played. 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. Edited March 22, 2019 by Bills2ref Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billykay Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 19 minutes ago, Bills2ref said: Because the onside kick has become a near 0% proposition and it is bad for business to not have some late game comebacks. If you want late game comebacks, the NFL should adopt the college rule where the clock stops on first downs until the chains are moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 I already see 4th and long (or 3rd and long). The onside kick is different and provides a bit of variety. It’s just more interesting, because it is rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo03 Posted March 22, 2019 Author Share Posted March 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, Bills2ref said: 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. Exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cba fan Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Bills2ref said: Because the onside kick has become a near 0% proposition and it is bad for business to not have some late game comebacks. never a fan of teams winning on gimmick plays. on-sides kicks suck. hail mary's suck. lateral plays on end of game kickoffs/punt returns suck. (and the massaging of the rules allowing multiple fumble recoveries advancement not allowed in real play) any team that clearly outplayed/dominated an opponent should not be subject to losing by some super low % gimmick play. I know many like the chance to see that, and the drama/entertainment value it provides, but it rewards luck over skill IMO. Not a fan at all. It is the equivalent to those trivia games where each successive round is worth so many more points then the previous round that in almost all cases the last question answered correctly determines the winner. Stupid as *****. Edited March 22, 2019 by cba fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 Gee....instead of dreaming up completely assinine rules, how about letting guys get a running start on kickoff teams to make onside kicks possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerlyofCtown Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetermansRedemption Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, KD in CA said: Gee....instead of dreaming up completely assinine rules, how about letting guys get a running start on kickoff teams to make onside kicks possible? NFL is too scared of the lawsuits stemming from player safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo03 Posted March 22, 2019 Author Share Posted March 22, 2019 8 minutes ago, Augie said: I already see 4th and long (or 3rd and long). The onside kick is different and provides a bit of variety. It’s just more interesting, because it is rare. But how often are 4th and longs converted? Who cares if people already see it. It's better option than the onside kick now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly McButterpants Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 34 minutes ago, klos63 said: I could only imagine the nightmare that would occur when the officials make crappy calls on the 4th and 15's. Truly - Pat*s do this after every score and the other team would never get the ball . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan1988 Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 34 minutes ago, Bills2ref said: 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. They should revert to the old onside kick rules only for that play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Augie said: Is the surprise onside kick eliminated? I like that that is an option. Even in a Super Bowl! That was a classic and ballsy moment. Agreed, and the recovery rate on surprise onside kicks is relatively high (I think it used to be as high as 50%, but maybe that's down after the rule change.) The one situation where teams should almost onside kick is after the other team is hit with a 15-yard penalty that's enforced on the kickoff. That means you're kicking off from midfield and an unsuccessful onside kick really doesn't change field position more than 10 or 15 yards. Why not take a chance on a recovery instead of mindlessly blasting the kickoff through the endzone? And yet I never see it done and I've never heard an announcer mention it. Edited March 22, 2019 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColoradoBills Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said: But how often are 4th and longs converted? Who cares if people already see it. It's better option than the onside kick now Kicking to the opposing team after a score is a basic football rule. Changing it by having a team being "forced" to put their defense back out goes against that basic concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 13 minutes ago, cba fan said: never a fan of teams winning on gimmick plays. on-sides kicks suck. hail mary's suck. lateral plays on end of game kickoffs/punt returns suck. (and the massaging of the rules allowing multiple fumble recoveries advancement not allowed in real play) any team that clearly outplayed/dominated an opponent should not be subject to losing by some super low % gimmick play. I know many like the chance to see that, and the drama/entertainment value it provides, but it rewards luck over skill IMO. Not a fan at all. It is the equivalent to those trivia games where each successive round is worth so many more points then the previous round that in almost all cases the last question answered correctly determines the winner. Stupid as *****. I dont think a team clearly dominated/outplayed a team so much that they deserve to win a game if the other team can win by converting an onside kick or even a hail Mary play. That means the game was pretty close.... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 22 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said: A 4th and 15 while not as hard to convert as an onside kick, is pretty much a long shot also How many times will you hear..."prior to the pass....." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetermansRedemption Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said: Kicking to the opposing team after a score is a basic football rule. Changing it by having a team being "forced" to put their defense back out goes against that basic concept. That team is more than welcome to put their kick return team out for the play. I just don’t think it would go very well ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 (edited) On 3/22/2019 at 12:11 PM, Buffalo03 said: But how often are 4th and longs converted? Who cares if people already see it. It's better option than the onside kick now Again.....why? Because you declared it to be true? I’m not convinced, and it’s OK to disagree. Maybe giving teams the option is OK, but as always - beware of unintended consequences. . Edited March 23, 2019 by Augie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColoradoBills Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, Bills2ref said: That team is more than welcome to put their kick return team out for the play. I just don’t think it would go very well ? LOL, just like the scoring team can put it's QB out, but hey MUST kick the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts