New rule to replace onside kick?

[iinii]

4 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

It's FOOTBALL. it's violent by design, and the players are paid handsomely to take that risk.

The vast majority don’t make anywhere near what most people think. Between taxes and short careers these  eye popping mega deals are the rarity. 

[Steptide]

I don't think it's a terrible idea. Imo it's more plausible than an onside kick. Onside kicks rarely ever work for the kicking team. A 4th and 15 is much more Do-able Imo. I think it's also more exciting than an inside kick 

[iinii]

2 hours ago, bigK14094 said:

Football morphing into an unrecognizeable sport.  Soon...a three point shot.

I think that is called a field goal.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

2 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

So for sports entertainment, do you draw the line anywhere on safety? 

 

Or what about the participants drawing the line? Do they not get that right?

 

They can draw a line and choose to not be paid. That is their right.

[PetermansRedemption]

58 minutes ago, Steve O said:

Um...you do know that a team can on-sides kick now after safety don't you?

 

Yes, however, it must be from a punt, which has to be a literal 0% proposition. I don’t remember it ever happening. So you would be going from a 0% success rate currently to a 20% success rate. This isn’t like the onside kick where it had a 20% success rate and the NFL killed it and are not looking to correct it.  

[row_33]

36 minutes ago, Steptide said:

I don't think it's a terrible idea. Imo it's more plausible than an onside kick. Onside kicks rarely ever work for the kicking team. A 4th and 15 is much more Do-able Imo. I think it's also more exciting than an inside kick 

 

i can't try a 4th and 15 when i want to make an onside kick work

 

 

whoa...

 

the Bills strategy the last 20 years has been to flounce down the field, down two scores, wasting 20 seconds each play and  hoping for the gahhhhhhhhhbagggggggggggggggggetime score and the onside kick

 

 

[Beast]

Imagine being down by 15 points with 5 seconds remaining. Score a TD, get a 2 point conversion, and then have a strong armed QB heave a hail mary “onside kick” for another TD and get another 2 point conversion to win.

 

Crazy.

[prissythecat]

3 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

Football will never NOT be physical.

 

Some of these rule changes are an effort to prevent an actual death from happening on the field of play.

 

For size comparison...

 

Aaron Maybin 6'4" 238lbs

Lawrence Taylor 6'3" 238lbs

 

What cut it back in the 80s and 90s ain't cutting it today.

 

 

Did Maybin ever play at 238 pounds ?   Didn’t he take weight gainers to reach that weight ? I remember he had issues with being way too light to play . 

[klos63]

5 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

It's FOOTBALL. it's violent by design, and the players are paid handsomely to take that risk.

They are paid handsomely because the game brings insane amounts of revenue. There should be no issues with trying to minimize the physical risks. Would you rather Josh Allen have a 15 year career with the Bills or suffer concussions or other injuries that limit his effectiveness and time playing.  Time to get over the 'macho' crap.

[row_33]

14 minutes ago, klos63 said:

They are paid handsomely because the game brings insane amounts of revenue. There should be no issues with trying to minimize the physical risks. Would you rather Josh Allen have a 15 year career with the Bills or suffer concussions or other injuries that limit his effectiveness and time playing.  Time to get over the 'macho' crap.

 

now we can dictate great 15 year careers for QBs as our right as Bills fans?

 

 

[Steve O]

55 minutes ago, Bills2ref said:

 

Yes, however, it must be from a punt, which has to be a literal 0% proposition. I don’t remember it ever happening. So you would be going from a 0% success rate currently to a 20% success rate. This isn’t like the onside kick where it had a 20% success rate and the NFL killed it and are not looking to correct it.  

Actually it doesn't have to be from a punt, but a tee can not be used if going from the ground. Either have to use a holder or lay the ball on its side if going from the ground. Dallas pulled one off successfully (from a punt) back in the 70's or 80's.

[klos63]

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

 

now we can dictate great 15 year careers for QBs as our right as Bills fans?

 

 

No, but we can try to make the dumbest comment of the day.... you win.

[NoSaint]

2 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

They can draw a line and choose to not be paid. That is their right.

 

But they can’t push for safer rules? That’s not?

[klos63]

11 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

But they can’t push for safer rules? That’s not?

You're wasting your time. Anyone that says 'make football physical again' isn't playing with a full deck.

[Marv's Neighbor]

As usual, they don't ask us, and will do as they want, so why worry?

[goober]

Interesting idea but I don’t like the concept of some iffy defensive holding call nowhere near the play making it an automatic first down.  

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

27 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

But they can’t push for safer rules? That’s not?

 

I'm sure there's a line of people waiting for a shot.

[suorangefan4]

5 hours ago, bigK14094 said:

Football morphing into an unrecognizeable sport.  Soon...a three point shot.

 

It's not just football... it's everything these days.

 

- Hockey went to a weird playoff format where the matchups are determined by rivalries instead of the highest seed playing the lowest seed.

- Nascar went to that stupid stage racing a few years ago. Because randomly throwing cautions to reward points a third and two thirds of the way through the race is just so exciting. 

- College basketball is throwing around the idea of going to four quarters. Apparently college basketball isn't exciting enough being different and having two 20 minute halfs.

 

People are so obsessed with change these days. Nothing ever satisfies them. They always have to come up with something new.

[Steve O]

46 minutes ago, goober said:

Interesting idea but I don’t like the concept of some iffy defensive holding call nowhere near the play making it an automatic first down.  

I was thinking this as well.  Someone makes a chuck 6 yards down field instead of 5 and automatic first down. Hand checking back and forth and the defense gets flagged for PI. Not to mention the questionable roughing the passer and leading with the helmet when tackling a WR calls.

[tcampbell104]

its better than the onside kick now

[frostbitmic]

Two questions on this...

 

Q1. Has a study been done comparing the rate of injury between the old style of onside kick and 4th and 15 plays ? ... I can't recall ever seeing a serious injury on an onside kick.

 

Q2. If under the proposed new rule you choose to kick off, how far does the ball have to travel before it isn't considered an onside kick ?  20 yards ? ...50 yards ? ...out of the end zone?

 

If they pass this rule I think they need to make defensive penalties on the 4th and 15 play reviewable.

[Tcali]

4th and 15 from 35 is too easy. make it 4th and 20. For the rule to work the attempt should fail 80% of the time.

4 hours ago, goober said:

Interesting idea but I don’t like the concept of some iffy defensive holding call nowhere near the play making it an automatic first down.  

good point

[Bing Bong]

This has been proposed before. I forgot who. Like Greg Schiano or something. But I love the idea of a 4th and long play. Just turn it into normal football instead of some bizarre play.

 

 

Onside kick is the "ugliest stupid looking spectacle in organized sport in which dice is played with human bodies" lol

Edited March 25, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Bing Bong]

4 hours ago, tcampbell104 said:

its better than the onside kick now

Onside kick is the "ugliest stupid looking spectacle in organized sport in which dice is played with human bodies" - Jon Boise, SBNation

[Chicken Boo]

On 3/24/2019 at 1:37 PM, prissythecat said:

 

 

Did Maybin ever play at 238 pounds ?   Didn’t he take weight gainers to reach that weight ? I remember he had issues with being way too light to play . 

 

He got up to 250lbs, if I remember correctly.

[stosh64]

On 3/23/2019 at 9:09 PM, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I wish they would just bring regular kick offs back and leave it alone. It’s one of the most exciting plays in the game when it’s done correctly and it was responsible for some of the greatest plays in nfl history. Don’t touch the onside kicks and don’t keep trying to take away the kick off. These guys know the risk when they sign up. Play football or don’t. Stop trying to make it an arcade game. Bring the kickoff back. Make football physical again

I couldn't agree more.

They keep ******* with the rules trying to make it more SJW friendly and they will kill it just like nascar did.

[LABILLBACKER]

On 3/23/2019 at 8:34 PM, klos63 said:

I just despise that rationale.  They take a career threatening risk because if they want a chance to make the team, they will do it. Doesn't mean it's fair or right.  Reasonable people don't want players risking serious injury for their entertainment. I know it's a physical game, I have no issues trying to make the game safer.

If you think football isn't physical, you have some major issues. You want to lose half your team with blown out knees throughout the season?

 But how are we supposed to quench our insatiable desire for blood & carnage?  JK......

[Buffalo03]

I love this rule. I actually made a post about it a few days ago and people lost their minds. 

[stosh64]

The 4th and 15 onside BS was shot down.  Good.

[Mr. WEO]

On ‎3‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 8:33 PM, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

Onside kick is the "ugliest stupid looking spectacle in organized sport in which dice is played with human bodies" - Jon Boise, SBNation

 

 

The success rate of onside kicks is about 25%.  4th and 15 is 13%.  (Football outsiders 2011).

 

 

Edited March 26, 2019 by Mr. WEO

[Bing Bong]

39 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

The success rate of onside kicks is about 25%.  4th and 15 is 13%.  (Football outsiders 2011).

 

 

I think Jon Bois, and I agree, are just saying it's a stupid looking play. It's an oblong ball shaped to fly through the air being used in an archaic NFL kickoff rule stating that you can recover a ball over 10 yards away. So you purposefully kick the ball like crap for just over 10 yards towards like 16 dudes crashing towards a ball that doesn't roll right.

 

But anyways, I think a lot of those successful onside kicks are made up by surprise onside kicks that have pretty good odds, as opposed to desperation onside kicks teams have to make to mathematically win.  Removing those I think maybe the success got halved, closer towards your 13%.. the ChartParty video covers all of this. Heck, I'd say allow 4th and 10 instead of 4th and 15. Make it even more probably.

Edited March 26, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Chill]

Too many rule changes. Just let the game be. Every year they make the game worse. 

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

I think Jon Bois, and I agree, are just saying it's a stupid looking play. It's an oblong ball shaped to fly through the air being used in an archaic NFL kickoff rule stating that you can recover a ball over 10 yards away. So you purposefully kick the ball like crap for just over 10 yards towards like 16 dudes crashing towards a ball that doesn't roll right.

 

But anyways, I think a lot of those successful onside kicks are made up by surprise onside kicks that have pretty good odds, as opposed to desperation onside kicks teams have to make to mathematically win.  Removing those I think maybe the success got halved.. the ChartParty video covers all of this. Heck, I'd say 4th in 10. Make it even more probably.

 

How many onside kicks are "a surprise"?  They are only done teams in desperation in order to steal another possession.

 

Also, it's interesting that a play that has been around since the '20's is suddenly "stupid looking" to the football loving public.

[Bing Bong]

9 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

How many onside kicks are "a surprise"?  They are only done teams in desperation in order to steal another possession.

 

Also, it's interesting that a play that has been around since the '20's is suddenly "stupid looking" to the football loving public.

This is fun. Debating over the onside kick. Let's spend time on this.

 

Saints vs Colts SB was a surprise.. they happen plenty of times. You just kick it when you don't necessarily need to. Cause your team's ready for it and the other team is not. Kind of like a fake punt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onside_kick

http://www.slate.com/id/2280272/pagenum/all

"An onside kick is considered successful if the kicking team regains the ball. Between 2001 and 2010, surprise onside kicks were successful 60% of the time, while expected onside kicks were successful less than 20% of the time." I literally just watched and linked a 20 minute video about kickoffs. Just go watch it.

 

And yes. It's probably ugly precisely because it's from the 1920s. That's why football looks completely different. People once considered the onside kick to be a more effective way to advance the ball than the forward pass... I don't even want to know what football looked like back then knowing that tidbit.

 

But if you find it to be a pretty play more power to you!

Edited March 26, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Bing Bong]

Kicks and punts are the last vestiges of whatever primordial sports ooze involving advancing a ball to some designated area evolved over centuries into American football, rugby and soccer

Edited March 26, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

This is fun. Debating over the onside kick. Let's spend time on this.

 

Saints vs Colts SB was a surprise.. they happen plenty of times. You just kick it when you don't necessarily need to. Cause your team's ready for it and the other team is not. Kind of like a fake punt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onside_kick

http://www.slate.com/id/2280272/pagenum/all

"An onside kick is considered successful if the kicking team regains the ball. Between 2001 and 2010, surprise onside kicks were successful 60% of the time, while expected onside kicks were successful less than 20% of the time." I literally just watched and linked a 20 minute video about kickoffs. Just go watch it.

 

And yes. It's probably ugly precisely because it's from the 1920s. That's why football looks completely different. People once considered the onside kick to be a more effective way to advance the ball than the forward pass... I don't even want to know what football looked like back then knowing that tidbit.

 

But if you find it to be a pretty play more power to you!

 

You “literally” just sited an instance where a team did an onside kick to start the second half.....a scenario that has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing, which is whether to replace the onside with a 4th and 15....IN AN OBVIOUS ONSIDE SITUATION.  Come on!  When a team is behind and time is running out and they just scored..it’s NEVER a surprise. 

 

Ugly play?  No,  that would be 4th and. 15.  An exercise in futility.

[Bing Bong]

I found a better argument to run with dude this one is all-time stupid. 

 

I'll table this for later but if you really love onside kicks and it's ties to 1920s football you might be better off being a rugby fan bud.

[Bing Bong]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You “literally” just sited an instance where a team did an onside kick to start the second half.....a scenario that has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing, which is whether to replace the onside with a 4th and 15....IN AN OBVIOUS ONSIDE SITUATION.  Come on!  When a team is behind and time is running out and they just scored..it’s NEVER a surprise. 

 

Ugly play?  No,  that would be 4th and. 15.  An exercise in futility.

Buddy you know I know you're yanking my chain. You said the onside kick was 25% successful I told you to take out the surprise kicks and you asked what a surprised onside kick was to which I gave you one.. and now you are proceeding to say this has nothing to do with our conversation.

 

Onside kicks are less successful when the team knows about it. So when it's an obvious kick situation it's about the same as a 4th and 15.. which is thus how they chose the yardage.

 

As to your hatred of 4th and 15 plays. It's weird man. It's a very weird thing to find ugly. It's just a football down you see all the time. Full of miraculous catches and heart crushing incompletions.

 

Do you specifically hate the down and distance? Which one more? The 4th? The 15 yards? Because it sounds like you hate a normal football play to gain a necessary amount of yards

Edited March 27, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P

[Dopey]

Boo, hiss. Boo, hiss. I just picture Brady, Brees, Mahomes and the like getting defensive holding or pass interference calls to make the game more "exciting". Plus, why give a team an extra offensive play? Just giving them that extra play coukd kill the momentum the opposing defense has worked hard to establish. And you know certain qbs would have an unfair officiating advantage.

[Mr. WEO]

19 minutes ago, BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P said:

Buddy you know I know you're yanking my chain. You said the onside kick was 25% successful I told you to take out the surprise kicks and you asked what a surprised onside kick was to which I gave you one.. and now you are proceeding to say this has nothing to do with our conversation.

 

Onside kicks are less successful when the team knows about it. So when it's an obvious kick situation it's about the same as a 4th and 15.. which is thus how they chose the yardage.

 

As to your hatred of 4th and 15 plays. It's weird man. It's a very weird thing to find ugly. It's just a football down you see all the time. Full of miraculous catches and heart crushing incompletions.

 

Do you specifically hate the down and distance? Which one more? The 4th? The 15 yards? Because it sounds like you hate a normal football play to gain a necessary amount of yards

 

 

The onside kick has a success rate of 25%.  

 

You mention the Saints surprise onside kick.  Yet we are talking about an option of intend taking a 4th and 15 as a rule change----which obviously has nothing at all to do with the Saint decision to open a half with an onside kick.

 

What on Earth is your point??