Jump to content
LB48

On-Side Kick Rule Option

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

the odds are not much different than recovering an onside kick 

https://operations.nfl.com/stats-central/stats-articles/why-fourth-and-15-from-the-25-insight-into-the-nfl-s-experiment-with-an-onside-kick-alternative/

 

Accounting for do-overs, we settled on the following chart to compare Denver’s proposal of a fourth-and-15 with the historical onside kick recovery rate of 13.2%.

nfo-059-lopez-converstion-rate-charts-rl

 

Kicking teams historically recovered onside kicks between 15% and 20% of the time in a given season. In 2018, in part to changes on the kickoff play, that number dropped below 10%.

 

 

So this is obvious: If they are serious, then they need to revert to the old rules, concussions be damned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL has neutered the onside kick rules so now it's virtually impossible to get an onside kick.

 

They need to change it somehow.

 

I think a 4th and 20 would be better, but they also need to figure out the foul/first down problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea. Onside kicks are stupid. I would just add the caveat that all penalties are up for review on that play. No one wants to see a BS pass interference give a team an extra drive. If they allow penalty reviews it would be fair.

 

Honestly I'd be okay if they took kicking out of the game entirely aside from punts and kickoffs. Let a team elect to take 3 points inside the 25 yard line. This will encourage more 4th down attempts between the 50 and the 25 and we don't have to pretend field goal kickers are football players. On the same note get rid of the extra point. Make a TD worth 7 points with the ability to risk 1 point on a 2 point conversion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan. The general argument for those in favor of the rule seems to be that the current probability of recovering an onside kick is too low.  The thing is, I honestly think it should be low.  Scoring a TD and then following that by getting the ball back on the ensuing kickoff should take a miracle IMO.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've often wondered why a team attempting an onside kick does not kick it hard directly at one of the opposing players who is only 30 feet away.  If you have your team ready for all bounces, or ready in case it misses and goes downfield, I would think you would have the advantage.  It might force teams to move further away from the kicker, increasing the chances of a successful recovery.

 

Alternatively, if the kicker pooch kicked the ball to a specific spot over the head of the first line of opposing players, say the number 50 on the left side of the field, the kicking team would know where to send all of their players and would surprise the receiving team.  Again, a small advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Talley56 said:

Not a fan. The general argument for those in favor of the rule seems to be that the current probability of recovering an onside kick is too low.  The thing is, I honestly think it should be low.  Scoring a TD and then following that by getting the ball back on the ensuing kickoff should take a miracle IMO.

 

Yup.  And an onside kick fits within the existing rules, i.e. a KO becomes live after 10 yards.  I see no reason to create artificial situations to allow a team to potentially win a game when they had most of the game to try and do so.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make it 20 yards to convert and it adds a ton more strategy to games.  I would seeing teams try this early in games.   You could come out in your kickoff team and audible to run a play against their kick return team.  It would be awesome.  Teams barely recover onside kicks anyways.  And if you played, you know how dangerous onside kicks are. It was just a chance to murder or get murder. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Talley56 said:

Not a fan. The general argument for those in favor of the rule seems to be that the current probability of recovering an onside kick is too low.  The thing is, I honestly think it should be low.  Scoring a TD and then following that by getting the ball back on the ensuing kickoff should take a miracle IMO.

^^^^This. The low probability only serves to heighten the drama/elation when it does work.

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NFL owners to vote on sky judge, onside kick alternative May 28

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-owners-to-vote-on-sky-judge-onside-kick-alternative-may-28

 

With the NFL trying to start the season on time, owners will consider a slate of rules changes, highlighted by a proposal for a sky judge to help officiating and another to give teams an option to an onside kick. Owners are expected to vote on rules during a May 28 virtual meeting.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one hand I love the idea of taking the fate of a game out of a kicker's hands.  Moving back the extra point was and still is a horrible move.  On the other hand, this feels to gimmicky.  They're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist as it should be a low percentage play.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question comes down to this: is the goal to increase the chances of the losing team getting another chance? Or is it to reduce concussions and other injuries?

 

If it's the latter, I guess I understand. But I don't know that I've seen that many injuries on these plays. Still, I wouldn't like it.

 

If it's the former, WTF? I think most of us agree that it should be an incredible long shot to get the ball back. Nobody wants to see the scales tipped too far in one direction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I seriously hate these silly things. It’s football. I don’t want the kick off to go away. I don’t want the extra point to go away. I don’t want the onside kick to go away. Play Football. You want to be safer? Fine. I have no issue with intelligent solutions towards the goals of safety. Don’t change the actual plays in the game please.

Thats exactly what the 4th and 15 is, more actual football. The onside kick is basically impossible, and even if you did recover it, its nothing but a lucky bounce. 

2 hours ago, Talley56 said:

Not a fan. The general argument for those in favor of the rule seems to be that the current probability of recovering an onside kick is too low.  The thing is, I honestly think it should be low.  Scoring a TD and then following that by getting the ball back on the ensuing kickoff should take a miracle IMO.

4th and 15 is a low probabilty. Thats why teams never attempt them, except in the most desperate of circumstances. 

Edited by wagon127

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another artificial situation added to the game.


So like overtime, instead of just playing football, it’s now the game isn’t over if you kick a field goal first.

 

Take a knee, get 25% of the field handed to you instead of 20%.
 

Take out kicking the onsides and just hand the ball to the offense. 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what will be next to be eliminated.

 

Running plays?

 

Kickoff returns?

 

Advancing the ball after a catch?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, ChasBB said:

According to the article on NFL.com, over the past two seasons, on-sides kicks have been successful 10.4% of the time (higher than I expected, honestly).  According to Football Outsiders, the average rate of success of a 4th-and-15 scenario is 12.5%.  So, effectively, the proposed rule change increases the odds of keeping the football by only 2.1%, but teams risk giving the opponent the ball on the 25-yd line (instant field goal range for the opponent) instead of somewhere closer to mid-field with a failed on-sides kick.  I don't know if the proposed rule change really provides enough incentive to try it, so I don't see it so much as a "reward" for the trailing team - it's a very risky thing to try.  On the other hand, if your QB has a hot hand in the 4th suddenly, maybe you try it in those situations.  Not sure I like it, but not dead-set against it, either.  I would add a couple of requirements - you must have just scored a TD on the previous play and not a field goal to "earn" the right to attempt the 4th-and-15 and it should not be an option on an opening kickoff of either half.  Actually, I wouldn't allow it in the 1st half at all (not that teams would even consider that).


Going for the 4th and 15 would depend on time remaining.  If a team still has 3 timeouts to stop the clock and there is enough time left to get the ball back, I wouldn’t risk leaving the opponent at your 25.  If it’s a last hurrah, definitely take the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...