New Kickoffs...

[Low Positive]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I completely forgot that you can't move before the KR catches it.  So my point isn't valid.

These rules are designed to get returns, and nobody has come up with a way to game them. Yet.

[bmur66]

Why do they have to lift their dresses over their head until the ball is caught? I don’t get it.

[Boatdrinks]

After 3 games our kick coverage looks pretty bad. Gave Miami a great start to last nights game. Hopefully they can figure this thing out quickly. 

[ChronicAndKnuckles]

2 hours ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

I'll never get used to these new kickoff rules. They suck.

 

Then again, I hate Baseball's "ghost runner" rule whereby games tied after nine innings enter extra innings with a runner automatically placed on second base. 😳 

 

 Both rules are just ugly

I disagree. At least they made the kick off return a viable part of the game again which had been lacking since the days of Devin Hester.
 

I just think teams need to come up with better strategies on kick off coverage. With teams starting at the 35 and how good kickers are, it only takes about 25-30 yards to get into FG range. If I am a returner I am downing it every chance I get. Kickers should start working with the punters more to work on ball placement and directional kicking which are now much more important.

 

I actually think it’s exciting as kickers now need to develop whole new skill sets instead of just booming it into the end zone like they did in previous years. 

[DapperCam]

11 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said:

The trick is to try to get it to bounce so that if it's downed in the endzone after hitting the landing zone, it gets placed at the 20. 

I have seen some kickers nailing the bounce in the target zone, and that is 100% the best strategy. Requires some real talent from the kicker though to hit that consistently.

[FireChans]

11 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Kicking it to the 9 just allows the guy to catch it on the run and usually get a good return, with the decent chance of breaking one.

 

Seems like smart teams should just boot it through the end zone and put it on the 35.

 

Am I wrong?

 

I think you are. 

 

I think the odds the return team screws something up or takes a penalty or fumbles is a lot better than giving them the ball at the 35 guaranteed.

 

Sure, there's a risk they take it to the 40, but who cares? That's an extra 5 yards and great position either way. 

 

A muffed catch or a penalty or a great tackle pins them anywhere from the 15 and under. That's a 20+ yard difference in field position. That's the difference between starting your next drive on the 50 or the 25. 

[DrDawkinstein]

4 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I think you are. 

 

I think the odds the return team screws something up or takes a penalty or fumbles is a lot better than giving them the ball at the 35 guaranteed.

 

Sure, there's a risk they take it to the 40, but who cares? That's an extra 5 yards and great position either way. 

 

A muffed catch or a penalty or a great tackle pins them anywhere from the 15 and under. That's a 20+ yard difference in field position. That's the difference between starting your next drive on the 50 or the 25. 

 

I dont know, man.

 

Miami didnt start a single drive inside the 20 after a kick off, even after a penalty (set them back from the 32 to 27). But seemed like they were real close to breaking one for a TD at least twice last night.

[Mr. WEO]

5 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

47 yard line

32 yard line

26 yard line

26 yard line

37 yard line

 

I wouldnt say it's "very few" making it to the 35. Those returns average out to the 34 yard line. And each of those come with the chance to pop it for a TD, which was very close on a couple of them.

 

When the game was on the line at the end, they wisely kicked it into the end zone. Just do that all game instead of giving the other team a chance to turn the game around.

 

 

you listed one game and one team (I assume), and only 1 of those returns was of any significance compared to a touchback.    

 

anyway, the logic of the NFL for this change makes little sense.  there's no way you can reduce injuries by encouraging more returns on kickoffs.

[Steve Billieve]

6 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

47 yard line

32 yard line

26 yard line

26 yard line

37 yard line

 

I wouldnt say it's "very few" making it to the 35. Those returns average out to the 34 yard line. And each of those come with the chance to pop it for a TD, which was very close on a couple of them.

 

When the game was on the line at the end, they wisely kicked it into the end zone. Just do that all game instead of giving the other team a chance to turn the game around.

 

 

There's a disproportionate number of fumbles and penalties on returns too

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

you listed one game and one team (I assume), and only 1 of those returns was of any significance compared to a touchback.    

 

anyway, the logic of the NFL for this change makes little sense.  there's no way you can reduce injuries by encouraging more returns on kickoffs.

 

Yeah, man. This post was just inspired by what I saw last night. If it continues, we should think about just booting it.

 

Agreed on the logic (or lack there of). But hey, it has made kickoffs more entertaining, so I'll take it. No way it's safer for players than when teams were just kicking touchbacks last year.

[billsfan89]

3 minutes ago, Steve Billieve said:

 

There's a disproportionate number of fumbles and penalties on returns too

 

I think people don't always think of that when making risk assessments on kick returns. Yeah you could pop a TD or a long return but you could also fumble or get a penalty and back yourself inside the 20. I think the Bills have to do a better job on the kicks and try to keep opponents around the 30.

[FireChans]

39 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

you listed one game and one team (I assume), and only 1 of those returns was of any significance compared to a touchback.    

 

anyway, the logic of the NFL for this change makes little sense.  there's no way you can reduce injuries by encouraging more returns on kickoffs.

Was the logic to make it safer or to save the play?

[Mr. WEO]

40 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Was the logic to make it safer or to save the play?

 

the stated primary purpose was to promote safety.  if it was just to promote returns, they would move the touchback back to the 20.

[Augie]

The kickoff is a much uglier play in person. TV coverage helps to hide what an ugly play that is with the kicker so far behind the actual football players. Yes, that’s an odd first reaction, but I wish the NFL played football like the rest of the world. 

[FireChans]

13 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

the stated primary purpose was to promote safety.  if it was just to promote returns, they would move the touchback back to the 20.

?

 

I think the issue was that everyone was blasting it out of bounds and taking the touchback.

 

Moving up the touch back made it so that teams would be incentivized to keep the ball in play.

[TheFunPolice]

kickoffs are a competitive and exciting play now, rather than a formality, so I'll take it.

 

It's also a much safer play 

[The Jokeman]

15 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Kicking it to the 9 just allows the guy to catch it on the run and usually get a good return, with the decent chance of breaking one.

 

Seems like smart teams should just boot it through the end zone and put it on the 35.

 

Am I wrong?

 

No because then you lose any chance at turnover or pinning the team inside the 35 etc. 

[SinatraSinger]

9 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

47 yard line

32 yard line

26 yard line

26 yard line

37 yard line

 

I wouldnt say it's "very few" making it to the 35. Those returns average out to the 34 yard line. And each of those come with the chance to pop it for a TD, which was very close on a couple of them.

 

When the game was on the line at the end, they wisely kicked it into the end zone. Just do that all game instead of giving the other team a chance to turn the game around.

 

I look at these stats differently.  This tells me that 60% of these kick-offs resulted in the opposing team starting before their 35 and 40% of them before the 30.  If you look at the one that went to the 37, which is basically a wash, only 20% of the kick-offs resulted in a start past the 35.  I think they should keep doing what they are doing.

[BRH]

10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

why give everyone the ball on the 35 when very few would get there on the return?

 

 

7 hours ago, Low Positive said:

These rules are designed to get returns, and nobody has come up with a way to game them. Yet.

 

1 hour ago, TheFunPolice said:

kickoffs are a competitive and exciting play now, rather than a formality, so I'll take it.

 

It's also a much safer play 

 

This.  The league wants returns because they're exciting.  They don't want concussions or paralyses.  So this is the happy medium.  It's why they changed the rules again after last year when everyone kicked it out of the EZ.  If there are no returns, then why have kickoffs at all?

 

I'm fine with the way it is now.

[Watkins90]

I think with some kickers being able to hit from 65+ yards just putting it at the 35 may be a mistake.