Belichick right again

[patfanken]

The play they should get rid of is the extra point. Instead they should give the team a choice to put it on the one yd line for one point. On the 3 yd line for 2 points And on the 10 yd line for 3 points. THAT would not only bring some excitement back into the play, but also create some strategy issues as well as great 2nd guessing for the fans and mediots,

I think the KO's belong in the game. From what I read, the league got what it wanted out of the new rules. There were a lot fewer injuries since the moved the KO up. Its still a very excited play.

As for the lawsuits, I am both mad and saddened my it. Its just another example that the only thing America makes these days are lawsuits. "Can you believe it Rick, I am shocked to find out that if I run into people at high speeds I stand the risk of getting concussions......AND I am equally shocked to find out that concussions are bad for you" :rolleyes;

That being said if I had actually played in the NFL, I would gladly added my name to the list on the suit. Who wouldn't. A lawyer comes up to you says, add your name to this suit and you can get some money at no cost to you. Why wouldn't you add your name. I am all for player safety, but this lawsuit is crap

 

[upstater1]

Just expand rosters.

You make enough money.

Stop being so greedy, NFL.

 

[Ring 6]

yeah but people have been saying this since the dawn of sports, do you really like kickoffs that much? I wouldn't miss them at all, I'd definitely trade them away for having one or two more guys healthy all year

Yes, kickoffs are a big part of the game. You will be eliminating many parts of a traditional football game, such as:
1) Electrifying returns
2) Big hits
3) Eliminating in large part the opportunity for a team coming from behind late in the game by eliminating the onside kick. This may be the biggest change in the quality of the product
4) Strategy. We have won at least one game due to kicking deep and pinning a team back instead of onside kicking when they were defending the threat of the onside kick

Additionally, you aren't trading it for one or two more healthy guys a season, unless you can show me one or two guys each year being injured on kickoffs. My memory says that hasn't happened.

What do we do about punts? Which by the way are more dangerous to player safety? The team elects to give the ball over 40 yards away?

 

[Ring 6]

I personally would not mind having kickoffs go away entirely. I hate the back-to-back commercial breaks with one play in between.

Commercials would not be reduced. What you would get is the same amount of commercials without the kickoff to break up the commercials.
NOTHING will ever be done by the NFL to reduce revenues.

 

[Ring 6]

yeah but people have been saying this since the dawn of sports, do you really like kickoffs that much? I wouldn't miss them at all, I'd definitely trade them away for having one or two more guys healthy all year

BTW, people saying this since the dawn of sports doesn't diminish the point, it enhances it.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Commercials would not be reduced. What you would get is the same amount of commercials without the kickoff to break up the commercials.
NOTHING will ever be done by the NFL to reduce revenues.

That said, there are actually limits to the number of commercial breaks each network can have in a game. That's why the last half of Q4 often goes by without a commercial break.

 

[nukin]

The play they should get rid of is the extra point. Instead they should give the team a choice to put it on the one yd line for one point. On the 3 yd line for 2 points And on the 10 yd line for 3 points. THAT would not only bring some excitement back into the play, but also create some strategy issues as well as great 2nd guessing for the fans and mediots,

That's a cool idea, although I don't understand why teams just go for 2 points every time currently. Seems to work well against all madden

 

[Sicilian]

I'm neutral on kickoffs honestly. Even the big returns I've never found all that exciting, I don't know why. That said, just giving the ball to the other team at the 20 is insufferably boring, and as many have mentioned removes some strategy from the game.

If they can come up with a safer but adequately exciting play to replace kickoffs with that can start a drive (and gives the "kicking" team a small chance to recover late in games), then I'd eventually just get used to it and it won't matter. But I can't think of anything off the top of my head that would satisfy all those requirements.

 

[Sicilian]

That's a cool idea, although I don't understand why teams just go for 2 points every time currently. Seems to work well against all madden

It's something I've thought about in regards to very efficient offenses like the Patriots. Basically, if your success rate is over 50% you're averaging out more points going for 2 than you are kicking the PAT.

Let's say your team can score on a 2-pt 60% of the time and has an offense that scores 4 TD's per game. You could easily treat it like an investment portfolio... go for the conversions in the first half, knowing you're going to get three or four chances to make up for any early misses. Then, late in the game when you don't have the time left for the averages to play out, you play it safe and kick the PAT (depending on the score and situation left of course).

I'm sure there are stats and other factors that make this impractical, but I am kind of surprised that high powered offenses in today's NFL haven't started toying with this idea yet.

 

[Wax Frog]

But I can't think of anything off the top of my head that would satisfy all those requirements.

Safer? I don't know, but I'd like to see the teams line up at the 50 and wait for the ref to toss the ball in the air - "come and get it!"

 

[Ring 6]

It's something I've thought about in regards to very efficient offenses like the Patriots. Basically, if your success rate is over 50% you're averaging out more points going for 2 than you are kicking the PAT.

Let's say your team can score on a 2-pt 60% of the time and has an offense that scores 4 TD's per game. You could easily treat it like an investment portfolio... go for the conversions in the first half, knowing you're going to get three or four chances to make up for any early misses. Then, late in the game when you don't have the time left for the averages to play out, you play it safe and kick the PAT (depending on the score and situation left of course).

I'm sure there are stats and other factors that make this impractical, but I am kind of surprised that high powered offenses in today's NFL haven't started toying with this idea yet.

In reality the 2 point conversion success rate is well under 50%. That is a large reason why teams don't toy with the idea.
Also, even if they could hit the 60% you are talking about, the 5th highest scoring offense in the NFL scored 48 TDs.
The difference between 100% 1 pt conversions and 60% 2pointers is less than 5 points over the course of an entire season.
So even at a wacky, proabably unrealistic conversion rate, you are talking about 5 points for a top 5 offense, which really doesn't cover the risk of the impact of the lost points on the 40% you miss.

 

[RDS11]

In reality the 2 point conversion success rate is well under 50%. That is a large reason why teams don't toy with the idea.
Also, even if they could hit the 60% you are talking about, the 5th highest scoring offense in the NFL scored 48 TDs.
The difference between 100% 1 pt conversions and 60% 2pointers is less than 5 points over the course of an entire season.
So even at a wacky, proabably unrealistic conversion rate, you are talking about 5 points for a top 5 offense, which really doesn't cover the risk of the impact of the lost points on the 40% you miss.

The conversion rate is actually pretty close to 50% (47.3% over the 2000-09 period):
Advanced NFL Stats: Almost Always Go for 2-Point Conversions?

That being said, I don't think it's a worthwhile risk. I would put it in the same basket as other 'theoritical' strategies, like never punting (always go for it on 4th down). Might look good on paper, but it doesn't account for the psychological aspect a miss might have on the players.

 

[Sicilian]

In reality the 2 point conversion success rate is well under 50%. That is a large reason why teams don't toy with the idea.
Also, even if they could hit the 60% you are talking about, the 5th highest scoring offense in the NFL scored 48 TDs.
The difference between 100% 1 pt conversions and 60% 2pointers is less than 5 points over the course of an entire season.
So even at a wacky, proabably unrealistic conversion rate, you are talking about 5 points for a top 5 offense, which really doesn't cover the risk of the impact of the lost points on the 40% you miss.

Good stuff. That's exactly the kind of number crunching I was referring to in my last line. Thanks for doing the work for me

 

[Reckedtrek]

Dear NFL; Your the most popular sport in the USA.. why keep F'ing with the game? Leave it alone!

BB knew they were after this and now it's coming to light. Maybe that's why BB almost never drafts linebackers... the NFL will surely make them illegal soon enough, too.

 

[DaBruinz]

First off, what proof do they have that getting rid of kick-offs would result in a reduction of injuries. I don't believe that there are more injuries on kick-offs than on other types of plays.

Secondly, I have a better idea than eliminating kick-offs. Let's just eliminate the stadiums and fields and such all together. Get EA to create a game where they can play 11 on 11 all at once.. Then the worst they have to worry about is thumb strains.. [/sarcasm]

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Yes, kickoffs are a big part of the game. You will be eliminating many parts of a traditional football game, such as:
1) Electrifying returns
2) Big hits
3) Eliminating in large part the opportunity for a team coming from behind late in the game by eliminating the onside kick. This may be the biggest change in the quality of the product
4) Strategy. We have won at least one game due to kicking deep and pinning a team back instead of onside kicking when they were defending the threat of the onside kick

Additionally, you aren't trading it for one or two more healthy guys a season, unless you can show me one or two guys each year being injured on kickoffs. My memory says that hasn't happened.

What do we do about punts? Which by the way are more dangerous to player safety? The team elects to give the ball over 40 yards away?

You beat me to it with the point about punts. Were the NFL sincere about player safety rationale on KORs, punt returns have to go too.

 

[Reckedtrek]

First off, what proof do they have that getting rid of kick-offs would result in a reduction of injuries. I don't believe that there are more injuries on kick-offs than on other types of plays.

Secondly, I have a better idea than eliminating kick-offs. Let's just eliminate the stadiums and fields and such all together. Get EA to create a game where they can play 11 on 11 all at once.. Then the worst they have to worry about is thumb strains.. [/sarcasm]

I LIKE IT! Get rid of all the stadium expenses and overhead... but they'd lose parking fees and concessions... so just double ticket prices. Those tendonitis lawsuits are going to be a real *****, though.

 

[unoriginal]

First off, what proof do they have that getting rid of kick-offs would result in a reduction of injuries. I don't believe that there are more injuries on kick-offs than on other types of plays.

While I don’t have access to the NFL’s data, I did find this study on high school athletes, entitled “Effects of Time in Competition, Phase of Play, and Field Location on Injury Severity in High School Football” by Ellen E. Yard. Some of the lowlights as it relates to injuries for high school football players:

• 32.7% of injuries on kickoffs and punts were “severe” (defined as 21 or more missed days), compared to 19.3% on other plays.
• 20.3% of injuries on kickoffs and punts were concussions, compared to 10.9% on other plays.

I’ll leave it to you to decide how relevant those directional findings are to the NFL (which is saying, like that study, that serious injuries occur more frequently on kickoffs). I find it to be pretty self-evident that serious injury rates and concussions would be higher on plays where the acceleration portion of the Mass times Acceleration formula was greatly increased.

source: Hypocrisy, Safety and the Kickoff Rule Change

FYI, normal assumptions are that kickoffs are more dangerous than punt returns, thereby explaining things like Greg Schiano's proposal for modified free kicks after Eric LeGrand was paralyzed. So the numbers for kickoffs alone should be worse than those quoted above.

Personally I would not much care if the kickoff was taken out of the game for good, just as I don't miss the Flying Wedge that was banned over a century ago for similar reasons.

 

[Ring 6]

source: Hypocrisy, Safety and the Kickoff Rule Change

FYI, normal assumptions are that kickoffs are more dangerous than punt returns, thereby explaining things like Greg Schiano's proposal for modified free kicks after Eric LeGrand was paralyzed. So the numbers for kickoffs alone should be worse than those quoted above.

Personally I would not much care if the kickoff was taken out of the game for good, just as I don't miss the Flying Wedge that was banned over a century ago for similar reasons.

There are a number of things wrong with using the stats you posted to imply that the rate of injury on kickoffs is excessive.

 

[THELAWFIRM226]

its just a matter of time before these idiots who run football ruin it. from eliminating kick offs to having teams in Europe they will ruin it sooner or latter. leave it alone already. its perfect the way it is.

How exactly is having a team or two in Europe "ruining football"?