New Proposal to replace onside kicks!!!

[jrfitz06]

The Denver Broncos just proposed a rule change to replace the onside kick,

Instead of having the onside kick teams would have the option to take the ball 4th & 15 for their OWN 35 Yard Line.

No I don't think this has any chance of passing this year but this could be the rule within the next 5 years.

What do you guys Think???

https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...e-kicks/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.48afa7c768c7

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I’d prefer that over attempting an onsides kick under the current kickoff rules, actually.

 

[primetime]

It's what the AAF is doing and it works better than the now impossible NFL onside.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

One of the stupidest rule proposals I've ever heard. Wonder if it came directly from the horse face's mouth.

Special teams is part of the game. They need to figure out how to make it less than impossible to succeed at while still allowing for player safety. Must work without those two ends.

 

[Brick27]

The onside kick is suppose to be risky and low odds. If you find yourself in that situation, it SHOULD be difficult and unlikely. Why does a team deserve a more favorable means to get the ball game when they’ve pinned themselves in a situation where they haven’t earned it? What are the odds of converting from 4th and 15? Would think they’re more likely.

Similar to KC Queefs b*tching about both teams getting the ball in OT, it sounds like just another rule that would employ even more favorable circumstances for a team to score points, and less focus on the other phases of the game.

 

[jrfitz06]

I think its a great idea it and there is a lot of room to tweak it so the percentage converted dont get to crazy either way ie if 4th & 15 is only converted 10% of the time they could change it to 4th & 10 or make it 4th & 20 if teams start converting it too much, there's a lot of room for growth to make games more competitive.

 

[everlong]

The only other thing I can see them doing it moving the yards the kicking team can touch the ball at from ten down to 7.

 

[RayClay]

You have to admit, it will be really exciting to watch the ref hand the ball to one of the teams.

 

[GodBrady]

I think its a great idea it and there is a lot of room to tweak it so the percentage converted dont get to crazy either way ie if 4th & 15 is only converted 10% of the time they could change it to 4th & 10 or make it 4th & 20 if teams start converting it too much, there's a lot of room for growth to make games more competitive.

Agree. It might take some tweaking.

 

[Antdawg]

The onside kick is suppose to be risky and low odds. If you find yourself in that situation, it SHOULD be difficult and unlikely. Why does a team deserve a more favorable means to get the ball game when they’ve pinned themselves in a situation where they haven’t earned it? What are the odds of converting from 4th and 15? Would think they’re more likely.

Similar to KC Queefs b*tching about both teams getting the ball in OT, it sounds like just another rule that would employ even more favorable circumstances for a team to score points, and less focus on the other phases of the game.

This.

Let's not make the game of football into a cartoon.

 

[TB_Helmet]

I know I’m being overconfident but I feel like a Brady offense would be able to convert that about 40% of the time at the end of the game against tired defenses.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

This is a USFL move.
The team eschewing the onside kick for the 4th & whatever from wherever is already behind. They may have nothing to lose.
Why do these losers get awarded a chance to get a helmet catch type play or more probably a bogus pass interference or a phantom away from the play defensive holding call for a first down? Controversies abound.
NFW!!!

 

[Gwedd]

I think it works fine the way it is. IF something has to change, then a better idea is to move the receiving team's players back another 5 yards or so.

But otherwise, I think it needs to be left alone.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Your team does not have the ball -
you have no right to have the ball unless the opponent screws up.
So no - getting a free possession is a non starter.

 

[aluminum seats]

Did that many guys really get hurt under the old kick rules? I don’t remember that.

 

[Wheelman]

No, bring back old kickoff rules, eliminate thursday night football. Problem solved.

 

[varjao]

Makes no sense to me.

 

[Wheelman]

One of the stupidest rule proposals I've ever heard. Wonder if it came directly from the horse face's mouth.

Special teams is part of the game. They need to figure out how to make it less than impossible to succeed at while still allowing for player safety. Must work without those two ends.

With an assist from that piece of **** human Bill Polian who co-founded the AAF.

 

[XLIX]

For now we won't see it. But when the NFL inevitably gets rid of the kickoff, this is probably what they will do.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Terrible idea