OT: Onside Kicks

[1960Pats]

Now that the kicking team can't get a running start the onside kick has disappeared. Too bad. It used to be an exciting part of the end of games.

What exactly did the NYFL hope to accomplish with this move? It doesn't look like it added anything to the kickoffs. This seems like another case where the tinkering with rules hasn't worked and may have backfired.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

I guess they don’t want any overtimes

 

[jah]

They didn't want people running directly at each other at full speed. I understand the school of thought that the kickoff is bad for player safety and doesn't actually make the game much more exciting (see the relevant Chart Party episode, it explains much better than I could).

However, the way they've tried to mitigate these problems comes across as a half measure that doesn't really do much of anything. I'd bet that kickoffs are still among the more dangerous plays in football even now...the only thing changed is the intrigue of the play itself has been removed.

Either let players have running starts or replace the kickoff with a 4th and 15 from your own 40 to emulate the probability of making what would have been an onside kick (the other option, analogous to a regular kickoff, would of course be punting).

 

[MassPats38]

The professed reason is always going to be player safety. This article mentioned the impossibility of the onside kick, but it also described that as as "unintended consequence" of the rule change (there just aren't that many kicking scenarios to label something so obvious 'unintended').

With all the players still falling to injury, I would love to see the statistics on how the reduced preseason, shortened overtime and kickoff changes have impacted the overall total on injuries. A rule change like the length of overtime just seemed random (I never heard a single statistics that suggested that change was in any way tied to injuries in the first place).

It all seems like phony PR on "efforts to make the game safer," while keeping aspects like Thursday football, a revenue grab, that clearly invites a higher injury total given reduced recovery time from Sunday games.

 

[Ring 6]

Now that the kicking team can't get a running start the onside kick has disappeared. Too bad. It used to be an exciting part of the end of games.

What exactly did the NYFL hope to accomplish with this move? It doesn't look like it added anything to the kickoffs. This seems like another case where the tinkering with rules hasn't worked and may have backfired.

I think it was a PR stunt. They had to enact a rule to show they cared about player safety. People complain about kickoffs being dangerous. So give them 5 less yards of a running start ( which still has them at full speed by the point of any contact by the way).
Nfl has become a political entity.

 

[TB_Helmet]

Good article on the subject with a proposed new strategy designed for the kicker to recover it (I’m not overly optimistic this will take over)

The Art of Onside Kicking Has Been Reborn

 

[Deus Irae]

The NFL effectively killed the kickoff. In a couple of years, the NFL may officially kill the kickoff. As the league has shown time and again, money a/k/a concussion lawsuit fears, is more important to the NFL than game play.

 

[Ring 6]

The NFL effectively killed the kickoff. In a couple of years, the NFL may officially kill the kickoff. As the league has shown time and again, money a/k/a concussion lawsuit fears, is more important to the NFL than game play.

The NFL is a business. They act like a business. Why is that surprising to anyone?
Would you expect them to invite billion dollar lawsuits in order to keep the game more enjoyable and traditional?

 

[XLIX]

The NFL effectively killed the kickoff. In a couple of years, the NFL may officially kill the kickoff. As the league has shown time and again, money a/k/a concussion lawsuit fears, is more important to the NFL than game play.

They have to keep something around to allow for a team to score and get the ball back immediately. I think they will move to a punt where it is 4th and 10 (15?) from the 35 yard line or something like that.

 

[Froob]

Did the Ravens lose a game recently on an onside kick?

 

[fourhour]

They have to keep something around to allow for a team to score and get the ball back immediately. I think they will move to a punt where it is 4th and 10 (15?) from the 35 yard line or something like that.

A safety allows for that.

 

[jah]

They have to keep something around to allow for a team to score and get the ball back immediately. I think they will move to a punt where it is 4th and 10 (15?) from the 35 yard line or something like that.

I'm not sure if the league has ever actually said they like that 4th down idea, I think it's just something that has caught on with certain sects of football nerds online.

 

[jah]

A safety allows for that.

I think the difference is pretty clear.

 

[fourhour]

I think the difference is pretty clear.

I understand, but stand by my post.

 

[everlong]

If they're not going to allow a running head start they should tinker with how far the ball has to travel before the defensive team can touch the ball. If you keep the receiving team 10 yards back but the ball only has to go 7 yards then the receiving team cannot simply sit back and setup their blocking.

It's just one sample idea but it could give coaches the ability to be very creative.

 

[1960Pats]

Good article on the subject with a proposed new strategy designed for the kicker to recover it (I’m not overly optimistic this will take over)

The Art of Onside Kicking Has Been Reborn

That article was fantastic but I don't agree with it's last statement. The onside kick is not more interesting now.

 

[1960Pats]

If they're not going to allow a running head start they should tinker with how far the ball has to travel before the defensive team can touch the ball. If you keep the receiving team 10 yards back but the ball only has to go 7 yards then the receiving team cannot simply sit back and setup their blocking.

It's just one sample idea but it could give coaches the ability to be very creative.

I think you're on the right track. Maybe they could keep the ball's travel distance at 10 yards but make the receiving team line up 15 back.

 

[Wheelman]

I didn't even realize this was a new rule!

 

[brdmaverick]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I think a 9% success rate is a good rate to be at. It's a desperation play that should give the team 'a chance' but not a good one. I think it's serving its purpose.

 

[BTTA]

In high school we had a kickoff design of a line drive right at the opposing players. Once in a while, theycouldn't get out of the way and it would bounce back to us. They never actually caught it on the fly. Most of the time, they would scramble around for 20 seconds trying to just get a handle on the ball around the 20, and we'd be all over them. Never in my three years did we have on returned beyond the 40.

I guess that success is just due to amateur levels of training.