Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/05/20/25-ways-improve-nfl-fmia-peter-king/

 

This was an interesting article with some good and dumb ideas about how to improve the league. I have to agree with the people who mentioned onside kickoffs. I think the league has to do something to improve the odds of a successful onside try. Right now, there is a lot less drama at the end of games.

 

I actually liked what the AAFL did with onside tries which was something like this:  If the team that just scored trails by 17 or more points or if the team that just scored trails by any amount with fewer than five minutes remaining in the fourth quarter, that team can choose to try to convert a fourth-and-12 play from its own 28. If the team gains 12 or more yards in that one play, it keeps possession. If it doesn’t, the other team takes possession.

Edited by mykidsdad
Posted (edited)

As someone who knows stupid ideas..."improving the onside kick" is a bad idea.

 

if you're going to improve something, you start with something that is used regularly, not something that is used less than 1% of the time.

Edited by jeremy2020
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Changing the onside kick rules doesn't have to be an improvement on anything, it can just be a restoration or mitigation of some more recent rule changes. It's not like its a common play, why not just allow the selection of an onside kick like they do with extra points/two point conversions.  I believe the only reason they changed the onside kicks rules was because of injury risk, but if its a play that hardly ever happens . . .

Posted
11 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

Get rid of the OSK.

 

It's rarely used and only has an 8 percent success rate 

 

And the Bills are dreadful at them. Both ways around. People forget it because we picked them off both times to win both games but in 2017 the Dolphins converted onside kicks against us in both games to give themselves a comeback shot in the final few seconds. I've got a feeling there is a 3rd one too in the McDermott era.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:

Why not just have the rule like it used to be instead of some contrived 4th and 15 BS..

 

Its not supposed to be easy for the team to come back and win..

Ask Kevin Everett

 

agree that contrived 4th and 15 is nonsense. Don't know a good answer, should be a path to a losing team keeping the ball. And if not for the injury risk the old rule was as good as any. An art to the kick as well as a science. Element of surprise when not done at the end of a game. But there is enough injuries when 250-300 lb men run collide from a still position, giving them both a 10 yard sprint before the collision is a recipe for injury.

Posted
3 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:

Why not just have the rule like it used to be instead of some contrived 4th and 15 BS..

 

Its not supposed to be easy for the team to come back and win..

The 4th and 15 if only allowed once a game, in the 4th quarter, and only for a team trailing, would actually allow for the play to require some sort of football skill. There is very limited skill involved in current onside kicks, its just a jump ball type play. Way too much luck involved.

Posted

oh, mykidsdad...

Sorry, just had to beat teef lol

 

Seriously though the 4th down conversion would be a nightmare for a team like the Pats. They would get it 99% of the time and just march down to tie/win the game. 16-0 every season til Brady quits.

×
×
  • Create New...