On-Side Kick Rule Option

[LB48]

League Owners will consider this rule change in their upcoming Virtual Meeting.

 

Teams could still onside kick, but if this proposal was adopted, they also would have the opportunity to convert a 4th-and-15 scenario at their own 25-yard line to retain possession.  Teams could use the 4th-and-15 attempt only twice per game.

 

Gaining 15 or more yards, presumably by passing the football, is certainly easier than executing a successful onside kick. 

 

What's your opinion??

[Watkins90]

Honestly, I don't like it. Why should you get a better chance to come back when you haven't played well enough to have the lead all game. 

[The Dean]

I absolutely hate it. But  if the clock starts running, I hate it less.

 

I think a minor tweak with the offensive/defensive lineups would be a wiser option.

[RiotAct]

I like it... would add some excitement.   Onside kicks have such low probability of working, especially nowadays 

[coloradobillsfan]

don't like it.  it's a desperation measure that should be difficult. 

[first_and_ten]

I love it if the Bills are the team losing.I hate it if the team the Bills are beating needs it

[LB48]

Just now, coloradobillsfan said:

don't like it.  it's a desperation measure that should be difficult. 

I kind of agree.  I can see a team using it in other last minutes of a game situation.

[section122]

Nightmares of "pass interference" being called to benefit certain teams with this scenario.  Anytime you are adding the refs to end of game scenarios you are opening a giant can of worms. 

 

In theory I like the idea.  In reality it sounds terrible.

[msw2112]

I'm more of a traditionalist, so I don't like it.  The on-sides kick is an important part of the game that has always been.  If the new rule passes, however, I could learn to like it.

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

I seriously hate these silly things. It’s football. I don’t want the kick off to go away. I don’t want the extra point to go away. I don’t want the onside kick to go away. Play Football. You want to be safer? Fine. I have no issue with intelligent solutions towards the goals of safety. Don’t change the actual plays in the game please.

[Just Joshin']

Not a fan.  An on side kick under the old rules had a 25% success rate.  A 15 yard pass play must have better odds.  If this is done, the yardage needs to be increased to 20 or more.

 

The penalty issue is also legit - a poor PI call can flip the game.  Yes it could happen regardless but when losing possession it is a double hit.

 

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Just Joshin'

[Sherlock Holmes]

8 hours ago, section122 said:

Nightmares of "pass interference" being called to benefit certain teams with this scenario.  Anytime you are adding the refs to end of game scenarios you are opening a giant can of worms. 

 

In theory I like the idea.  In reality it sounds terrible.

Good thing Thomas is a xxxx xxxxxx now... oh wait

[Moderator Edited for poor choice of language]

[Gugny]

Leave the goddamn game alone.  

[Rubes]

I'd be interested to see what the average conversion rate overall has been for 4th and 15's in the final 2:00.

 

[Koko78]

It's an interesting proposal, in theory.

 

However, I agree with the comments about unchallengable phantom PIs being called (or blatant OPIs being ignored), allowing the refs to be involved in deciding games even more. Also, how do things like defensive holding calls work? Does the offense get an automatic 1st down? A re-do of 4th and 15?

[The Dean]

3 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

It's an interesting proposal, in theory.

 

However, I agree with the comments about unchallengable phantom PIs being called (or blatant OPIs being ignored), allowing the refs to be involved in deciding games even more. Also, how do things like defensive holding calls work? Does the offense get an automatic 1st down? A re-do of 4th and 15?

 

 

I almost think there would have to be different standards for penalties, or different rules altogether for the play. That's a non-starter for me.

[NewEra]

If this passes, we’ll lose a super bowl because of it.  Terrible idea. I’d say a 4th and 30 would be more fair, but then the refs would still be able to become the stars of the game. No way id give the refs another opportunity to lose the game for us

[ehfeuh57]

NO

[Orlando Buffalo]

The only reason I am against it is that some teams would just play a PI call and not even attempt to complete the pass. I like the idea overall but it obviously would become a farce with the poor state of officiating in the league right now.

[ChasBB]

According to the article on NFL.com, over the past two seasons, on-sides kicks have been successful 10.4% of the time (higher than I expected, honestly).  According to Football Outsiders, the average rate of success of a 4th-and-15 scenario is 12.5%.  So, effectively, the proposed rule change increases the odds of keeping the football by only 2.1%, but teams risk giving the opponent the ball on the 25-yd line (instant field goal range for the opponent) instead of somewhere closer to mid-field with a failed on-sides kick.  I don't know if the proposed rule change really provides enough incentive to try it, so I don't see it so much as a "reward" for the trailing team - it's a very risky thing to try.  On the other hand, if your QB has a hot hand in the 4th suddenly, maybe you try it in those situations.  Not sure I like it, but not dead-set against it, either.  I would add a couple of requirements - you must have just scored a TD on the previous play and not a field goal to "earn" the right to attempt the 4th-and-15 and it should not be an option on an opening kickoff of either half.  Actually, I wouldn't allow it in the 1st half at all (not that teams would even consider that).

Edited May 22, 2020 by ChasBB