Change the kickoff rules to this?

Donate To GopherHole


I guess that's better than the nearly automatic touchback they have now but I wish they'd just go back to kicking off from the 30 and touchbacks going to the 20 like it used to be. This doesn't look as exciting as a normal kickoff.
 

matt said:
I like it. It obviously takes away the surprise onside kick, but I think that’s a small price to pay to have more kicks returned.
Click to expand...

How many surprise onside kicks does this eliminate? There is like 9 per year as it is.
 

Meh. I give them full credit for being clever ... but it takes all excitement out of it. Granted, for a noble reason to prevent concussions.

But it's silly.

Just get rid of kickoffs. There would still be FG's, XP's, and punts. Plenty of foot for football.

Unless you're wanting to onside, then of course that is still allowed. So then essentially your choice after scoring points is to go for an onside or "defer" (or whatever word you want to use) which allows the other team to just get the ball at the 25.
 


Gophers_4life said:
Meh. I give them full credit for being clever ... but it takes all excitement out of it. Granted, for a noble reason to prevent concussions.

But it's silly.

Just get rid of kickoffs. There would still be FG's, XP's, and punts. Plenty of foot for football.

Unless you're wanting to onside, then of course that is still allowed. So then essentially your choice after scoring points is to go for an onside or "defer" (or whatever word you want to use) which allows the other team to just get the ball at the 25.
Click to expand...
No special teams is a big part of the game including kickoffs!!!
 

I thought I would hate it but ….. that’s actually pretty neat…
 












Word said:
So many kickoffs these days are touchbacks. Most of the time it's a big waste of time.
Click to expand...
They why wouldn't you change the rule to try to develop a way of making them meaningful?
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Your argument against changing the kickoff rules (to make them more impactful) is that kickoffs are meaningless. They're only meaningless because of the current rules.
Click to expand...
Which were put into place to deal with concussions.

The XFL made the decision and it is a neat idea that is out of the box. We’ll have a season of data to see what happens.

If it ends up being the vast, vast majority of the returns just get tackled at the 25-30, then I see no point in doing it.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Which were put into place to deal with concussions.

The XFL made the decision and it is a neat idea that is out of the box. We’ll have a season of data to see what happens.

If it ends up being the vast, vast majority of the returns just get tackled at the 25-30, then I see no point in doing it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get why the rule was changed. I'm just saying the argument against the XFL rule shouldn't be "kickoffs are meaningless". Whether they like the rule or not, the entire goal of the rule is to make them meaninful.

If the vast majority of kickoffs end up in a tackle, then the rule is working. Right now, the vast majority of kickoffs end up with the ball bouncing in the endzone. It would be a terrible rule if the vast majority of kickoffs ended up with long returns - that would be way TOO much.

It's like XP - the vast majority are made.
Punts - the vast majority are not blocked and have little to no return.

That's the entire appeal of ST.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
They why wouldn't you change the rule to try to develop a way of making them meaningful?
Click to expand...
I'm up for whatever. Either get rid of them completely or make them interesting.
 


This will be in the NFL in the next 3 years.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Yeah, I get why the rule was changed. I'm just saying the argument against the XFL rule shouldn't be "kickoffs are meaningless". Whether they like the rule or not, the entire goal of the rule is to make them meaninful.

If the vast majority of kickoffs end up in a tackle, then the rule is working. Right now, the vast majority of kickoffs end up with the ball bouncing in the endzone. It would be a terrible rule if the vast majority of kickoffs ended up with long returns - that would be way TOO much.

It's like XP - the vast majority are made.
Punts - the vast majority are not blocked and have little to no return.

That's the entire appeal of ST.
Click to expand...
But actually .... they are meaningless, on their face. They serve no purpose other than to give the ball to the other team after you've scored punts. They don't have the direct meaning that all of the others do.

Punts - reward a team for gaining field position. If you've marched down the field, but then stalled, you have the chance to pin the opponent down with a well executed punt. That, in of itself, is meaningful, even if it's a fair catch.
FG - again a reward for gaining field position. Allows you to score 3 points instead of trying for a first down or TD and possibly turning the ball over. That, in of itself, is meaningful.
XP - the "safe" option to get the 7th point after a TD, instead of going for two. That, in of itself, is meaningful.


Then with it being neutered to reduce concussion risk -- which was the correct call to make -- it's even worse.


Again, I commend the XFL for the neat, out of the box idea to "revive" "meaningful" and exciting kickoff returns but avoid concussions. I just don't think such a thing can be done. We'll see
 


I was hoping this thread was going to be a rule like, "No kickoffs earlier than Noon Local time."

Sigh.
 

matt said:
I like it. It obviously takes away the surprise onside kick, but I think that’s a small price to pay to have more kicks returned.
Click to expand...
And the actually completely eliminated the onside kick and replaced it with a one down scenario. Basically you start with a 4th and 15. Great ideas.
 

MNfootballfan said:
And the actually completely eliminated the onside kick and replaced it with a one down scenario. Basically you start with a 4th and 15. Great ideas.
Click to expand...
:devilish::

so, getting rid of an actual kicking play (the onside kick) and replacing it with real football, is good, but getting rid of normal kick-off, which mostly results in touchbacks, and replacing it with a concocted thing to try to force more kick returns, is also good?
 

I’m liking the new kickoff formation. Now allow the returner to throw a forward pass and we’d really have some fun.

I’m not sure about the onside kick replacement, but it’s probably safer. Nothing like being a target for an elite athlete that gets a 10 yard running running start.
 

WAGopher said:
I’m liking the new kickoff formation. Now allow the returner to throw a forward pass and we’d really have some fun.

I’m not sure about the onside kick replacement, but it’s probably safer. Nothing like being a target for an elite athlete that gets a 10 yard running running start.
Click to expand...


Everyone seems to be trying to get clean blocks and other guys get to the runner. Looks relatively low contact and … pretty interesting actually.
 
Last edited:

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Everyone seems to be trying to get clean blocks and other guys get to the runner. Looks relatively low contact and … pretty interesting actually.
Click to expand...
True, and I’ve always enjoyed the onside kick. Why I’m not sure about the 15 yard play is that usually the team trying the onside play, has found some momentum, and that can make the one play try a little more successful.
 

I like the CFL rule on no kickoff after a field goal. Opposing team starts at the 35. Speeds up game, might make teams go for it more often.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom