More of a chance to convert 4th and 15 than to recover an onside kick, especially under the new rules.
When you start working about Refs making calls to change the game because of spreads you should take youre ball hime and stop watching sports.
Really? 4th and 15 will be worse than 0-104? to another post here, how does this rule, opting for 4th and 15 on 4th down attempt eliminate the surprise onside kick during a game? They usually come as a surprise like that NO game, why can't a HC call for an onside kick on an opening drive in the 3rd Q?
Because this rule is meant to replace inside kicks it's even stated in the release. Basically what the 4th and 15 does if if you score and it's a close game instead of kicking it back or going for an onside to get the ball back you can choose to go for a 4th and 15 instead. It eliminates onside kicks.
Players injured on onside kicks isnt the issue. Players were hurt all the time during KO's. The rules were changed so that players wouldn't be as susceptible to injury during KOs. The rule changes to save joints and bones on KOs made it even harder to recover and onside kick, actually making it almost impossible. Which is why the NFL proposed a different way to get that first down But Im sure all the whining that accompanies any rule change has shelved the exciting 4th and 15 try
Where in any of my posts does it say I dont know why theyre doing it? You responded to my post asking why a team cant still attempt an onside kick at another part of the game. I wanted the 4th and 15 play, a lot more exciting than the onside kick. I cant actually believe people are this worked up over a play that never works being eliminated.
They cannot attempt the onside kick because this play is meant to replace it. Meaning they won't do onside kicks anymore. Which was what I responded to.
Injury is the exact reason the rules were changed which is why they are attempting to get rid of onside kicks. That's what this whole thing is about.
Onside kicks are not some special rule. Once the ball travels 10 yards it's anyone's ball. That rule applies to ALL KOs. That leaves it up to the kicking team: Do we want field position or kick it short and try to recover. If they wanted to eliminate onside kicks they just need to eliminate the 10 yard rule, making KOs like punts....once the ball is kicked, it belongs to the other team. I like the 10 yard rule on KOs. It keeps the other team guessing, which can lead to some excitement. And it keeps games 'winnable' right to the end. All fans need is a sliver of hope and they keep watching. What I'D love to see gotten rid of is the 'victory formation' which allows teams to run out the clock with zero risk. Teams should be forced to run plays that attempt to advance the ball, even in the last 1:20 of a game.
Where did it say that the onside kick is now illegal? Who says on the opening drive a team cant line up to kick and try a surprise onside kick, they can the way Im reading it. Im seeing that on 4th down instead of lining up for an onside kick you now can line up on 4th and 15, theres an option. Not a straight out this is the only alternative: Heres the proposal Their rules change would provide an alternative to an onside kick and “allow the team that is trailing in the game a way to maintain possession after scoring by successfully converting a fourth-and-15 play from its own 25-yard line.
An alternative to onside kick... which by what you just posted means they scored and instead of a kickoff or onside they get the ball again... 4th and 15... not on 4th down.. immediately after they score as in when they would kick it back to the other team or do an onside. They are trying to replace the onside kick.
The proposed rule would be an option the teams would have up to twice per game. In no way does it eliminate the insides kick.
I respectfully disagree. That's part of the strategy of the game. Also, when teams do run regular plays, defenders are always punching at the ball and being even more aggressive. That can lead to injuries. If the game is close I could almost see your point, but in blowouts, it would just be prolonging the game and causing unnecessary risk to players
It doesn't eliminate it but it is meant to take its place. It will essentially take it out if the game and I think eventually replace it. I'm not on either side of this argument. I was stating that it will replace it in most cases. He was saying it could be used on 4th down and that's not what it is. It for for using after you score and instead of kicking it back to the opposing team just like the onside kick. Not sure why he didn't get that.
I doubt it would have replaced it, there would be a handful of coaches who would use the option more often, just as there are coaches who go for it on 4th down much more often than most. Notice it's those same teams and coaches who continually propose a similar change and were in support of this latest proposal from Philly. It was voted down by the league and is dead so its become a non issue ,for this season at least.
I think it was just tables. Which means for this season it's on hold but could be voted on next. They probably felt there was enough going on and didn't want to add to it. I get that its gonna be a pretty crazy year.
None of this makes sense. You dont have to score to use the onside kick. 4 and 15, an alternative to the onside kick. Thats it.
What are you arguing? That an option means something more than an alternative? Forgret it the rule was dumped.