Stupid Idea to limit kick offs, and increase scoring

The NFL is moving slowly toward removing the most iconic play, the Kick Off. The new AAFL will not have kick offs at all.

So, here is my stupid plan, please feel free to flame away, but Id rather get real input. Id like to create an idea to pitch to the NFL in an online campaign.

First of all Kick offs could be limited to the start of the game, and start of the second half.

What to do after a score?

I think the NFL should adopt a form of the Rugby Scrum. Place the ball on the 50 after touchdowns, and have a scrum, place it on the 35 of the scoring team if they kick a close range field goal.

This would increase scoring and create exciting broken play scoring opportunities, and limit field goals.

While Im on the subject, Field goals should be valued between 1-4 points depending on the distance.

Okay, any thoughts?

Instead of a kickoff, why not have one play, offense versus defense, from the 5 yard line. Defense has an opportunity for a safety or TD. Offense has the opportunity for a TD and if the offense gets a play greater than 20 yards, then they get the ball to start the series where that play ended. If they don't get at least 20 yards, then they start the drive at the 20.

Not sure I want to turn the NFL into Rugby. Valuing FG's by distance is intriguing. Kickers will be more valuable especially if you add a "4 pts" range and on the flip side teams will probably eschew the "1 or 2 pt fgs" for a chance at a TD more often than not.

Originally posted by 49erminion:
Not sure I want to turn the NFL into Rugby. Valuing FG's by distance is intriguing. Kickers will be more valuable especially if you add a "4 pts" range and on the flip side teams will probably eschew the "1 or 2 pt fgs" for a chance at a TD more often than not.

Thats the idea behind the lower point value field goals, create more fourth down conversion attempts.

As for being more like rugby, it's only after scoring plays, I really want to avoid the "place the ball on the 25" after a score! With some kind of scrum after a score, the live ball play creates instant scoring opportunities, the team that just scored might have to be prohibited from advancing a recovered scum, to avoid landslide scores. The scoring teams ability to control the scrum, would be great for comebacks, possibly even better than onside kicks.

I don't know, its the offseason, and Im bored.....

If they eliminate the kickoffs a lot of games will lose intrigue towards the end with no chance of an onside kick

Originally posted by crabman82:
If they eliminate the kickoffs a lot of games will lose intrigue towards the end with no chance of an onside kick

Hence the scum!

The new "no kick off" league, the AAFL, will place the ball on the 25 after a score, their version of the onside kick will be to place the ball on the 35, and give the team one chance to gain 10 yards, statistically the odds are about the same....but is seems boring compared to live ball play of an onside kick.....so...instead...a scrum....maybe?

after a score the ball is placed on the 50, ten players, five from each team put in shin guards, lock arms and on the whistle, try to kick the ball out of the circle. The ball may not be touched with a hadn't, and the players cannot break the formation until the ball is out side the circle. Remaining twelve player, six form each team may be any where out side the circle. The team that last scored can not advance the ball, except during the final two minutes of the half, or the game.

No...no...nooooo.

Scrums would be an absolute mess, especially with a bunch of guys who have no idea how to do it properly (which in itself then potentially becomes more dangerous).

Originally posted by JaggedJ:

No...no...nooooo.

Scrums would be an absolute mess, especially with a bunch of guys who have no idea how to do it properly (which in itself then potentially becomes more dangerous).

They would learn

Remember the XFL? lol



Or Schiano's idea? The scoring team retains possession of the ball, but faces a 4th & 15 at their own 30. Basically, punts replace kickoffs and a team can still go for it if they need to.

I don't see scrums as better or worse than those ideas, but I'm not excited about any of them. Particularly since a lot of the rugby fans I know hate scrums since they are laden with restarts, collapses, and penalties that slow down the game.

That being said, I don't have a better idea

This is a terrible idea. Just leave the damn kickoff.

Originally posted by Overkill:

Remember the XFL? lol



Or Schiano's idea? The scoring team retains possession of the ball, but faces a 4th & 15 at their own 30. Basically, punts replace kickoffs and a team can still go for it if they need to.

I don't see scrums as better or worse than those ideas, but I'm not excited about any of them. Particularly since a lot of the rugby fans I know hate scrums since they are laden with restarts, collapses, and penalties that slow down the game.

That being said, I don't have a better idea

Yeah, I'm suffering from off season bordness coupled with anxiety over all this "get rid of the kick off" talk on the radio.

Gotta remeber those rugby fans don't like all the stoppage between plays in American football either. Besides, we're Americans, we can find a away to make scrums better!

Lol, when training camp start?

Originally posted by Lott49ersFan:

This is a terrible idea. Just leave the damn kickoff.

It's The NFL that keeps floating the idea of getting rid of the kick off, not me, I love it!

Originally posted by Lott49ersFan:

This is a terrible idea. Just leave the damn kickoff.

This

When I went to NFL games nearly every weekend, missing the kickoff was not an option. The stands were full and the excitement would build as the ball was in the air and the players were running downfield with ferocious hits all across the field. Those days are gone. The violence, which we loved, is in the past. It's becoming a softer game, a different game.