4th and 15 Proposed Rule to replace On-Side Kick

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Yeah I'm okay with that. If a team is trailing by that much after 58 minutes then they shouldn't get a chance to pull something out their butt in the final 120 seconds to win the game. It would kind of be like having a 5 point shot in the NBA. Kinda, still have to drive another 60 yards.

The main issue for me though is what some have brought up. On that 4th & 15, what is there's a ticky tack defensive holding call? Or a successful conversion but there was blatant offensive holding that was missed? It's another opportunity for the refs to heavily influence the outcome with a subjective call.

As far as the penalties are concerned I would treat it as a onside kick penalty. Offense commits the penalty it's a fail. The defense commits the foul it's a retry with shortened field

It's statistically as probable to complete a 4 and 15 as the old onside kick. The new onside kick was damn near impossible. Unless you wanna just completely scrap the onside kick from the game. If the 49ers are down by 9 and score a touchdown with 1:15 left on the clock with no timeouts your good with kicking it to the opposing team cause we are down by 2 points after 59 minutes.

Originally posted by Overkill:
Not in favor of it. It's just going to put the refs in the spotlight. Like OP stated, some teams will try for defensive pass interference. Others will run pick routes and dare the refs to make the call. And, of course, fans will always see uncalled holding penalties, etc.

The impact will also not be equal on all teams. A team like the Titans, for example, will have far less chance at picking that up than KC. The Titans are also less likely to be blowing teams out, and therefore more likely to see an opponent take advantage of this. It clearly favors a certain play style and gives teams with top 5 qb's another advantage. The rest of the league will either see marginal benefit or no benefit at all.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel.

Onside kicks suck now, but at least it involves special teams; i.e. it's not about a team's offense or defense, it's about a third unit of the team. This might have been a cool rule 15 years ago, but with the way they've b*****dized the ability to play defense, it puts things even more in favor of the offense. Someone else in this thread mentioned an awesome point that I didn't even consider - teams are likely going to be attempting this "onside replacement" against a gassed defense.

Put this all together and you've got:
- a defense that is playing with one hand behind it's back because of the modern-era NFL rules
- a defense that is likely tired as hell, because the other team will probably have just put together a long drive
- a rule that now makes the elite quarterbacks in the league even more valuable (like you said, run-focused teams will have a harder time here)

It's kind of a novel idea, but it just seems to be way too imbalanced. Onside kicks have always seemed really fluky/random. I think that's actually a good thing, because getting an extra possession - which is basically a turnover - should be really hard and fluky.

Originally posted by ChicoCorrales:
Not in favor of it. Why do they have to keep ruining the game each year?

This- so many rule changes but refs call or don't call as they see fit

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Yeah I'm okay with that. If a team is trailing by that much after 58 minutes then they shouldn't get a chance to pull something out their butt in the final 120 seconds to win the game. It would kind of be like having a 5 point shot in the NBA. Kinda, still have to drive another 60 yards.

The main issue for me though is what some have brought up. On that 4th & 15, what is there's a ticky tack defensive holding call? Or a successful conversion but there was blatant offensive holding that was missed? It's another opportunity for the refs to heavily influence the outcome with a subjective call.

As far as the penalties are concerned I would treat it as a onside kick penalty. Offense commits the penalty it's a fail. The defense commits the foul it's a retry with shortened field

It's statistically as probable to complete a 4 and 15 as the old onside kick. The new onside kick was damn near impossible. Unless you wanna just completely scrap the onside kick from the game. If the 49ers are down by 9 and score a touchdown with 1:15 left on the clock with no timeouts your good with kicking it to the opposing team cause we are down by 2 points after 59 minutes.

In that situation you go for the onside kick. This new gimmicky 4th & 15 idea does add excitement, I won't argue that, but it also invites a bad (non)call to influence the outcome of the game. The owners already shot this idea down so I guess it's over with for now.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Yeah I'm okay with that. If a team is trailing by that much after 58 minutes then they shouldn't get a chance to pull something out their butt in the final 120 seconds to win the game. It would kind of be like having a 5 point shot in the NBA. Kinda, still have to drive another 60 yards.

The main issue for me though is what some have brought up. On that 4th & 15, what is there's a ticky tack defensive holding call? Or a successful conversion but there was blatant offensive holding that was missed? It's another opportunity for the refs to heavily influence the outcome with a subjective call.

As far as the penalties are concerned I would treat it as a onside kick penalty. Offense commits the penalty it's a fail. The defense commits the foul it's a retry with shortened field

It's statistically as probable to complete a 4 and 15 as the old onside kick. The new onside kick was damn near impossible. Unless you wanna just completely scrap the onside kick from the game. If the 49ers are down by 9 and score a touchdown with 1:15 left on the clock with no timeouts your good with kicking it to the opposing team cause we are down by 2 points after 59 minutes.

In that situation you go for the onside kick. This new gimmicky 4th & 15 idea does add excitement, I won't argue that, but it also invites a bad (non)call to influence the outcome of the game. The owners already shot this idea down so I guess it's over with for now.

I think it's a missed opportunity tbh. Make it a 4th and 20. During the play all penalties are 5 yard infractions. So if the defense continues to hold defensively the offense has a higher chance to convert. The current format of an onside kick is horrible. Not being able to overload one side. Having to go from a flat footed stance. The only way to get an onside kick now is either surprise or the other team misplays it horribly. I liked the old format but due to safety concerns they changed it and now it seems like the kicking team has no chance.

I think the NFL needs to quit considering rule changes until the officials learn the current rules. It seems like they have to huddle up and discuss every penalty call. If the rules are that hard to interpret then they should simplify them. If the officials aren't trained well enough then they need to improve the training. If they're incompetent then get rid of them. They also need to improve the replay system which takes way to long. After they decide on whether to uphold the call or not thern they have to spend time deciding where to place the ball and how much time should be on the clock. Both of those should be decided by another person while they are reviewing the play. Way too much dead time in football. Nearly every game takes 3 and 1/2 hours and they have about 15 minutes of actual action.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Yeah I'm okay with that. If a team is trailing by that much after 58 minutes then they shouldn't get a chance to pull something out their butt in the final 120 seconds to win the game. It would kind of be like having a 5 point shot in the NBA. Kinda, still have to drive another 60 yards.

The main issue for me though is what some have brought up. On that 4th & 15, what is there's a ticky tack defensive holding call? Or a successful conversion but there was blatant offensive holding that was missed? It's another opportunity for the refs to heavily influence the outcome with a subjective call.

As far as the penalties are concerned I would treat it as a onside kick penalty. Offense commits the penalty it's a fail. The defense commits the foul it's a retry with shortened field

It's statistically as probable to complete a 4 and 15 as the old onside kick. The new onside kick was damn near impossible. Unless you wanna just completely scrap the onside kick from the game. If the 49ers are down by 9 and score a touchdown with 1:15 left on the clock with no timeouts your good with kicking it to the opposing team cause we are down by 2 points after 59 minutes.

In that situation you go for the onside kick. This new gimmicky 4th & 15 idea does add excitement, I won't argue that, but it also invites a bad (non)call to influence the outcome of the game. The owners already shot this idea down so I guess it's over with for now.

Thank goodness.

I never liked the idea.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Yeah I'm okay with that. If a team is trailing by that much after 58 minutes then they shouldn't get a chance to pull something out their butt in the final 120 seconds to win the game. It would kind of be like having a 5 point shot in the NBA. Kinda, still have to drive another 60 yards.

The main issue for me though is what some have brought up. On that 4th & 15, what is there's a ticky tack defensive holding call? Or a successful conversion but there was blatant offensive holding that was missed? It's another opportunity for the refs to heavily influence the outcome with a subjective call.

As far as the penalties are concerned I would treat it as a onside kick penalty. Offense commits the penalty it's a fail. The defense commits the foul it's a retry with shortened field

It's statistically as probable to complete a 4 and 15 as the old onside kick. The new onside kick was damn near impossible. Unless you wanna just completely scrap the onside kick from the game. If the 49ers are down by 9 and score a touchdown with 1:15 left on the clock with no timeouts your good with kicking it to the opposing team cause we are down by 2 points after 59 minutes.

In that situation you go for the onside kick. This new gimmicky 4th & 15 idea does add excitement, I won't argue that, but it also invites a bad (non)call to influence the outcome of the game. The owners already shot this idea down so I guess it's over with for now.

I think it's a missed opportunity tbh. Make it a 4th and 20. During the play all penalties are 5 yard infractions. So if the defense continues to hold defensively the offense has a higher chance to convert. The current format of an onside kick is horrible. Not being able to overload one side. Having to go from a flat footed stance. The only way to get an onside kick now is either surprise or the other team misplays it horribly. I liked the old format but due to safety concerns they changed it and now it seems like the kicking team has no chance.

I agree flat foot kickoff rule reduces the already slim chance at recovering an onside kick. Sure, I guess add some oddball rules for the 4th and 15 play and eliminate the chance of automatic first downs. I'm all for adding another exciting situation to end of game moments so I see why this might be a missed opportunity to add drama.

Going back to your scenario where a team scores late to make it a one score game, and not having a chance to win because an onside kick recovery is so improbable, I say tough.

theduke85 put it well in his post above: "Onside kicks have always seemed really fluky/random. I think that's actually a good thing, because getting an extra possession - which is basically a turnover - should be really hard and fluky."

Apparently I don't understand the reasoning for it. Was there a questionable situation which brought it into consideration or to eliminate punt return injuries? Was it to promote the chance of a losing team coming from behind ?
If they just want excitement up to the last second, then penalize the victory formation with a loss of downs to keep the game action rolling.

Originally posted by Sourball:

Apparently I don't understand the reasoning for it. Was there a questionable situation which brought it into consideration or to eliminate punt return injuries? Was it to promote the chance of a losing team coming from behind ?
If they just want excitement up to the last second, then penalize the victory formation with a loss of downs to keep the game action rolling.

Because when they changed kickoff rules to no running start and not being allowed to overload one side of the kickoff it made onside kicks irrelevant. But screw it if your down by 2 scores the team deserves to lose we don't like the game to be competitive or have intrigue.

Football is already unrecognizable from its glory days and this just makes it worse.

It will be a s**t show of refs deciding games.

Originally posted by WINiner:
It will be a s**t show of refs deciding games.

they already do, but we just cant stop watching unfortunately.

I don't think it's a completely horrible idea but the main reason I oppose it is you have Seattle with even more last-second rabbits they're pulling out of their ass than they already do.

Yeah, anyone who says this would be exciting... it would just lead to more BS finishes like the packers/cawks NFCCG. I'm glad it didn't pass.

Personally, I think they should just go back to the old onside kick rules (let the kicking team load up on one side). The whole "player safety" issue for onside kicks is a reach.