Thoughts on the NFL's possible onside kick proposal

[JessieP]

With the major emphasis on safety a new proposal was tossed around at the league meeting this past month. The onside kick has always been one of the most dangerous play's in football, the receiving teams front line are basically sitting ducks. It's the only play left where you can clobber a player who is forced to take his eye off oncoming contact. Football purist have never been a fan of it because it also allows for more "luck of the bounce" than any other play.

The proposal is that if a team is down by 7 or more in the last 5 minutes of the half or the game they can request a try to get the ball back after a score. They would get the ball on the 20 and they must get to the 35 in one play. If they get the 15 yards they start there, 1st an 10. If the attempt fails the receiving team gets the ball wherever they got to.

Not only is it safer it would finally eliminate the least football play in football. I personally vote yes.   

[incogneto]

If you can find meaningful statistics showing injuries during insides kicks I would support it.  Otherwise I would not change it due to anecdotal evidence.

[Overdahill]

Depends on whether you are asking Overdahill Jekyll or Hyde? 

[GRN R H-2 X-Deep Over]

I think the onside kick is a very football play. See ball get ball. Knock down drag out.

[HeberFan]

How about the NFL let coaches call whatever play they want ?

[Dayton Kitchens]

I say no.    If people are that worried about injuries then have the games played on a computer simulation and be done with it.

[JessieP]

The proposal was tabled for this year, it may come up next year. Besides safety another thrust behind it is the incredibly low number of successful attempts. In the NFL an onside kick works 2% of the time, it's dangerous and boring. I'd bet if you ask KK he'd tell you that the number of OK's they recover is far less than 10 years ago. Most teams have caught on. The OK is a tiny part of PA's success, the no punting is far more successful. Over the past 2 times Batesville played PA we recovered every OK and still got killed. I'd venture to guess that most times PA tries it they fail. Now Harrison fell apart last season when they couldn't handle any of them but most teams can.

[JessieP]

I say no.    If people are that worried about injuries then have the games played on a computer simulation and be done with it.

Well said. Why do we have any safety rules at all? What's with this wussie fair catch thing? And why can you not hit the QB after he's released the ball? I say you should be able to blindside them in the huddle. While we're at it who came up with this no grabbing the face mask rule? Give me one good reason why razor blades are forbidden? Pass interference, clipping and crotch kicks are what this game needs. If people like Dayton ran the show football would be dead in about 18 months.

[beach bum]

I say no.    If people are that worried about injuries then have the games played on a computer simulation and be done with it.

You've never heard of a happy medium in your life have you? Or things in moderation?

[GRN R H-2 X-Deep Over]

Giving teams easier ways to get the football back could put defensive players at risk playing tired--back to back . . . to back [maybe] possessions. And maybe even offensive players too.
Removing the onside kick to make extra possessions easier does not feel right. If a team gets a lead over the course of a three-hour slug-fest, it should be relatively easy for that team to keep their lead. Every play needs to matter, not just the last couple possessions.

'Football may be the best taught subject in school because it is the thing we have not tried to make easy.'

[Dayton Kitchens]

You've never heard of a happy medium in your life have you? Or things in moderation?

Exchanging on side kicks for a "get the ball back with one opportunity to make 15 yards" is NOT moderation.    It is the elimination of a feature of the game that has been around almost since the beginning with no evidence that it serves any real purpose.

[MDXPHD]

I don't know why a team has to be down by 7 to go for it. I say if you change the rule, let the team go for it whenever they want. If they don't get the 15 yards, the other team gets the ball on the 20 or where they got the ball to.

[Coach T Wood]

The proposal was tabled for this year, it may come up next year. Besides safety another thrust behind it is the incredibly low number of successful attempts. In the NFL an onside kick works 2% of the time, it's dangerous and boring. I'd bet if you ask KK he'd tell you that the number of OK's they recover is far less than 10 years ago. Most teams have caught on. The OK is a tiny part of PA's success, the no punting is far more successful. Over the past 2 times Batesville played PA we recovered every OK and still got killed. I'd venture to guess that most times PA tries it they fail. Now Harrison fell apart last season when they couldn't handle any of them but most teams can.

Can you give me an example of when it is boring?  That's kind of a personal opinion, I understand, but in most cases since the team that is doing it is down by a score with very little time left but with the chance of making a very unlikely come back in a game a reality.......what is boring about that?   Again, it's all relative.  Personal opinions I understand.

[JessieP]

Can you give me an example of when it is boring?  That's kind of a personal opinion, I understand, but in most cases since the team that is doing it is down by a score with very little time left but with the chance of making a very unlikely come back in a game a reality.......what is boring about that?   Again, it's all relative.  Personal opinions I understand.

It's boring in the sense that it was floated by an NFL team (Broncos) in regards to the NFL. The onside kick has an NFL success rate of 2%. 60+ yard field goals have a 37% success rate.

The reason the proposal was put forth was the NFL instructed all of it's members to submit safety suggestions. The panel that the NFL put together at the onset of CTE listed the kick off portion of football as the most dangerous. The onside kick is the only play left in pro football where a player going after the ball is never protected as a defenseless player, he's fair game. While he is focused on the ball, and the ball alone, he can be clocked, even before the ball arrives. There are rules for safety all over the game, pass interference, defensive player, fair catch and a few others. There are currently no rules to protect players receiving the ball on the onside kick. 

[HeberFan]

Coaches should be able to call whatever play the want, whenever they want.

[MDXPHD]

It's boring in the sense that it was floated by an NFL team (Broncos) in regards to the NFL. The onside kick has an NFL success rate of 2%. 60+ yard field goals have a 37% success rate.

The reason the proposal was put forth was the NFL instructed all of it's members to submit safety suggestions. The panel that the NFL put together at the onset of CTE listed the kick off portion of football as the most dangerous. The onside kick is the only play left in pro football where a player going after the ball is never protected as a defenseless player, he's fair game. While he is focused on the ball, and the ball alone, he can be clocked, even before the ball arrives. There are rules for safety all over the game, pass interference, defensive player, fair catch and a few others. There are currently no rules to protect players receiving the ball on the onside kick.

"The panel is trying to come up with ways to make themselves look better for future lawsuits"

I do think it's probably dangerous, but football in general is. They've already taken the big hits out from safeties, can't even two hand touch the qb's anymore, and now they're taking the kickoff away in general. It's going to be a completely different game in the next 10 years.

[JessieP]

Coaches should be able to call whatever play the want, whenever they want.

Two forward passes? 8 men eligible? The momentum rule (Smack the qb after the pass, he's fair game until the play clock re-starts)? Any play?

[JessieP]

"The panel is trying to come up with ways to make themselves look better for future lawsuits"

I do think it's probably dangerous, but football in general is. They've already taken the big hits out from safeties, can't even two hand touch the qb's anymore, and now they're taking the kickoff away in general. It's going to be a completely different game in the next 10 years.

Survival. Back in the day some said face mask would kill the purity of the game. Football must evolve to survive. As well versed as you are in high school sports you must know that it's dying from the feet up. Participation in youth leagues, jr  and senior high schools is dropping. Although costs and lack of parity are named as issues, safety is the top reason given. The NFL itself admitted 5 years ago that without sweeping safety changes it's an unsustainable model.

[MDXPHD]

Survival. Back in the day some said face mask would kill the purity of the game. Football must evolve to survive. As well versed as you are in high school sports you must know that it's dying from the feet up. Participation in youth leagues, jr  and senior high schools is dropping. Although costs and lack of parity are named as issues, safety is the top reason given. The NFL itself admitted 5 years ago that without sweeping safety changes it's an unsustainable model.

All sports are dwindling in the youth sector. Travel sports are hurting all the others too. I agree that it's safety, but the NFL needed some serious lawsuits filed for them to take CTE serious.

[MDXPHD]

But I agree. They have to evolve if they want to sustain it. NBA is making huge strides right now while the NFL is moderately regressing.

[JessieP]

All sports are dwindling in the youth sector. Travel sports are hurting all the others too. I agree that it's safety, but the NFL needed some serious lawsuits filed for them to take CTE serious.

No doubt about it. No CTE no rule changes. The NFL did not get concerned out of it's own volition. As far as major safety changes it needs to start at the top. The colleges follow suit and then the high schools.

As far as anyone thinking this is me grinding another ax with the private schools needs to wake up. Unless the AAA does something drastic to address the transfer/boundary/private school/parity-competitive games issues we will cross the tipping point. Within 5 years we will have around 10 teams with 80+ players and 90 or so with 25-40 players. Once we hit that it's doomsday scenario time. 

[HeberFan]

Two forward passes? 8 men eligible? The momentum rule (Smack the qb after the pass, he's fair game until the play clock re-starts)? Any play?

Now you're talking penalties, not plays.  But yes, I would be for 10 eligible receivers. Why not?

[JessieP]

Now you're talking penalties, not plays.  But yes, I would be for 10 eligible receivers. Why not?

You initially said let the coach call whatever play he wants whenever he wants. There are rules that have existed for decades that prohibit a coach from calling any play he wants. Changing the onside kick would just be another one. There are plays that were called in the 60's that would be a penalty today. Every coach in America has thought at one time or another "I'd love to call ____ but I'd get flagged".

[HeberFan]

You initially said let the coach call whatever play he wants whenever he wants. There are rules that have existed for decades that prohibit a coach from calling any play he wants. Changing the onside kick would just be another one. There are plays that were called in the 60's that would be a penalty today. Every coach in America has thought at one time or another "I'd love to call ____ but I'd get flagged".

You are helping make my point... thanks.

[Dayton Kitchens]

If you really want to reduce the incidents of head and neck injuries,   modify the rules to allow low hits far more frequently.   People are so appalled (at all levels of football) at the idea of a player "wrecking a knee" that there are now rules discouraging low hits and some officiating crews that are constantly on alert for anything resembling "going for the legs".

The result is natural.   You move the primary impact areas from below the waist to the neck and head areas.   A player is hit low and they tend to collapse like a tree being blown or cut down.   Knees,  waist, torso,  then the head hitting in that order.  Allowing a steady dissipation of force. 

A player is hit high and their upper body tends to fly backward (forward sometimes) with the head and neck impacting the ground first and at far greater velocity than with the low hit.

[beach bum]

If you really want to reduce the incidents of head and neck injuries,   modify the rules to allow low hits far more frequently.   People are so appalled (at all levels of football) at the idea of a player "wrecking a knee" that there are now rules discouraging low hits and some officiating crews that are constantly on alert for anything resembling "going for the legs".

The result is natural.   You move the primary impact areas from below the waist to the neck and head areas.   A player is hit low and they tend to collapse like a tree being blown or cut down.   Knees,  waist, torso,  then the head hitting in that order.  Allowing a steady dissipation of force. 

A player is hit high and their upper body tends to fly backward (forward sometimes) with the head and neck impacting the ground first and at far greater velocity than with the low hit.

Or you can just teach people how to tackle properly instead of trying to take someone's knee out or head hunt them?? ..... Sheesh not that hard, but maybe it is to you? You do know there is a bunch of space between the helmet and all the way down to someone's knees?  Again, why are everyone of your replies so extreme one way or the other instead of having some moderation?

[Dayton Kitchens]

Or you can just teach people how to tackle properly instead of trying to take someone's knee out or head hunt them?? ….. Sheesh not that hard, but maybe it is to you? You do know there is a bunch of space between the helmet and all the way down to someone's knees?  Again, why are everyone of your replies so extreme one way or the other instead of having some moderation?

For one,  not even pro football teams,   you know those guys who are paid a rich mans pay to do nothing but play (or coach) football tackle properly anymore.


For another,   ironically as the head of players gets better protected thanks to better technology,  the more players instinctively are willing to stick the head into places it doesn't belong.


It has been suggested that players would be safer from serious head injuries if they did away with the traditional facemask and simply required goggles and full depth mouthpieces.  Without a face mask,  players would instinctively avoid endangering their heads.

[JessieP]

Or you can just teach people how to tackle properly instead of trying to take someone's knee out or head hunt them?? ..... Sheesh not that hard, but maybe it is to you? You do know there is a bunch of space between the helmet and all the way down to someone's knees?  Again, why are everyone of your replies so extreme one way or the other instead of having some moderation?

Great post. I knew when I offered something up for conversation, something that did not originate from me, that some people would take offense rather than offer other objective suggestions. The reason the NFL is pursuing such rules is in major part because football is dying. It is obvious to everyone except the AAA and the people on the 5A message boards. Any suggestion that would increase safety or level the playing field is dismissed as snowflakey.

For the first time I followed high school basketball, the Lady Pioneers were awesome so I jumped on the bandwagon. Although our post season drags on as long as the regular season the tournaments were very exciting. It was one nail biter after another. Football playoffs in Arkansas are mercy rule after mercy rule until we're left with the same few teams. Most of the Championships were yawnfest as well. But by all means let's keep the status quo. Let's have a select few teams keep cherry picking talent and never address any rule changes that may increase participation.

On the bright side Hootens will require a lot less paper to print.  The 2029 issue may have to only preview about 30 high schools and a hand few of colleges.

[Overdahill]

Great post. I knew when I offered something up for conversation, something that did not originate from me, that some people would take offense rather than offer other objective suggestions. The reason the NFL is pursuing such rules is in major part because football is dying. It is obvious to everyone except the AAA and the people on the 5A message boards. Any suggestion that would increase safety or level the playing field is dismissed as snowflakey.

For the first time I followed high school basketball, the Lady Pioneers were awesome so I jumped on the bandwagon. Although our post season drags on as long as the regular season the tournaments were very exciting. It was one nail biter after another. Football playoffs in Arkansas are mercy rule after mercy rule until we're left with the same few teams. Most of the Championships were yawnfest as well. But by all means let's keep the status quo. Let's have a select few teams keep cherry picking talent and never address any rule changes that may increase participation.

On the bright side Hootens will require a lot less paper to print.  The 2029 issue may have to only preview about 30 high schools and a hand few of colleges.

Sounds kind of snowflakey to me 

[HeberFan]

Defenders go for "big hits" instead of grabbing tackles, because, they hope to cause a fumble and make a highlight. Sometimes causes misses, too. Injuries happen on the field, in practice and in the shower.

[JessieP]

Sounds kind of snowflakey to me 

That's just plain rude. When you saw me balling in my car at McCain Mall it was because I was traumatized by seeing what I thought was a MAGA hat, turns out it was a Cincinnati Reds hat but upsetting none the less. To make matters worse you ask "Are you ok dude", Dude? I recognize all 27 acceptable gender identifications. Even typing this I can feel the tears building up.

[Overdahill]

That's just plain rude. When you saw me balling in my car at McCain Mall it was because I was traumatized by seeing what I thought was a MAGA hat, turns out it was a Cincinnati Reds hat but upsetting none the less. To make matters worse you ask "Are you ok dude", Dude? I recognize all 27 acceptable gender identifications. Even typing this I can feel the tears building up.

Its all good; you get credit for starting a new thread "Snowflakery" BTW I am moving back to the metroplex so see you at Campisi's 

[HeberFan]

What if, when asked about our race, we all said, "I'm invisible!"