Jump to content
SportsWrath

Recommended Posts

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001024006/article/john-mara-only-no-vote-for-onside-kick-alternative

 

 

John Mara only no vote for onside kick alternative

The Denver Broncos' proposal to provide teams with an alternative to the onside kick generated a lot of interest from the Competition Committee with only one member opposed to it.

Giants owner John Mara told NFL Network's Judy Battista that he was the only no vote on the Competition Committee.

"What are we, the Arena Football League?" Mara said of the proposal to provide a fourth-and-15 alternative option to the onside kick.

The members believe it could be a fun option for teams, given that rule changes designed to make the kickoff safer have all but eliminated the chance to successfully execute an onside kick. The proposal calls for teams to get the option, a maximum of once per game during the fourth quarter only, of foregoing a kickoff and instead attempting to remain on offense following a score by converting what would essentially be a fourth-and-15 play from its own 35-yard line.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This play is designed to fuck the Giants in every close game there is. As it is, we played what? 10-11 games decided by under 1 score and 6-7 was decided in the 4th Qtr.

 

Oh HELL NO!!! This has Giants fuck up written all over it. No way this rule is applicable in a Giants game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Manning cant throw beyond 10 yards so theres that.

 

I also dont think teams that are losing should be granted a play that has a greater success rate than the current onside kick to change the tide of the game. If you want to win, play defense and score points throughout the game. If not, keep the play with a 10% chance of being successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Manning cant throw beyond 10 yards so theres that.

 

I also dont think teams that are losing should not be granted a play that has a greater success rate than the current onside kick to change the tide of the game. If you want to win, play defense and score points throughout the game. If not, keep the play with a 10% chance of being successful.

Actually I think the reason for the 4th and 15 was that it has the same chance of being successful as an onside kick.

 

It's the same success rate just not based on the bounce of an oblong ball being kicked into the ground.

 

it's now based on if the other teams defense can execute better than your offense which I think it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Manning cant throw beyond 10 yards so theres that.

 

I also dont think teams that are losing should not be granted a play that has a greater success rate than the current onside kick to change the tide of the game. If you want to win, play defense and score points throughout the game. If not, keep the play with a 10% chance of being successful.

Actually I think the reason for the 4th and 15 was that it has the same chance of being successful as an onside kick.

 

It's the same success rate just not based on the bounce of an oblong ball being kicked into the ground.

 

it's now based on if the other teams defense can execute better than your offense which I think it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Drizz, you seem to see a lot more 4th-and-15 completed passes than onside kick recoveries. I can only think of two times in my 35+ years as a Giants fan that I saw our team recover our own onsides kick.

 

Make it a 4th-and-30 and maybe we're talking. 15 yards? You see plays that long ten times a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like it is another move to completely get rid of the kick off....

 

What if you want to onside kick early in the game, is that illegal? What if a kicker slips and kicks a 10 yarder into the mud?

There's nothing stopping a team for doing an onside kick whenever they want, the rule purposes that once a game a team that is losing in the fourth quarter can elect to have a 4th and 15 instead of a onside kick.

 

And I don't think I've ever seen your scenario ever happen but as long as the balm travels 10 yards it's live to recover for the kicking team, it's always been this way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Drizz, you seem to see a lot more 4th-and-15 completed passes than onside kick recoveries. I can only think of two times in my 35+ years as a Giants fan that I saw our team recover our own onsides kick.

 

Make it a 4th-and-30 and maybe we're talking. 15 yards? You see plays that long ten times a game.

 

Yeah , when the giants are defending 4th and 15, it’s like 50-50.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah , when the giants are defending 4th and 15, it’s like 50-50.

 

Automatic first down when the Giants are leading in the fourth quarter with less than two minutes on the clock and up by less than seven. ^_^ :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, an onside kick is very difficult because no matter how well it's planned, the oblong nature of the ball makes it difficult to recover. Allowing a regular play instead is defeating the very purpose of the onside kick play, which is "we're going to try this last-ditch effort to allow us to score again but it's down to how the ball bounces." You get to carefully plan how you want to approach the play as opposed to it being more or less chance that you continue your drive.

 

This is a horrible rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I think the reason for the 4th and 15 was that it has the same chance of being successful as an onside kick.

 

It's the same success rate just not based on the bounce of an oblong ball being kicked into the ground.

 

it's now based on if the other teams defense can execute better than your offense which I think it should be.

That would make sense if every 4th and 15 occurred after a defense has been on the field for the previous drive and the offense is clicking and had momentum. The offense has every advantage here and I expect the conversion rate would be higher than even the standard 4th and 15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would make sense if every 4th and 15 occurred after a defense has been on the field for the previous drive and the offense is clicking and had momentum. The offense has every advantage here and I expect the conversion rate would be higher than even the standard 4th and 15.

By your logic no team with any offensive momentum should be punting then on 4th down and would be advantaged to go for it regardless of distance.

 

Typically following a TD and extra point there is a commercial time out and the coaches can still call a real time out to allow the defense more time to rest.

 

Since eliminating the running start of kickoffs the one side recovery chance has dropped to below 5 percent.

 

A 4th and 15 statistically is in the range of 12 percent conversion chance and are done in the same desperate situations as the team would be going for so I highly doubt the conversation rate would increase if at all or even decrease because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if they dont make it? Is the ball spotted on the line of scrimmage? What if theres a turnover, does it count?

It's considered a play like any other on the field, article even states it that it would just be giving the team a 4th down on their 35.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, an onside kick is very difficult because no matter how well it's planned, the oblong nature of the ball makes it difficult to recover. Allowing a regular play instead is defeating the very purpose of the onside kick play, which is "we're going to try this last-ditch effort to allow us to score again but it's down to how the ball bounces." You get to carefully plan how you want to approach the play as opposed to it being more or less chance that you continue your drive.

 

This is a horrible rule.

So one play a game instead of it being decided by chance it's decided by the actual players and coaches of the game.

 

Weird people would want that lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By your logic no team with any offensive momentum should be punting then on 4th down and would be advantaged to go for it regardless of distance.

 

Typically following a TD and extra point there is a commercial time out and the coaches can still call a real time out to allow the defense more time to rest.

 

Since eliminating the running start of kickoffs the one side recovery chance has dropped to below 5 percent.

 

A 4th and 15 statistically is in the range of 12 percent conversion chance and are done in the same desperate situations as the team would be going for so I highly doubt the conversation rate would increase if at all or even decrease because of it.

My logic is simply that 4th and 15 taking place after a defense has been on the field for likely 5+ minutes isnt a viable solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So one play a game instead of it being decided by chance it's decided by the actual players and coaches of the game.

 

Weird people would want that lol

I dont like the onside kick option, either, personally. Force a turnover, make a stop, score points or you lose. Why should teams be rewarded for losing with a chance to run a play? Itd be like a basketball team given a shot from half court to try to tie and force over time. Football is the only sport that rewards losing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My logic is simply that 4th and 15 taking place after a defense has been on the field for likely 5+ minutes isnt a viable solution.

Your logic would make sense if the offense wasn't on the field for the same length of time, but they are.

 

And once again TV time outs and real time outs remain a thing for both sides to get a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont like the onside kick option, either, personally. Force a turnover, make a stop, score points or you lose. Why should teams be rewarded for losing with a chance to run a play? Itd be like a basketball team given a shot from half court to try to tie and force over time. Football is the only sport that rewards losing.

In hockey the losing team can pull their goalie for an extra player on the ice risking the possibility of an easy goal scored against them.

 

I see it the same way.

 

The losing team in football once a game can have the opportunity after a field goal or TD to risk continuing a drive or giving the other team the ball likely inside their 40 yard line.

 

Instead of using an play that has now only a 5 percent chance of working because players no longer have a running start on kick offs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...