After a score:
1. Team A may elect to give Team B the ball at Team B's 25-yard line, beginning a new series of downs with a first-and-10.
2. Team A may elect to take the ball at its own 25-yard line for a fourth-and-15 play. If Team A is successful in making a first down, Team A will maintain possession and a new series of downs will continue as normal. If Team A is unsuccessful in making a first down, the result will be a turnover on downs and Team B will take possession at the dead-ball spot.
Before the snap:
It is not a false start if a flexed, eligible receiver in a two-point stance who flinches or picks up one foot, as long as his other foot remains partially on the ground and he resets for one second prior to the snap. A receiver who fits this exception is not considered to be “in motion” for the purposes of the Illegal Shift rules.
It is not a false start if all 11 offensive players have been set for at least one full second and any flexed, eligible receiver breaks his stance by picking up both feet.
https://operations.nfl.com/updates/the-rules/two-new-rules-to-be-tested-at-pro-bowl/ - (
New Window )
Those after score scenarios (especially the second one) sound just awful.
Given how it is nearly impossible for onsides kicks these days, if a team is down by a score with under two minutes and no time outs, who wouldn't go for this?
Those after score scenarios (especially the second one) sound just awful.
Got some bad news for you - this has been an idea for a few years now and in my opinion something similar (4th and long) is dramatically more likely than not to replace the onside kick in the next few years.
Quote:
2. Team A may elect to take the ball at its own 25-yard line for a fourth-and-15 play. If Team A is successful in making a first down, Team A will maintain possession and a new series of downs will continue as normal. If Team A is unsuccessful in making a first down, the result will be a turnover on downs and Team B will take possession at the dead-ball spot.
Given how it is nearly impossible for onsides kicks these days, if a team is down by a score with under two minutes and no time outs, who wouldn't go for this?
Right..this would take the place of an onside kick, which would be removed from the game
I do like the false start rule. it makes sense.
What if Team B's D is really gassed? Don't they get the chance to get a breather? Aren't they, the D, allow to rest, even if it's only for a 3 and out? Must they march back onto the field and keep playing, without stopping?
A change of possession must occur.
Imagine losing possession on a questionable defensive holding call,
Yes you would.
;>)
(I agree that the proposed rule change sucks though.)
The NFL is managed by absolute morons.
Quote:
Quote:
2. Team A may elect to take the ball at its own 25-yard line for a fourth-and-15 play. If Team A is successful in making a first down, Team A will maintain possession and a new series of downs will continue as normal. If Team A is unsuccessful in making a first down, the result will be a turnover on downs and Team B will take possession at the dead-ball spot.
Given how it is nearly impossible for onsides kicks these days, if a team is down by a score with under two minutes and no time outs, who wouldn't go for this?
Right..this would take the place of an onside kick, which would be removed from the game
The question is, is an onside kick not allowed? So a team could actually line up for a kick off and kick the onside as a surprise and the other team wouldn't expect it because they didn't take the 4th and 15 chance.
Plus it's riskier because of field position.
The false start thing is pretty good. I like the change.
1. You can hand the ball over at the 25 and give the other team a minute to move it 45 yards down field and kick a winning field goal of 47 yards, or
2. You keep possession of the ball, but it is 4th and 15 on the opponent's 25.
I think the obvious choice is to take the ball on the 25, but not try that hard to score. The other team will jam up the goal line and end zone, so it should be a lot easier to run an intermediate play that fails to score, but moves the ball down to the other team's 5 or 10 yard line with at least a few extra seconds having run off the clock.
So instead of handing the ball over on the 25 with a minute left in the game, maybe you've given them the ball on their own 5-10 yd. line with say, 50 seconds left in the game. That makes it a bit tougher for them to get into field goal range.
Furthermore, even if your 4th and 15 play is an incomplete pass, what have you lost? The other team gets the ball on their 25 with almost a minute to go, the same as if you had elected option number 1.
Which would you do if you were up by only 2 points?
2. You keep possession of the ball, but it is 4th and 15 on the opponent's 25.
You take the ball on your own 25. If it was the opponent's 25, teams with a decent fg kicker could score once and then literally just take 4th and 15 and kick fg after fg, never even giving the ball back.
I think a lot of posters on this thread aren't realizing how hard it is to convert a 4th and 15. I'd expect the conversion rate to be around 20%, but I'm just making that up and might be very wrong.
There have been so many rules changes since Baltimore beat the Giants in 1958, that these proposed changes are quite minor in comparison.
Quote:
2. You keep possession of the ball, but it is 4th and 15 on the opponent's 25.
You take the ball on your own 25. If it was the opponent's 25, teams with a decent fg kicker could score once and then literally just take 4th and 15 and kick fg after fg, never even giving the ball back.
You guys are on the wrong side of the field with that 4th and 25.
The NFL is managed by absolute morons.
The post-score things? I think that's where the game is headed because kickoffs have become too dangerous.
I think a 4th and 15 is much higher than that.
Basically, a failed conversion means handing the opponent a field goal attempt. I imagine that it would not be used except for in extreme circumstances, and only near the end of a game.
Under 2 minutes to go, the clock stops after each play (pass OR run!) This allows teams to get the ball back if they can play defense, even if they are out of TO's.
Fg, do the 4th down and make it, Td
Fg, do the 4th down and make it, Td
Fg, do the 4th down and make it, Td
A team can already win now by scoring a TD on the opening drive in OT.
You really think a team would kick a FG and then attempt a 4th and 15 knowing that (in the very likely event) if they don't convert, the opponent gets the ball only 25 yards from a game winning TD?
Fg, do the 4th down and make it, Td
It's already easier than that under the current rules. Lining up to receive a kick qualifies as an opportunity to possess the ball, so you can just do a successful onsides kick to open OT, and all you need from that point is a FG. Or if you've received first and scored a FG, do a successful onside kick at that point, and the game ends. No need to score twice.
The risk of giving your opponent a great scoring opportunity makes any of these scenarios very unlikely.
I would guess the propensity to get hurt on a 4th and 15 play might be equal to that of an onsides kick.
I don't think this is about player safety
I would guess the propensity to get hurt on a 4th and 15 play might be equal to that of an onsides kick.
I don't think this is about player safety
That's probably true. I guess if they're going to eliminate regular kickoffs, they figure they might as well replace onsides kicks with some kind of "regular" play. Probably more exciting to watch than an expected onsides kick.
They'd go a long way towards fixing that mess by just making the PI penalty a flat 15 yard penalty and calling it a day. The league is already too biased in favor of offense, and reducing the impact of some of the PI calls might help restore some balance there and reduce the dependence on replay.
They'd go a long way towards fixing that mess by just making the PI penalty a flat 15 yard penalty and calling it a day. The league is already too biased in favor of offense, and reducing the impact of some of the PI calls might help restore some balance there and reduce the dependence on replay.
15 yards is still a pretty big penalty - if a coach is inclined to challenge, I doubt reducing it to 15 yards would make much difference in his decision. I think they should instead recognize that the missed call against the Falcons last year was awful, but also a real outlier, and the vast vast majority of bad calls are simply bad judgement rather than egregious misses like that one, and life's hard and all that, but you can't challenge bad judgement. Some bad calls are preferable to the shitshow the PI challenges were this year imo, and they should just recognize it was a mistake and eliminate it.