Onside kick alternative proposed

will be extremely difficult to convert. The options the offense has to make this conversion aren't too robust. NFL defenses will also spend additional time prepping for this exact play knowing it's importance if the rules passes.

I think the conversion rate would be less than 20%. Maybe closer to 15%, which seems about right to me.

Hard for me to find a reason to be against this. Will make more games exciting, and this play will be a hell of a lot more entertaining than an onside kick. I'd be willing to wager that the amount of teams to successfully convert this play, and then go on to win a game, would be extremely rare.

put the game in the hands of your starts (both offense and defense) rather than random special teams players at a critical point in the game.

put the game in the hands of your starts (both offense and defense) rather than random special teams players at a critical point in the game.

I don’t like it

In comment 14908404 Mike in NY said:

Quote:

I don’t like it

This was also my first thought. No additional power for refs to turn the game please. They already turn too many games.

In comment 14908404 Mike in NY said:

Quote:

I don’t like it

This. Getting 15+ yards on one down seems like a much higher percentage play than recovering an onside. I don't mind the idea, but the distance needs to be reconsidered.

Is the starting the play from the 25. So if they convert, they essentially get to start their possession past the 40 yard line. Getting to keep the ball AND starting in ridiculously good field position seems a bit overkill, no? Converting a 15 yard play, while still difficult, is much easier than converting an onside kick. I think it would make things a bit fairer to the team that’s leading to start that 4th and 15 from the 10 or 15 yard line. At least then they’d still have to work to get more points

If so, say you scored with :05 seconds left to cut the opponents lead to 6 points.

With this onside kick method, you would basically have an opportunity for a 75 yard hail mary to try and get a TD.

You wouldn't have to worry about an onsides kick to try a hail mary, you would basically get a free shot at it.

Of course you would need a QB who could chuck it 75+ yards...

Made it 4th/20
Eliminated automatic first down on defensive penalties (just the yardage)
And started from the 25 instead of 35

I’d be for it.

is a cluster fuck. Kicking teams recover what once out of every 20 times? They convert 4-15 more frequently. ESPECIALLY against the Giants.

In comment 14908411 BH28 said:

Quote:

If so, say you scored with :05 seconds left to cut the opponents lead to 6 points. With this onside kick method, you would basically have an opportunity for a 75 yard hail mary to try and get a TD. You wouldn't have to worry about an onsides kick to try a hail mary, you would basically get a free shot at it. Of course you would need a QB who could chuck it 75+ yards...

Why wouldn't you be able to score a td off it? And of course you're right, in a scenario with very very little time left, this would be a slam dunk choice over an onsides kick.

Of a team scoring and immediately getting the ball back without earning it.

Figure out a way to make an onside kick safer; maybe fewer guys on LOS for each team. Only WRs and DBs on the LOS.

needed

When it's an obvious onside kick.
It has a much better chance when it's unexpected.

I love this new option, but feel like it's been out there a while and that the Eagles didn't think of this on their own.

a penalty shot.

with the risk of giving up the ball at their own 25 any less "earning it" than recovering an onside kick?

I am all for this proposal. I think onside kicks should still be allowed (to keep the surprise element involved), but I think it improves the game to give teams the chance to get the ball back by converting a tough, risky, offensive play.

As to the concern of automatic first down penatlies-- is it really a significant issue?

What's the general conversion rate for 4th and 15? or 4th and 10+ yards to go? I'm sure it's still low. And those rates would include any success based on automatic first down penalties. And if the majority of those conversions are due to penalties, then the league can address that.

If it is too high a success rate, then make the penalties just the yards and a replay of the down.

The on-side kick has been a part of the game for many, many decades. And it's not the kind of a play that gets people hurt, either. Leave the on-side kick rule alone.

You want to change something? Put in the sky judge to get pass interference calls and other down field penalties correct.

Patrick Mahomes on 3rd and 15+ yards this season (including playoffs):

13-17, 299 yds, 3 TD, 0 Int.

It's going to turn into basketball where only the last 5 minutes matters

Patrick Mahomes on 3rd and 15+ yards this season (including playoffs):

13-17, 299 yds, 3 TD, 0 Int.

It's going to turn into basketball where only the last 5 minutes matters

After you score you kick off. Return the old onside kick rules. They don’t happen often and few injuries. In this day in age where a WR can draw Pass interference this rule sucks. At least onside kick both squads have a chance

But that the point. It’s supposed to be rare. I don’t like this. I can envision a ticky tac defensive holding with an automatic first down deciding the game way too often.

worthy of the arena league or maybe the CFL. Teams that are winning are supposed to win. I don't like it at all, and our D would stop that play less than half the time.

or where they’d kickoff from. If you don’t make it, the other team is already in FG range.

In comment 14908499 Simms11 said:

Quote:

or where they’d kickoff from. If you don’t make it, the other team is already in FG range.

I mean they’d be in FG range if they started from the 25

I'll predict that more than half of the successful conversions will be the result of a defensive holding call. We'll see how popular it is then.

but why go after onside kicks? They're not a major source of injuries, and they make the game more exciting. A better proposal would be to make *all* kickoffs onside.

In comment 14908507 Ron from Ninerland said:

Quote:

I'll predict that more than half of the successful conversions will be the result of a defensive holding call. We'll see how popular it is then.

how about 4th and 15 play but forward passes are not allowed? Have to run it.

Though honestly I hate the whole idea, nothing wrong with the insides kick to make this change.

In comment 14908507 Ron from Ninerland said:

Quote:

I'll predict that more than half of the successful conversions will be the result of a defensive holding call. We'll see how popular it is then.

Is there a site that has this information? how often are automatic first down penalties called on 4th and long?

and not only because the Giants would give up the first down 3/4 of the time. This is fundamentally changing the game. A kickoff is supposed to follow a score, not an additional scrimmage play. If anything, they should go back to the original rule and stop being scared of their own shadows when it comes to liability.

And not just because it's too easy to simply convert the 4th and 15 compared to converting an onside kick. It's also because (as others have pointed out) it's more likely that there will be a defensive penalty compared to a penalty by the receiving team on an onside kick and because it's more likely that the offensive team will gain much more than the 15 yards on the play and may even score a TD compared to the likelihood of a successful onside kick giving the recovering team the ball across the 50-yard line. If they are stupid enough to adopt this rule, I hope it comes with the proviso that no matter where the ball winds up, they move it back to the 40-yard line.

.

Leave things the way they are. Maybe if you fall that far behind, you aren't supposed to win. Don't make it easier. Make the team kickoff.

Leave things the way they are. Maybe if you fall that far behind, you aren't supposed to win. Don't make it easier. Make the team kickoff.

Use a new "onside free kick" option, where the ball has to go past 20 yards rather than 10 yards, the kick is from their own 15 yard line, it's only an option during the last two minutes of the 4th quarter, and allow the kicking team to perform a free kick. Traditional onside kicks would be left as an alternate option at any time during the game.

More drama, more excitement, less dangerous than a full kickoff runback, slightly more contact than a successful onside kick. If the kicker doesn't get the ball in the right area, it's similar to a normal kick off and too far, potentially too short and ineligible for the kicking team to recover, and a failed free kick still gives the opposing team great field advantage for their follow up possession.

They'd shoot for a very high kicked ball going around 25 to 30 yards total distance and then it's basically a free scramble between both teams on what will essentially be a jump-ball (if the kick is executed well), but if it's batted down or not caught cleanly, it's a live ball fumble recovery. This type of play would lead to the winning team starting roughly around midfield on most attempts.

Imagine a tired defense forced to stay on the field for 3 consecutive drives, with no break, which can result in a 24 point swing in minutes. At some point it just isn't football anymore and this might be it.

Historical average of onside kick was 13.7% (prior to changing the rules)

Here’s the chart on 4th and success rate


So 4th ~17 is equivalent

NFL football operations - ( New Window )

Seems like the new rule should make it a 4th and 17!
Why does it need to be increments of 5 yards?

I think some here don't realize that with the NFL rule changes, onside kick chances has followed the path of the dinosaur.

that dumbass keeps adding and adding kludge inelegant solutions to a "problem", like 2 pt play, moving 1 pt kick back, and OT TD to win rule.

Might as well add a dopey shootout like soccer and HQ, and let luck win the game.

I never got the outside kick rule change
NFL said they did it to reduce injuries

before it was changed I don't recall ever seeing anyone get injured during onside kick

fluck alone. Just hire competent rules enforcement

In comment 14908668 giantfan2000 said:

Quote:

I never got the outside kick rule change NFL said they did it to reduce injuries before it was changed I don't recall ever seeing anyone get injured during onside kick

I think it has more to do with the head injuries. You’re likely not going to notice those on your television but they are trying to eliminate the violent collisions running full speed that occur during onside kicks

In comment 14908681 BigBlueShock said:

Quote:

In comment 14908668 giantfan2000 said: Quote: I never got the outside kick rule change NFL said they did it to reduce injuries before it was changed I don't recall ever seeing anyone get injured during onside kick I think it has more to do with the head injuries. You’re likely not going to notice those on your television but they are trying to eliminate the violent collisions running full speed that occur during onside kicks

But are they running full speed, given the rather narrow gap between players?

In comment 14908610 V.I.G. said:

Quote:

Historical average of onside kick was 13.7% (prior to changing the rules) Here’s the chart on 4th and success rate So 4th ~17 is equivalent NFL football operations - ( New Window )

Thanks for posting these. This is what I was looking for (and I'm curious if 3rd and long has different outcomes from 4th and long).

I think this chart should alleviate concerns about automatic first down penalties.

It doesn't have exact numbers here, but based on these charts, on 3rd/4th downs with 15+ yards to go, that first downs because of penalties happened something like 2-4% of times. Even if you factor in defensive penalties that merely added yards and replayed the down, it's only another 1-2% of plays. If anything, it looks like more penalties in these situations are called on the offense.

The new onside rules have made it much harder to convert which I think is a bad outcome. I understand why they did it, but I'd like to see there be more of an incentive for teams to be aggressive and so I like think option.

The automatic first down rule is tricky.

If you put restrictions on it, whats from stopping a defensive back from mugging a WR who beats them off the LOS?

In comment 14908408 BigBlueShock said:

Quote:

Is the starting the play from the 25. So if they convert, they essentially get to start their possession past the 40 yard line. Getting to keep the ball AND starting in ridiculously good field position seems a bit overkill, no?

If you recover an on side kick, dont you get the ball at the around the 40? So they are basing the starting point off that. Obviously, if a team gets a gain of 25 they are starting with better field position than the kick. Defenses will probably rush 3 and then have 6 sit a little in front of the marker and a couple to take away the deep ball

it failed then, it will fail now...as it should.

Onside kick is a Hail Mary and should have an extremely low success rate. You've been outplayed all game and are in a desperate position. The success/failure rate should reflect that.

In comment 14908839 jestersdead said:

Quote:

In comment 14908408 BigBlueShock said: Quote: Is the starting the play from the 25. So if they convert, they essentially get to start their possession past the 40 yard line. Getting to keep the ball AND starting in ridiculously good field position seems a bit overkill, no? If you recover an on side kick, dont you get the ball at the around the 40? So they are basing the starting point off that. Obviously, if a team gets a gain of 25 they are starting with better field position than the kick. Defenses will probably rush 3 and then have 6 sit a little in front of the marker and a couple to take away the deep ball

The chances of recovering an onside kick is much smaller than completing a 15 yard pass. The data posted earlier is from before they changed the onside kick. Even with the old onside kick rules the chances of getting 15 was much easier. So ultimately, teams will get better field position after having to run a higher percentage play. With this proposed system, a team basically has to make two plays to be in FG range. The first play, then one additional decent play. Too easy in my book.

I qd say the conversion rate against that defense is a lot closer to 50% than 15%

Or is that just a punch drunk fan s perception from watching a team accumulate the worst record in the NFL over that time frame, much of that losing because this defense never seem to be able to get off the field.

In comment 14908640 Coach Red Beaulieu said:

Quote:

that dumbass keeps adding and adding kludge inelegant solutions to a "problem", like 2 pt play, moving 1 pt kick back, and OT TD to win rule. Might as well add a dopey shootout like soccer and HQ, and let luck win the game.

2pt conversion well predates Goddell. I also like that extra points are missed more and the OT rule so that OT isn't basically decided by the coin toss

Has been a gimme for YEARS now. The Giants lost a awful lot of games where Eli gave a lead back to the D, and the D couldn't stop anyone. Even on 4th and long(s).

Until the D improves, this rule would kill the Giants. All a team has to do is throw it to a TE over the middle -- cause that's ALWAYS open.

The onside kick is supposed to be a longshot. 4th and 15 has to have significantly better odds than recovering an onside kick. Even if you have to convert 15 yards in one play, you are still being handed the ball right back after scoring. That is bullshit and against the spirit of the game.