Ag_07 said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

After everything that went wrong, I feel like the worst decision was running the ball and burning that timeout there at the end of the game. That forced the onside kick attempt which is very low percentage.

---

I still can't believe the league still uses the onside kick. The AAF had it right when they went to a one-play, 4th-and-13 from your own 35. That would spice up the end of games so much. I imagine it'll eventually get to that point, but with all the rule changes, the onside kick isn't what it was 20+ years ago.

---

Huh? How's that work?

The scoring team just automatically gets that ball with no kickoff?

---

Its their choice to kick off or use this play. My assumption is that the free kick rules are changed to eliminate the possibility of an onside occurring. Something like anything within 20 yards of the kicking team's restraining line is illegal touching (similar to the current 10 yard restriction).

91AggieLawyer said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

After everything that went wrong, I feel like the worst decision was running the ball and burning that timeout there at the end of the game. That forced the onside kick attempt which is very low percentage.

---

I still can't believe the league still uses the onside kick. The AAF had it right when they went to a one-play, 4th-and-13 from your own 35. That would spice up the end of games so much. I imagine it'll eventually get to that point, but with all the rule changes, the onside kick isn't what it was 20+ years ago.

---

Huh? How's that work?

The scoring team just automatically gets that ball with no kickoff?

---

Its their choice to kick off or use this play. My assumption is that the free kick rules are changed to eliminate the possibility of an onside occurring. Something like anything within 20 yards of the kicking team's restraining line is illegal touching (similar to the current 10 yard restriction).

---

Your team scores and gets the option of possession of the ball or kick off? I guess only in baseball does possession, or offense, not change when a team scores.

Would it be limited to 1 time per game or any time you want? Like now, you can onside kick any time.

Ag_07 said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

After everything that went wrong, I feel like the worst decision was running the ball and burning that timeout there at the end of the game. That forced the onside kick attempt which is very low percentage.

---

I still can't believe the league still uses the onside kick. The AAF had it right when they went to a one-play, 4th-and-13 from your own 35. That would spice up the end of games so much. I imagine it'll eventually get to that point, but with all the rule changes, the onside kick isn't what it was 20+ years ago.

---

Huh? How's that work?

The scoring team just automatically gets that ball with no kickoff?

---

What happens is the team has the ball with one play from their own 35-yard line. It's technically called a "4th-and-13." It's a low-percentage play, but it ups the excitement. AAF had tremendous success with it keeping games interesting until the end. Statistically, you have about a 1/5 chance of converting, compared to a 1/20 rate for an onside kick. FYI, before the rules change, onside kick percentages were about 1/8.

I'm open to extending it 4th-and-15 or even longer, where the percentage drops to about 1/8. Most sportswriters considered it the best thing to come out of the AAF.

I believe the XFL uses a 4th-and-15 model.

Edit: Someone asked a good question about doing this every single time you score. I believe, at least in the AAF, you could only do it in the last 5 minutes of the game. Outside of that, you had to onside kick.

agracer said:

---

91AggieLawyer said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

After everything that went wrong, I feel like the worst decision was running the ball and burning that timeout there at the end of the game. That forced the onside kick attempt which is very low percentage.

---

I still can't believe the league still uses the onside kick. The AAF had it right when they went to a one-play, 4th-and-13 from your own 35. That would spice up the end of games so much. I imagine it'll eventually get to that point, but with all the rule changes, the onside kick isn't what it was 20+ years ago.

---

Huh? How's that work?

The scoring team just automatically gets that ball with no kickoff?

---

Its their choice to kick off or use this play. My assumption is that the free kick rules are changed to eliminate the possibility of an onside occurring. Something like anything within 20 yards of the kicking team's restraining line is illegal touching (similar to the current 10 yard restriction).

---

Your team scores and gets the option of possession of the ball or kick off? I guess only in baseball does possession, or offense, not change when a team scores.

Would it be limited to 1 time per game or any time you want? Like now, you can onside kick any time.

---

Negative. In lieu of a kickoff, you get the option to run a one-play "onside" from a long distance. I can't remember, but I believe it was only an option in the last 5 minutes of the game?

So the team that just scored just gets the ball right back because they choose to?

I hate that. How's that fair at all?

It's worth considering... but I'd want the referee's taken out of the equation. I don't need some lame PI judgement call on an intentionally underthrown ball to give a team a free possession.

There would have to be something in effect that says, in the event of a defensive penalty, the line of scrimmage is moved to reflect the penalty, but the offense still has to convert a 4th & 15 play. No free bail-outs!

Ag_07 said:

---

So the team that just scored just gets the ball right back because they choose to?

I hate that. How's that fair at all?

---

You only have one play. It's not like you get a brand-new drive. If you don't get the first down, you don't keep the ball. Get the first down, keep the ball. The odds are still heavily against you.

It's coming to the league eventually. Just a matter of time and distance.

jr15aggie said:

---

It's worth considering... but I'd want the referee's taken out of the equation. I don't need some lame PI judgement call on an intentionally underthrown ball to give a team a free possession.

There would have to be something in effect that says, in the event of a defensive penalty, the line of scrimmage is moved to reflect the penalty, but the offense still has to convert a 4th & 15 play. No free bail-outs!

---

I could live with that. My only caveat would be that, in the event of a second defensive penalty, it's a first down. Otherwise, dudes just gonna get told to keep tackling receivers.

Either way, miles better than an onside kick.

I don't like it.

I don't like the thought of just giving a team a possession of any kind.

Ag_07 said:

---

I don't like it.

I don't like the thought of just giving a team a possession of any kind.

---

Technically, an onside kick is still part of a possession. Just a lower percentage play. Instead of kicking 10 yards from the 35, you're passing 13-15 yards from the 35. The difference is the mode, not the possession.

Wait, so who's 35 do you get your 4th and long from?

htxag09 said:

---

Wait, so who's 35 do you get your 4th and long from?

---

Your own. Same spot as an onside kick.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

htxag09 said:

---

Wait, so who's 35 do you get your 4th and long from?

---

Your own. Same spot as an onside kick.

---

OK, that makes more sense in risk/reward.

htxag09 said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

htxag09 said:

---

Wait, so who's 35 do you get your 4th and long from?

---

Your own. Same spot as an onside kick.

---

OK, that makes more sense in risk/reward.

---

I'm sure you could institute it from the safety kick spot, which is the 20.

Ag_07 said:

---

So the team that just scored just gets the ball right back because they choose to?

I hate that. How's that fair at all?

---

Id' do it it but I want it change to 4th and 50 from your own 1 yard line.

How about a magic timeout where you get the ball back

Seems reasonable

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

So the team that just scored just gets the ball right back because they choose to?

I hate that. How's that fair at all?

---

Id' do it it but I want it change to 4th and 50 from your own 1 yard line.

---

Lol, that's even worse than an onside kick.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

ApachePilot said:

---

I wish onside kicks were like the old version.

---

What was the old version?

---

Several things, but above all you could send the house and with a running start and crash through the receiving side.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-onside-kick-rules-change/1maonm4pbz75319popkzs833r7

I was being sarcastic.

The Porkchop Express said:

---

I was being sarcastic.

---

ApachePilot said:

---

91AggieLawyer said:

---

ApachePilot said:

---

I wish onside kicks were like the old version.

---

What was the old version?

---

Several things, but above all you could send the house and with a running start and crash through the receiving side.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-onside-kick-rules-change/1maonm4pbz75319popkzs833r7

---

They've made a few changes over the years, which have made the game safer, but made recovering your own kick nearly impossible. Teams went something like 1-for-31 on onside kicks this year. At that rate, what's even the point? You're almost as statistically likely to recover a fumble on a kickoff return, lol.

People might not remember, but the onside kick used to be one of the most exciting plays in a game, a nail-biting experience. Now, it's kind of like, "Oh, that's cute".

Rule changes drop onside-kick success from 21% to 6%

What's also funny from that article is that teams are going for it more on 4th down, but their 4th down percentages are actually dropping.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ApachePilot said:

---

91AggieLawyer said:

---

ApachePilot said:

---

I wish onside kicks were like the old version.

---

What was the old version?

---

Several things, but above all you could send the house and with a running start and crash through the receiving side.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-onside-kick-rules-change/1maonm4pbz75319popkzs833r7

---

They've made a few changes over the years, which have made the game safer, but made recovering your own kick nearly impossible. Teams went something like 1-for-31 on onside kicks this year. At that rate, what's even the point? You're almost as statistically likely to recover a fumble on a kickoff return, lol.

People might not remember, but the onside kick used to be one of the most exciting plays in a game, a nail-biting experience. Now, it's kind of like, "Oh, that's cute".

Rule changes drop onside-kick success from 21% to 6%

What's also funny from that article is that teams are going for it more on 4th down, but their 4th down percentages are actually dropping.

---

Doesn't it have to bounce twice now instead of just once?

Or was it that it did not have to bounce at all and now it has to bounce at least once?

Some kicker needs to figure out how to kick it it goes about 50 feet in the air, and then sign some 7 foot 4 NBA reject to just lumber down field and catch it when it comes down.

I've always wondered why no one ever tried to kick it over the line of players and just drop it in the middle of the field and have everyone make a mad dash as the ball is bouncing around aimlessly around the other end of the field.

Hell you could even have some big guys blow up the line and your fastest guys run in behind them.

Ag_07 said:

---

I've always wondered why no one ever tried to kick it over the line of players and just drop it in the middle of the field and have everyone make a mad dash as the ball is bouncing around aimlessly around the other end of the field.

Hell you could even have some big guys blow up the line and your fastest guys run in behind them.

---

I covered a high school team one year that did that. Not for onside kick purposes, but because their coverage team sucked and they were in a district with a lot of burners at kickoff return. The kid would pop it up so it landed around the 25 or so and usually take at least 1 crazy bounce. They'd keep it out of the best guys hands and at least twice they came up with the ball in the scrum.

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Some kicker needs to figure out how to kick it it goes about 50 feet in the air, and then sign some 7 foot 4 NBA reject to just lumber down field and catch it when it comes down.

---

This won't work because the receiving team can always call for a fair catch. It would have to be a kick that hits the ground first and then rockets into the air... which is exactly what they try and do on on-side kicks but it's hard to do consistently.

jr15aggie said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Some kicker needs to figure out how to kick it it goes about 50 feet in the air, and then sign some 7 foot 4 NBA reject to just lumber down field and catch it when it comes down.

---

This won't work because the receiving team can always call for a fair catch. It would have to be a kick that hits the ground first and then rockets into the air... which is exactly what they try and do on on-side kicks but it's hard to do consistently.

---

That's what I meant, and I agree it seems fairly impossible from a physics standpoint. My brother and I always have the discussion about how some team needs to develop like a special teams academy solely devoted to getting sizable advtanges on special teams by really pushing the envelope on what they can accomplish. I know there are special teams coaches, but very few strictly special teams players. Would love to see some team sell out on its coaching/data/whatever budget and come up with some alternate strategies on how to get an onside kick or block punts/FGs better.

Lol... yeah, it all reminds me of when got Marty B... we all thought, instant TD when we get inside the 10. Just throw a jump ball in the middle of the end zone... no way anybody will out jump him.

Never happened once!

agracer said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

ApachePilot said:

---

91AggieLawyer said:

---

ApachePilot said:

---

I wish onside kicks were like the old version.

---

What was the old version?

---

Several things, but above all you could send the house and with a running start and crash through the receiving side.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-onside-kick-rules-change/1maonm4pbz75319popkzs833r7

---

They've made a few changes over the years, which have made the game safer, but made recovering your own kick nearly impossible. Teams went something like 1-for-31 on onside kicks this year. At that rate, what's even the point? You're almost as statistically likely to recover a fumble on a kickoff return, lol.

People might not remember, but the onside kick used to be one of the most exciting plays in a game, a nail-biting experience. Now, it's kind of like, "Oh, that's cute".

Rule changes drop onside-kick success from 21% to 6%

What's also funny from that article is that teams are going for it more on 4th down, but their 4th down percentages are actually dropping.

---

Doesn't it have to bounce twice now instead of just once?

Or was it that it did not have to bounce at all and now it has to bounce at least once?

---

Yeah, they outlawed the nose dive where kickers would slam it into the ground, and it would rocket, like, 40 feet into the air. Used to be a staple of the game, and teams had the recovery down to a science.

Was that outlawed? I thought the main changes were (1) need at least 4 players on each side of the kicker and (2) have to line up within a yard of the kick (so no more running starts). #2 is the real killer because it is extremely difficult to get to that high bouncer without a running start because it has to be kicked hard to get that bounce

DannyDuberstein said:

---

Was that outlawed? I thought the main changes were (1) need at least 4 players on each side of the kicker and (2) have to line up within a yard of the kick (so no more running starts). #2 is the real killer because it is extremely difficult to get to that high bouncer without a running start because it has to be kicked hard to get that bounce

---

I believe another poster mentioned it, but I believe the NFL effectively killed it by ruling the ball has to bounce at least twice.

It was an extremely effective setup while it lasted.

Edit: Just checked. Yes, the offense (kicking team) can not touch the ball until it has bounced twice.

jr15aggie said:

---

Lol... yeah, it all reminds me of when got Marty B... we all thought, instant TD when we get inside the 10. Just throw a jump ball in the middle of the end zone... no way anybody will out jump him.

Never happened once!

---

Funny, his senior year of HS I covered the state 7 on 7 tourney at A&M. ALief Taylor won the consolation championship by doing exactly what you said. Alief Taylor typically threw the ball about 5 times a game, and they were all to Martellus.

TexasAggiesWin said:

---

DGrimesAg92 said:

---

JDay said:

---

If you have paid any attention to the officiating, it is obvious the league was not going to let KC lose no matter what. Terribly one-sided officiating.

Basically doesn't matter if they implode or not. They will get the calls they need.

---

The NFL "scriptwriters" leaked it last week. San Fran and KC, KC wins back to back championships and beta boy proposes to the crazy one.

---

I seen it on the internet, must be true

---

You "seen" it or "saw" it?


If you're attempting smack, at least look smart.

Patrick Mahomes' father, Patrick Mahomes Sr., arrested for DWI 3rd or more in Tyler Texas Saturday night pic.twitter.com/0Q9RifYRDE

— Dallas Texas TV (@DallasTexasTV) February 4, 2024