new kickoff idea

[BINGO]

yep, that is the first thing we're supposed to know.....how many of these concussions are in fact coming from kick-offs?

common sense tells us it will be the highest percentage, being it is the biggest of ollisions. but haven't read anything which provides that data?

That's the whole point. You want to take actions without having facts. Steve Young, Jahvid Best, Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, Kolb, etc. didn't get concussed while returning a kick or as a gunner on the kickoff teams. Goodell wants to modify the game without first establishing the percentage of time and instances (quarters, down, type of turf, running, passing, kickoffs, field goals) which concussions tend to occur. No facts, but yet take action!

 

[BINGO]

good point.

No it's not. That was a horrible point.

 

[BINGO]

Of course, that makes perfect sense.

But why stop with KO returns? We should just eliminate all low percentage plays like kickoff returns, long FG's, down and distance of more than 20 yards, punt returns, Hail Mary's, etc.

Hell I think we should just institute the "mercy rule", we'll call it the "21-point rule". Any team that finds itself down by 21 with less than 21 minutes to go and the game is called! That would reduce concussions too!

I mean, like you said, it is the other teams fault for getting behind right? I gotta hand it to you Deep, every now and again you really show what separates you from all the other posters on the board.

Yoooo. I picked up and referenced the same thing without even seeing this.

 

[threelittleturds]

This would definitely make punters with the ability to boom it a hot commodity.

On the surface, I don't like the idea of changing the game... because the ability to bring a KR back for a TD generally takes the wind out of a team's sails during a comeback attempt, or it jumpstarts a team that has fallen behind too. Although I can understand trying to reduce injuries.

4th and 15, I'd like those odds of converting if I had one of the top QBs in the league... that conversion rate would be a lot higher than an onside kick. Seriously, say you're up 2 TDs or maybe 10 points on the Saints, Patriots, Packers, Broncos, Giants.. whoever you think has an elite QB... they just got a TD and now they just need to pick up 15 yards to get a new set of downs??? Thats way too easy for an elite QB... a hell of a lot easier than hoping that the onside kick bounces just right or the other team muffs it...

I think a rule change like this unfairly shifts the balance of power even more in favor of teams that have elite QBs, they are the only ones who benefit from a 4th and 15 instead of a kicking formation... because if they're down and coming back, playing in rhythm, that can be a very easy completion for Brady, Brees, and Rodgers. So yeah, I don't like it... this rule change would make it even easier for the top passing offenses to come back.

Make it 4th and 20, thats a little harder to pick up, even for the elite QBs. Maybe 4th and 25, just so they have a chance but it needs to be just perfect. 4th and 15 doesn't need a lot of things to come together to convert, you know? Not int he same way that a lot of things have to come together to get an onside.

 

[abaskin18]

No it's not. That was a horrible point.

Perhaps you missed the point I was making, or I didn't make it clearly enough. They want to have their cake and eat it too. I understand how it could frustrate someone (as it does me), but I don't know what's so hard to understand about it.

 

[deep9er]

This would definitely make punters with the ability to boom it a hot commodity.

On the surface, I don't like the idea of changing the game... because the ability to bring a KR back for a TD generally takes the wind out of a team's sails during a comeback attempt, or it jumpstarts a team that has fallen behind too. Although I can understand trying to reduce injuries.

4th and 15, I'd like those odds of converting if I had one of the top QBs in the league... that conversion rate would be a lot higher than an onside kick. Seriously, say you're up 2 TDs or maybe 10 points on the Saints, Patriots, Packers, Broncos, Giants.. whoever you think has an elite QB... they just got a TD and now they just need to pick up 15 yards to get a new set of downs??? Thats way too easy for an elite QB... a hell of a lot easier than hoping that the onside kick bounces just right or the other team muffs it...

I think a rule change like this unfairly shifts the balance of power even more in favor of teams that have elite QBs, they are the only ones who benefit from a 4th and 15 instead of a kicking formation... because if they're down and coming back, playing in rhythm, that can be a very easy completion for Brady, Brees, and Rodgers. So yeah, I don't like it... this rule change would make it even easier for the top passing offenses to come back.

Make it 4th and 20, thats a little harder to pick up, even for the elite QBs. Maybe 4th and 25, just so they have a chance but it needs to be just perfect. 4th and 15 doesn't need a lot of things to come together to convert, you know? Not int he same way that a lot of things have to come together to get an onside.

ok, this is a good point.....4th and 15th could be more likely than recovering an on-side kick. how much likely is up for debate in itself, but i'd guess it is more likely with an elite QB.

they could crunch the data and compare these odds? then adjust the yardage accordingly, won't be exact but more fair?

 

[Bemular]

It seem like Goodell just wants to do something just to do it. Just so in case he gets sued again he can say, "See? We tried!"

Meanwhile soon enough he'll be asking his players to play more regular seasons games and travel cross-continents to play football.

He's a fucking idiot. Wanna prevent concussions? Stop talking about adding more games. Scratch the London idea. Hell, end Thursday Night Football. Pump more $$$ into R&D for better equipment and helmets.

Clyde,

I'm fairly neutral on Goodell; leaning perhaps more towards liking him than not so I'm interested in understanding your point of view.

Regarding the concussion issue, I can see the Thursday argument, but not the London argument. As for the $$$ and R&D - $$$ & R&D alone won't solve the problem - Equipment has been researched, developed, modified and improved since the '30's but therein lies part of the problem.

Humans have also gone through a lot of R&D and can now play "harder" than the current and likely future equipment can and will be able to protect against. Protection has had the unintended consequence of making players less safe against head injuries because it has changed the way they play.

Another thing to keep in mind is protection can only be so good before the point of diminished returns is breached. Rule changes are going to have to be part of the process. A process made more difficult when you consider the league has built its reputation and made its fortune on violence.

 

[deep9er]

Seriously, Deep?!! Without taking into consideration what got them to that tight game, still they deserved to lose without having any facts...

for example?

what things could've occurred in the game that would make you think.........hey, the team behind should be given a better chance to tie to win?

 

[Bemular]

Yoooo. I picked up and referenced the same thing without even seeing this.

Yeah, My Brother - I honestly do not understand this guy, Deep; but, I'm sure it all makes perfect sense in his mind.

 

[Bemular]

for example?

what things could've occurred in the game that would make you think.........hey, the team behind should be given a better chance to tie to win?

Once again, Deep, it is not a "better" chance it is their rightful chance - If the winning team wanted to eliminate that rightful chance then perhaps THEY should have not scored with time remaining.

 

[BINGO]

Josh Cribbs of Cleveland Browns likens no-kickoff scenario to intramurals - ESPN

 

[CalamityX11]

scrap this 4th n 15.... keep it as is.... career ending injuries and life threatening injuries happen in most sports, more so in football. Its part of the game, don't want to risk it, don't play it.

 

[CalamityX11]

because if i see a 3 yard pass on 4th n 15 lol........

 

[CalamityX11]

not to mention its the start of a game, incompletes happen on first down, sometimes they get it but not so much on more than 15 yards unless your one of those teams....

there's no real reward to this.

 

[BINGO]

scrap this 4th n 15.... keep it as is.... career ending injuries and life threatening injuries happen in most sports, more so in football. Its part of the game, don't want to risk it, don't play it.

I hear you Calamity, but I as for me, I would welcome the proposal with open arms if researchers can show me that "most" of the concussions occurred during "kickoffs".

He is basically saying, if we modify and eliminate kickoffs, Jahvid Best, Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, would not have gotten concussed.

 

[CalamityX11]

I hear you Calamity, but I as for me, I would welcome the proposal with open arms if researchers can show me that "most" of the concussions occurred during "kickoffs".

He is basically saying, if we modify and eliminate kickoffs, Jahvid Best, Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, would not have gotten concussed.

I agree with you, eliminating the kickoffs wouldn't erase the concussions occured during actual offensive plays.

 

[Bemular]

I hear you Calamity, but I as for me, I would welcome the proposal with open arms if researchers can show me that "most" of the concussions occurred during "kickoffs".

He is basically saying, if we modify and eliminate kickoffs, Jahvid Best, Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, would not have gotten concussed.

That right there is my same question. I keep hearing how the kickoff is the cause of the most violent collisions - but rarely do I see concussions as the result of those hits. So just from that standpoint/perspective I don't quite understand the need to change the rule.