4th and 15 at your own 30

Biggie · Post by **Biggie** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:07 pm

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000106654/article/roger-goodell-mulling-over-idea-of-eliminating-kickoffs wrote:When the NFL changed the line of scrimmage for kickoffs to increase touchbacks, New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick derisively said that it was only a matter of time before the NFL eliminated kickoffs entirely. He believed that's what the NFL wanted to do.

Belichick might wind up being proven right.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said that he's taken it under consideration to remove the kickoff entirely.

"It's an off-the-wall idea. It's different and makes you think differently. It did me," Goodell told TIME in a cover story for the Dec. 17 issue.

Even more intriguing is an alternative concept promoted by Tampa Bay Buccaneers coach Greg Schiano. Goodell met with the NFL competition committee chairman about the concept.

"After a touchdown or field goal, instead of kicking off, a team would get the ball on its own 30-yard line, where it's fourth and 15," TIME's Sean Gregory writes. "The options are either to go for it and try to retain possession or punt. If you go for it and fall short, of course, the opposing team would take over with good field position. In essence, a punt replaces the kickoffs."

It's an interesting idea. We haven't seen the numbers that punts are that much safer than kickoffs, but the NFL must have the data to support the notion if they were considering it.

The implications for strategy are even more intriguing. If a team is trailing by more than one score very late in the fourth quarter, they likely would to try to go for it on fourth-and-15 instead of punting. That's not an easy situation to convert, but the concept would still make it easier to make a comeback without ever giving the ball back to an opponent.

Totally bizarre, but the more I think about it, the more I kinda like it?

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:14 pm

I don't see why not. Give it a try in preseason and see how it plays out. It could be interesting. It really isn't that bizarre.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:40 pm

Sounds like some youth league rules. Eliminating special teams play that can produce one of the most exciting plays in the game is not a good move, imo.....and Devon Hester's.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:41 pm

It doesn't eliminate special teams play, you crusty old fart.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:45 pm

Maybe they could just outlaw running on the kickoffs. They’d all have to go like those race-walkers – one foot in contact with the ground at all times.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:04 pm

mvscal wrote:It doesn't eliminate special teams play, you crusty old fart.

It does eliminate kickoff returns....which is what we're talking about.....plus it will likely give the ball back to the team who just scored. Maybe a better solution would be to give the receiving team the option of taking the ball 1st down on the 20, or 4th and 15 on the 30. Or better yet, just kick the fucking ball and let them play football.....and quit fuckin' with the game.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:10 pm

Mace wrote:It does eliminate kickoff returns....which is what we're talking about.....

And replaces them with punt returns. BFD

plus it will likely give the ball back to the team who just scored.

15 yard conversions are "likely" plays? I don't suppose you have any numbers to back up that assertion? Nope? Just jerking your knee and talking out your ass?

A 15 yard conversion is about a 20% play. Not very fucking likely, is it? And the penalty for failure would be giving the opponent the ball on your own 30. Kind of like playing with an empty net in hockey.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/07 ... ility.html

Onside kicks have a 26% success rate, though it varies between surprise kicks and expected. Yes, you would probably see more successful 15 yard conversions overall but not that significant of a difference.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09 ... kicks.html

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:32 pm

mvscal wrote:
Mace wrote:It does eliminate kickoff returns....which is what we're talking about.....
And replaces them with punt returns. BFD

plus it will likely give the ball back to the team who just scored.
15 yard conversions are "likely" plays? I don't suppose you have any numbers to back up that assertion? Nope? Just jerking your knee and talking out your ass?

A 15 yard conversion is about a 20% play. Not very fucking likely, is it? And the penalty for failure would be giving the opponent the ball on your own 30. Kind of like playing with an empty net in hockey.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2008/07 ... ility.html

Offsides kicks have a 26% success rate, though it varies between surprise kicks and expected. Yes, you would probably see more successful 15 yard conversions overall but not that significant of a difference.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09 ... kicks.html

In lieu of a kickoff return, the receiving team would get the ball 4th and 15 on the 30 and "likely" punt the ball back to the team who just scored.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:39 pm

Mace wrote:In lieu of a kickoff return, the receiving team would get the ball 4th and 15 on the 30 and "likely" punt the ball back to the team who just scored.

Try reading it again. The scoring team lines up on their 30 and either punts or attempts the 15 yard conversion.

"After a touchdown or field goal, instead of kicking off, a team would get the ball on its own 30-yard line, where it's fourth and 15," TIME's Sean Gregory writes. "The options are either to go for it and try to retain possession or punt. If you go for it and fall short, of course, the opposing team would take over with good field position. In essence, a punt replaces the kickoffs."

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:05 pm

Yep, I read it again.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:02 am

Uniforms will include mandatory skirts for all players.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 2:48 am

Maybe they ought to start selling logo pacifiers for the fans. What a bunch freaking crybabies. Jesus Christ...

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:05 pm

so you've got a really shitty team with nothing to lose (s'up chefs) who score then you're going to give them the ball back at their own 30 and make it 4th and 15? with nothing to lose, of course they opt to go for it...and lets say they make it, go on to score a TD (I know that sounds preposterous) and then they get the ball back again at their own 30 facing another 4th and 15? they go for it again, make it and so it goes....who the fuck dreams this shit up

that's got to be one of the more stupid ideas the NFL has come up with for a while...if you want to eliminate kickoffs, just give it to the receiving team on their own 25 and be done with it

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:38 pm

mvscal wrote:A 15 yard conversion is about a 20% play. Not very fucking likely, is it?

Probably even less than that when you consider it's a 4th and 15. Much different than a 1st and 15...everyone on defense knows you're going to drop back and pass the ball down field.

I like the idea.

Go Coogs' · Post by **Go Coogs'** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 5:13 pm

I'm kind of on the fence with this idea. The kick-off has become a dangerous play because these guys are much bigger, stronger, and faster than they were years ago. I understand what shutyomouth is saying to and extent. These guys signed on for this and knew there is a high risk involved when choosing this profession. Lets face it, more than half of these guys would probably be on the streets if it wasn't for their God given ability to be big and run fast.

The kick-off play has more of a chance than any other play to end a man's career and also temporarily paralyze him. It's a rare event but we've seen it happen; however, we've also seen regular scrimmage plays turn into disaster like we did with the Tulane DB earlier this season. Same thing happened with Dennis Byrd, so how are you going to eliminate those plays from happening? Is there data to back up that spinal injuries occur more on kick-offs than plays from scrimmage?

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 5:41 pm

Go Coogs' wrote:I'm kind of on the fence with this idea. The kick-off has become a dangerous play because these guys are much bigger, stronger, and faster than they were years ago. I understand what shutyomouth is saying to and extent. These guys signed on for this and knew there is a high risk involved when choosing this profession. Lets face it, more than half of these guys would probably be on the streets if it wasn't for their God given ability to be big and run fast.

The kick-off play has more of a chance than any other play to end a man's career and also temporarily paralyze him. It's a rare event but we've seen it happen; however, we've also seen regular scrimmage plays turn into disaster like we did with the Tulane DB earlier this season. Same thing happened with Dennis Byrd, so how are you going to eliminate those plays from happening? Is there data to back up that spinal injuries occur more on kick-offs than plays from scrimmage?

Personally, I prefer inflicting them on passes over the middle.

- Jack Tatum

My initial reaction is negative to the proposed rule change but, like the DH in baseball, I would likely get used to it even if I don't agree with it. Like Felix said, it would make more sense to just give the ball to the receiving team on the 25.....or give the scoring team the option of having the ball 4th and 15 on their own 30 in lieu of an onside kick.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Fri Dec 07, 2012 5:57 pm

Felix wrote:so you've got a really shitty team with nothing to lose (s'up chefs) who score then you're going to give them the ball back at their own 30 and make it 4th and 15? with nothing to lose, of course they opt to go for it...and lets say they make it, go on to score a TD (I know that sounds preposterous) and then they get the ball back again at their own 30 facing another 4th and 15? they go for it again, make it and so it goes....who the fuck dreams this shit up.

How does this differ from recovering multiple onside kicks in a row, driving down the field, and scoring?

You make it sound like teams are going to opt for the 4th and 15 more than the onside kick. The risk is the same, dumbfuck. If you don't make it, you are giving the other team the ball deep in your territory. You will punt the ball 99% of the time unless you're behind and there's little time left in the game.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:46 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
mvscal wrote:A 15 yard conversion is about a 20% play. Not very fucking likely, is it?
Probably even less than that when you consider it's a 4th and 15.

The figure I used was for 3rd and 15 which is more or less the same one shot deal. I couldn't find anything for 4th and 15.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:54 pm

Felix wrote:so you've got a really shitty team with nothing to lose (s'up chefs) who score then you're going to give them the ball back at their own 30 and make it 4th and 15? with nothing to lose, of course they opt to go for it...and lets say they make it, go on to score a TD (I know that sounds preposterous) and then they get the ball back again at their own 30 facing another 4th and 15? they go for it again, make it and so it goes....

It would be 4th and 15 not 4th and 1, idiot. A surprise onside kick has a 60% success rate. The Chiefs should have trying them all year according to your "reasoning," right?

Only and idiot (or Bill Belichick) would opt to go for it if the game wasn't on the line and they're running out of time. 8 times out of 10 the team that tries the conversion is going to give the ball back to the opponent on their own 30. Not very good odds and some very fucked up field position.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:58 pm

Go Coogs' wrote:I'm kind of on the fence with this idea. The kick-off has become a dangerous play because these guys are much bigger, stronger, and faster than they were years ago. I understand what shutyomouth is saying to and extent. These guys signed on for this and knew there is a high risk involved when choosing this profession. Lets face it, more than half of these guys would probably be on the streets if it wasn't for their God given ability to be big and run fast.

The kick-off play has more of a chance than any other play to end a man's career and also temporarily paralyze him. It's a rare event but we've seen it happen; however, we've also seen regular scrimmage plays turn into disaster like we did with the Tulane DB earlier this season. Same thing happened with Dennis Byrd, so how are you going to eliminate those plays from happening? Is there data to back up that spinal injuries occur more on kick-offs than plays from scrimmage?

Honestly, I couldn't give less of a fuck about player safety. I like the proposal because I think it could make the game a little more interesting. If it also happens to have the side effect of reducing the risk of serious injury, that's fine.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:56 am

mvscal wrote:
It would be 4th and 15 not 4th and 1, idiot. A surprise onside kick has a 60% success rate. The Chiefs should have trying them all year according to your "reasoning," right?

Only and idiot (or Bill Belichick) would opt to go for it if the game wasn't on the line and they're running out of time. 8 times out of 10 the team that tries the conversion is going to give the ball back to the opponent on their own 30. Not very good odds and some very fucked up field position.

where did I say it would be 4th and 1 dumbfuck....

put the ball in a QB's hand and I'd venture to say the odds on converting a 4th and 15 would be substantially higher than the chances of recovering an onside kick

it's a stupid fucking idea....I'm not surprised you seem to support it

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:52 am

Felix wrote:put the ball in a QB's hand and I'd venture to say the odds on converting a 4th and 15 would be substantially higher than the chances of recovering an onside kick

it's a stupid fucking idea....I'm not surprised you seem to support it

You can stop "venturing" on the odds, you fucking idiot. I've already posted them. 20% chance. While you're at it, you can "venture" on the odds of a team scoring against you when they're starting from your own fucking 30 yard line.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:36 pm

mvscal wrote:While you're at it, you can "venture" on the odds of a team scoring against you when they're starting from your own fucking 30 yard line.

what the fuck are you talking about lamebrain? i'm not versed in gibberish so if you'd like to try that again in english, give it a shot

maybe you'd care to explain why you think a horseshit rule like this would enhance the game, make it a better product, etc. do you think punts are safer than kickoffs? they're not....

like i said if they want to eliminate kickoffs just place the ball at the 25 and le er rip

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Sat Dec 08, 2012 8:31 pm

Felix wrote:put the ball in a QB's hand and I'd venture to say the odds on converting a 4th and 15 would be substantially higher than the chances of recovering an onside kick

So. What are the numbers? Stop "venturing" and post some real data for us to chew on. Or shut the fuck up.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Dec 08, 2012 9:00 pm

Felix wrote:
mvscal wrote:While you're at it, you can "venture" on the odds of a team scoring against you when they're starting from your own fucking 30 yard line.
what the fuck are you talking about lamebrain? i'm not versed in gibberish so if you'd like to try that again in english, give it a shot

That is what would happen in the event of an incompletion on the 4-15 play, dumbfuck.

do you think punts are safer than kickoffs? they're not....

The NFL seems to think they are and, presumably, they have data to support that conclusion. Where are your numbers, btw? You clearly state that punt returns are not safer than kick returns.

Put some numbers on the table or fuck off, idiot.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:00 pm

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:
So. What are the numbers? Stop "venturing" and post some real data for us to chew on.

fuck off moron...

mvscal wrote:
That is what would happen in the event of an incompletion on the 4-15 play, dumbfuck.

wait, you mean if they don't complete a 4th a 15 the ball reverts to the other team? wow, this is eye opening stuff.....

The NFL seems to think they are

the nfl, who are so concerned with player safety they want to turn a 16 game season into an 18 game season...you mean that organization?

still waiting on the reasons you think this would be an improvement to the game

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Sat Dec 08, 2012 11:30 pm

Felix wrote:

That's what I thought, bitch. Feel free to post something... anything... to back up your shit take.

In case you forgot (or are just fucking high right now and can't remember), this is your shit take:

FuckedUpOnVicodin wrote:the odds on converting a 4th and 15 would be substantially higher than the chances of recovering an onside kick.

Post the data, you worthless fucking addict.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:21 pm

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote: That's what I thought, bitch. Feel free to post something... anything... to back up your shit take.

you know, it might do you some good to exercise your brain for once instead of just standing on the sidelines opining idiotic thoughts.....read this book, then get back to me

Hidden Game of Football by Bob Carroll, John Thorn, and Pete Palmer.....it's a remarkable study and analysis of statistical data...

but if you want the formula for calculating it, here you go
Vgo = p[5.91 + 0.077x] – (1–p)[5.91 + 0.077x]

the odds on converting a 4th and 15 would be substantially higher than the chances of recovering an onside kick.

when opposing teams are expecting it, onside kicks have about a 20% success ratio.....that's about the same for converting a 4th and 15....so it's not substantially higher....oddly enough, when those onside kicks are successful, the probability of the recovering team winning is almost non-existent....but I'll give you the same opportunity to explain in detail why you think this rule would enhance the game....or haven't you thought that far ahead

from your continual nonsensical reference to vicodin, I can see your pretty hung up on that shit.....I can also detect that your vagina is still tender from your own idiocy earlier in the year....sorry dawg, I handed it to you on a plate and you were too stupid to take advantage...the person you should be mad at is yourself not me....

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:55 pm

Felix wrote:when opposing teams are expecting it, onside kicks have about a 20% success ratio.....that's about the same for converting a 4th and 15....so it's not substantially higher....

Yeah....that's what I've been telling you. Except that it is a good deal lower than 20% when expected. It's more like 12%. The jeopardy of failure is also greater as you would be more likely to turn it over back on your 30 yard line which sets up a 47 yard field goal attempt before the opposing offense even steps on the field.

A failed onside kick starts at the 35 and (usually) travels about ten yards where it recovered by the hands team around the 45 yard line. That would be a 62 yard attempt without any further gain. When you actually stop and think about it, the onside kick is a pretty stupid gimmick play. I can't see how or why anybody would be so attached to it. It really isn't a "football play."

I'll give you the same opportunity to explain in detail why you think this rule would enhance the game.

For one, I believe it allows more opportunity for strategy and gamesmenship between the coaches but the most significant enhancement to the game is that it allows your offense to decide your fate.

Say your team is trying to claw its way back into a game. The clock is winding down and you've just managed a score. Would you rather put the game in the hands of your starting offense and let them execute a proper football play or would you rather pin your hopes on your soccer fag being able to do some kind of bouncy, kicky thing that rolls ten yards and hope one of your special teams scrubs can come down with the ball?

Why not try it out in preseason for a year or two to see how it plays out?

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:57 pm

Felix -- who is the one who keeps making references to our non-trade? It is you who can't let it go, not me. You are obsessed with how I dismissed you as drug addled loser who couldn't keep his shit together. Just let it go.

With regard to the stats. Someone already posted something very similar earlier in this thread. You saw that... right?

Plus from my years of watching football, I knew that 4th and 15 was not a decided advantage over recovering an on-side kick. Anyone with half a brain knew there was not a huge disparity between the two. Except you, of course. A drug addict fucking loser who can't get anything right.

And btw -- limit your shit takes in this forum to NFL stuff only. Or I will do it for you. You want to keep 'sessing over the JAFFL, then post a thread in that forum.

trev · Post by **trev** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:02 pm

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:
And btw -- limit your shit takes in this forum to NFL stuff only. Or I will do it for you. You want to keep 'sessing over the JAFFL, then post a thread in that forum.

Are you going to throw your newfound power around like that? You might want to rethink that, douche.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:12 pm

trev wrote:
ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:
And btw -- limit your shit takes in this forum to NFL stuff only. Or I will do it for you. You want to keep 'sessing over the JAFFL, then post a thread in that forum.
Are you going to throw your newfound power around like that? You might want to rethink that, douche.

I posted a comment on his threat to Felix too.....and he promptly deleted it. So, yeah, you're spot on, Trev.

trev · Post by **trev** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:17 pm

Oh really. Great to know. Mine better not get deleted. Unless someone wants to lose his tiny little balls.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:28 pm

Do you people really want to read about a topic Felix should have 'let go' about 2 months ago?

A topic that doesn't affect your life or the NFL in any way?

I am of the opinion our dealings are not for public consumption. And anything that goes on in a private forum, stays private. And if you can't limit your takes to something football related, I will delete your bullshit post haste. And as long as I am a Moderator of this forum, that's how it's going to be. Go PM some Admin if you got a problem with that. If that's too strict for the people who run this site, then they can find someone else to babysit.

trev · Post by **trev** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:32 pm

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Do you people really want to read about a topic Felix should have 'let go' about 2 months ago?

A topic that doesn't affect your life or the NFL in any way?

I am of the opinion our dealings are not for public consumption. And anything that goes on in a private forum, stays private. And if you can't limit your takes to something football related, I will delete your bullshit post haste. And as long as I am a Moderator of this forum, that's how it's going to be. Go PM some Admin if you got a problem with that.

No need to PM an admin. You won't last long on your own. You are doing just fine all by yourself.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:38 pm

at ucant.

I don't think the proposed rule change will fly because there will be too much fan opposition to them bastarizing the game by eliminating kick off returns. While mvscal isn't concerned with trying to minimize the risk of serious injury, the NFL is, but they'll have to come up with some very convincing stats to prove that most catastrophic injuries occur on kick offs. I suppose it's possible, but I don't recall ever seeing anyone suffer a catastrophic injury on a return.

trev · Post by **trev** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:40 pm

Mace wrote: at ucant.

Is that an unacceptable post in this forum boy? Watch yourself, it might get axed.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:42 pm

trev wrote:You won't last long on your own.

Terrific. In either case, I will have lasted longer than my predecessor.

Now. Let's all get back on topic. How 'bout them Chargers? That was quite unexpected yesterday, trev. It's always fun to watch Pittsburgh get blown the fuck out, especially by a team who many expected to mail in the rest of the season.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:15 pm

I don't know who your predecessor might have been because no one cares about the moderators until they start deleting posts and become heavy handed. It's usually a case of small penis syndrome.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:29 pm

Feel free talk about football all you want, Mace.

If you have a problem with me, reach out to an Admin.