Goodell: Replacing Kickoffs with a Punt?

[PackerLegend]

The worst ******* idea I've ever heard.

[dannyz]

So would this mean that the other time might not get a chance to touch the ball?

One team could score then instead of kicking off it would be like a 4 and 20 and they could go for it, if that is what Goodell is talking about it's stupid.

[Bucs147]

Originally Posted by dannyz

So would this mean that the other time might not get a chance to touch the ball?

One team could score then instead of kicking off it would be like a 4 and 20 and they could go for it, if that is what Goodell is talking about it's stupid.

I don't like the idea, but how many times have teams tried a 4 and 15 from their 30 yard line when they didn't desperatly need the 1st down ? Even Bellichick and his Patriots offense doesn't do that.

[LonghornsLegend]

Why does a rule have to change every year though? It's just hilarious they look to find a rule to change when there are still rules in place that make zero sense ie throwing a flag on a TD.

[vikes_28]

How many players have actually been paralyzed during any NFL play...with a quick google search, i saw 3. I understand the whole eric legrand thing was sad, and it shouldn't happen, but it does. Unfortunately it is just the physicality of the game. it happens. making a change this drastic is ridiculous.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by LonghornsLegend

Why does a rule have to change every year though? It's just hilarious they look to find a rule to change when there are still rules in place that make zero sense ie throwing a flag on a TD.

because $$$$. the biggest delusion fans are currently under is that any rule change is designed to improve the 'game' itself.

[falloutboy14]

I think a game where both teams just decided not to punt would be very entertaining. For some teams, the odds of completing 4th & 15 have to be close to stopping the other team from scoring. If you can string together possessions in a row, imagine how tired the defense will be. Imagine a half of football where only one team possesses the ball.

It wouldn't be football, but I'd watch it once or twice.

[descendency]

Personally, I think it should be 4th and 10. The ball only has to travel 10 yards on an onside kick already.

[bearsfan_51]

All forms of kicking should be eliminated from football. It has nothing to do with the rest of the game.

[prock]

This is the ******* stupidest thing I've heard.

[descendency]

Originally Posted by dannyz

So would this mean that the other time might not get a chance to touch the ball?

One team could score then instead of kicking off it would be like a 4 and 20 and they could go for it, if that is what Goodell is talking about it's stupid.

The only thing this will do is make onside kicks into actual plays instead of the play it is now.

And I imagine (just a guess) that punts are far safer than kick offs. So many illegal wedges are still missed. I saw a 4 man wedge during the Jets and Patriots game that went unflagged. (it was 2 two-man wedges that basically were running side by side)

The consequence of that is teams will start using wedge busters and that job is basically a regularly guaranteed concussion.

[thefalconer]

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

All forms of kicking should be eliminated from football. It has nothing to do with the rest of the game.

change the name of the sport then.

[DiG]

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

Maybe it could be 4th and 15 if the kicking team lines up in a punt formation with their standard punter in the game. Then it becomes 4th and 30 if the team lines up in a regular offense with relaxed contact rules for the defense? Converting a 4th and 30 with the defense more free would be about as unlikely as recovering an onsides kick nowadays.

but what if you have ray rice?

[bearsfan_51]

Originally Posted by thefalconer

change the name of the sport then.

That's the concern here? That the game is improperly named?

[Halsey]

Obviously a lot of people are going to criticize the inevitable changes the NFL will have to make, but the critics aren't the ones dealing with the lawsuits, injuries, etc. The NFL doesn't appear to have a lot of choices when it comes to making some major changes to the game.

[dannyz]

Originally Posted by descendency

The only thing this will do is make onside kicks into actual plays instead of the play it is now.

And I imagine (just a guess) that punts are far safer than kick offs. So many illegal wedges are still missed. I saw a 4 man wedge during the Jets and Patriots game that went unflagged. (it was 2 two-man wedges that basically were running side by side)

The consequence of that is teams will start using wedge busters and that job is basically a regularly guaranteed concussion.

All I am saying is the Lions win the toss and elect to "kick off" so the first play of the game would be a "4 and 20" what is stoping them from going deep to Calvin every time? I get that teams don't go for it that long until the end of the game but if they convert the other team would never get the ball.

[WCH]

How freaking valuable would a PR like Devin Hester be if the league adopted this? Teams would have two options: pass on 4th and 15 from the 30; or punt to Devin Hester.

[njx9]

i'd never punt. under any circumstances. with a decent punter, you're giving them the ball at what, the 40? yippee. might as well try at keeping the ball every time.

i just don't even care anymore. the nfl is desperately trying to turn itself into the nba.

[descendency]

Originally Posted by njx9

i'd never punt. under any circumstances. with a decent punter, you're giving them the ball at what, the 40? yippee. might as well try at keeping the ball every time.

i just don't even care anymore. the nfl is desperately trying to turn itself into the nba.

If an average punt nets 40 yards (which seems low), you would be giving it to them on the 30.

If they have them punt from the 35 or 40, that would basically fix the problem of additional yards gained.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by descendency

If an average punt nets 40 yards (which seems low), you would be giving it to them on the 30.

If they have them punt from the 35 or 40, that would basically fix the problem of additional yards gained.

the net average is right around 40.

so if they punt they kick from the 35/40, if they go for it, they start from further back? i'm not saying the nfl isn't capable of making a rule that inane, but that would be an inane rule. if it all started at the 40, you have even less reason to bother with punting, especially if the other team has a good returner.

[P-L]

I'm not really a fan, but I can't say it would really bother me either. I haven't agreed with most of the recent rule changes, but I still don't enjoy football any less than I did five or ten years ago. I can't imagine eliminating kick offs would change that either.

[ph90702]

If the NFL wants to eliminate kickoffs, then why not just give the team that got scored on the ball at their 25 yard line? Then, they would have to go 75 yards to score a touchdown.

[Brothgar]

I don't really know how I feel about this change if it comes into play. Firstly, It seems to devalue the kicker position more than it already has. It also makes a major change to the game above anything we have seen since the moving back of the field goal posts. It essentially eliminates half of special teams and the biggest most dynamic play in sports let alone football which is the kick return for a TD. On the other hand it would be really interesting to see a 4th and 15 but all in all I really dislike getting rid of one third of the game.

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by y.f.s.

ANYTHING TO STOP TERRORISM

...wait, I have my narratives mixed up.

God I missed you.

[brat316]

Eliminates 6-11 guys as well. fringe ST players.