RealGM

The NFL is clearly trying to eliminate kickoff returns because they are the most dangerous play but they keep doing it in a stupid way that makes the whole play silly and redundant.

I propose a few changes to the process.

No more coin tosses. Home team either chooses the ball or the direction they want to go.

Half's start with the ball at the 20 yard line.

If a team scores a TD the opponent starts on the 15 yard line.

If a team scores a FG the opponent starts on the 30 yard line.

If a team misses a short FG where the ball would would be spotted at the 22 for example the ball is still moved out to the 30 yard line.

If a team scores a Safety they also get the ball back on the 30 yard line.

Onside kicks are replaced by getting the ball on your own 15. The team will then be facing a 4th and 15. If they go for a second onside kick it'll be 4th and 20. Max two attempts per team and only in the 4th quarter and only when trailing.

If the NFL is serious about eliminating the dangers of kickoffs and onside kicks I think this does that quite well while also adding some excitement to the end of games.

Really. Why don't we just get rid of football the way we know it to be. I mean half the damn rules today have already made the league a part time joke and not fun to watch at times. Personally I'd like to get rid of the 5 yard chuck rule and the 15 yard personal foul penalty for breathing on a QB. QB is suppose to be a football player, not an old lady at a square dance party.

The main thing I'd like further adjustments to is OT. It's still ridiculous that it basically comes down to a coin toss. Both teams should get a chance no matter what even if the team that wins the toss gets a TD. It's better than the old way, but why go half way? It still largely comes down to a coin toss.

bluejerseyjinx wrote:Really. Why don't we just get rid of football the way we know it to be. I mean half the damn rules today have already made the league a part time joke and not fun to watch at times. Personally I'd like to get rid of the 5 yard chuck rule and the 15 yard personal foul penalty for breathing on a QB. QB is suppose to be a football player, not an old lady at a square dance party.

QBs are too important to the league and the quality of the game to not give a little more protection. After a pass they are extremely vulnerable, especially at the knees which is why I have no issues with the rule that says you have to go above the knees. I do agree that the refs are far too liberal with the roughing the passer calls when somebody gives the QB a little knock just after he releases the ball.

I just hate they way they are trying to manipulate the kicking game.

bluejerseyjinx wrote:I just hate they way they are trying to manipulate the kicking game.

They want to get rid of it altogether but just haven't come up with an alternative which is what I tried to do. I understand why they are trying to reduce returns. Giant men running full speed for 40 yards and colliding with each other is a recipe for disaster. I know everyone whines about the pussification of the game but it really is an unnecessarily dangerous play. It could also reduce roster sizes a bit which should lead to pay raises for the more skilled important players.

So once again it boils down to money. Why doesn't that surprise me. Football has always been a rough violent sport and they have pussyfied it. To a point where it is not fun to watch at times. And I don't like reducing roster spots so we can pay certain players more money. Football has always been the ultimate TEAM SPORT.

bwgood77 wrote:The main thing I'd like further adjustments to is OT. It's still ridiculous that it basically comes down to a coin toss. Both teams should get a chance no matter what even if the team that wins the toss gets a TD. It's better than the old way, but why go half way? It still largely comes down to a coin toss.

The problem is going 2nd is a pretty huge advantage if both teams get the ball. It's essentially an extra down if you need it.

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:The main thing I'd like further adjustments to is OT. It's still ridiculous that it basically comes down to a coin toss. Both teams should get a chance no matter what even if the team that wins the toss gets a TD. It's better than the old way, but why go half way? It still largely comes down to a coin toss.

The problem is going 2nd is a pretty huge advantage if both teams get the ball. It's essentially an extra down if you need it.

Well then most teams, if they won the toss would let the other team have the ball first.

bwgood77 wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:The main thing I'd like further adjustments to is OT. It's still ridiculous that it basically comes down to a coin toss. Both teams should get a chance no matter what even if the team that wins the toss gets a TD. It's better than the old way, but why go half way? It still largely comes down to a coin toss.

The problem is going 2nd is a pretty huge advantage if both teams get the ball. It's essentially an extra down if you need it.

Well then most teams, if they won the toss would let the other team have the ball first.

They would if you changed the rule. It wouldn't be any fairer.

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:
The problem is going 2nd is a pretty huge advantage if both teams get the ball. It's essentially an extra down if you need it.

Well then most teams, if they won the toss would let the other team have the ball first.

They would if you changed the rule. It wouldn't be any fairer.

So you think with both teams getting a chance to have the ball is no more fair than only one team getting a chance if they score a TD?

bwgood77 wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:
Well then most teams, if they won the toss would let the other team have the ball first.

They would if you changed the rule. It wouldn't be any fairer.

So you think with both teams getting a chance to have the ball is no more fair than only one team getting a chance if they score a TD?

Let's put it this way, it's still not fair. Whether it's fairer could be debated.

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:
They would if you changed the rule. It wouldn't be any fairer.

So you think with both teams getting a chance to have the ball is no more fair than only one team getting a chance if they score a TD?

Let's put it this way, it's still not fair. Whether it's fairer could be debated.

What do you think IS fair? Do you think they should just eliminate it and call it a tie? I would mind that, although you'd still have to have something in place for the playoffs.

bwgood77 wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:
So you think with both teams getting a chance to have the ball is no more fair than only one team getting a chance if they score a TD?

Let's put it this way, it's still not fair. Whether it's fairer could be debated.

What do you think IS fair? Do you think they should just eliminate it and call it a tie? I would mind that, although you'd still have to have something in place for the playoffs.

The only other fair option besides a tie would probably be to play a full allotment of time.

Worm Guts wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:

Worm Guts wrote:
Let's put it this way, it's still not fair. Whether it's fairer could be debated.

What do you think IS fair? Do you think they should just eliminate it and call it a tie? I would mind that, although you'd still have to have something in place for the playoffs.

The only other fair option besides a tie would probably be to play a full allotment of time.

Yes, that would probably be the best option.

Protecting QB's is overrated.

None of the good QB's even get hurt that much. It's the scrub QB's no one cares about like Bradford who are always hurt.

bwgood77 wrote:The main thing I'd like further adjustments to is OT. It's still ridiculous that it basically comes down to a coin toss. Both teams should get a chance no matter what even if the team that wins the toss gets a TD. It's better than the old way, but why go half way? It still largely comes down to a coin toss.

I'd actually like to return to the old rule of pure sudden death. At the point that the hysteria started about both teams not having a chance to touch the ball, the team who won the coin toss was winning 53 percent of the time, which statistically meant that the old rule had nearly struck a perfectly competitive balance. It's also simpler and doesn't drag out what is a much more exhausting dangerous game compared to other sports. This can also be filed under player safety that the league pretends to support.

all players need to be protected better, not just qbs. ideally playing sports shouldnt prevent you from remembering your kids' names.

bluejerseyjinx wrote:So once again it boils down to money. Why doesn't that surprise me. Football has always been a rough violent sport and they have pussyfied it. To a point where it is not fun to watch at times. And I don't like reducing roster spots so we can pay certain players more money. Football has always been the ultimate TEAM SPORT.

I say all the big sports have been changed to make it less physical...

Don't know much about baseball, however, FOotball, soccer and basketball definitely has.

If the NFL really cared about player health then the topic of expanding to 18 regular season games (with a full pre-season) wouldn't come up as often as it does. I understand the potential of injury that exists on kickoff/punt returns; but in terms of actual injuries how much more frequent/severe are injuries in those situations?