4th & 15 Replacing Onside Kicks???

[KRL]

What do people think of the proposal?  I'm willing to see it implemented
for 2020 to see how it works.  Onside kicks rarely worked, the 4th &
15 would be much more "makeable".  If a HC was really aggressive he could
keep the ball away from the opponent by going for it after every score:

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-updates-language-on-4th-and-15-proposal-taking-out-trailing-requirement

 

The NFL already tweaked the proposed onside kick alternative rule to be voted on by owners next week.

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reported Friday that the updated language on the proposed rule change, which would allow teams to retain possession after a score by converting a fourth-and-15 play from its own 25-yard-line, takes out the requirement the team must be trailing to employ the maneuver.

If the proposal passes, a team leading could attempt to play keep-away from an opponent by utilizing the fourth-and-15 option. It doesn't come without risk of giving the opponent the ball in scoring range.

Wiping out the prerequisite that a team must be trailing to try to keep possession is the right move. Coaches should be allowed the freedom to take calculated risks. Onside kicks don't restrict usage to trailing teams. Neither should its substitute.

The rule would still allow teams to continue to attempt onside kicks if they so choose.

NFL owners are set to discuss and vote on potential rule changes for the 2020 season during a virtual meeting on May 28.

[Il Mostro]

This just seems so contrived.  What happened to making a stop on defense in order to get the ball back?  There is great football drama when the D is pumped up after a score and are going balls out to get the ball back. 4th and 15 seems way to easy in today's offense skewed game.

[JohnnyLV]

Not a fan of this.  Think about it. The vast majority of on side kicks I would think happen late in a game after a 2 minute drill. The opposing defense is already tired, the team that just scored has a lot of momentum and in that situation 4th and 15 is just not as difficult as it seems. Does pass interference and defensive holding apply. Does pass interference 16 yards down the field mean a conversion? Holding make it a second attempt at 4th and 10? Too much ref involvement then, and regardless of what the NFL thinks officiating is biased towards the name QBs and elite teams. 

In addition, its a no risk play for the trailing team so teams will load their playbooks with special 4th and 15 plays, trick plays, and plays designed to create contact that can be called 50/50.

What ever the current success rate for 4th and 15 is now add at least 10% if this gets enacted

 

[Barry McCockinner]

I hate it but I also hate that onsides kicks are now basically impossible due to rule changes. I'd much rather see them get rid of the rules that ruined onsides kicks in the first place.

You're taking away another piece of special teams and further emphasizing offense. The game has always evolved but it seems to be changing faster than in the past and not for the better IMO.

[BUM-KNEE]

Not a fan of this idea.

[Bleedin Green]

I am totally opposed to this.  The recent years' issues with the extremely low onside kick rate are actually very easily manageable in the same exact way that they dealt with the extra point changes.  You let teams declare they will be going for an onside kick, and then they are allowed to line up using the old kickoff rules.  There was never a concern about the lack of onside recoveries in the old days, and the injury risks have never been the same for onsides as they are for standard kickoffs, so it's the most simplistic change that aligns with the history of the game.

The NFL has become already excessively offensive-centric as it is, this is a whole new level that's really changing the game.

[jetstream23]

What about a penalty for an automatic 1st down on that 4th and 15?  That's one thing that would irk me is a team using this new "onside kick" method and having a debatable holding call or something create an automatic conversion that lets a team retain possession of the ball.

[FidelioJet]

15 yards wouldn’t be enough.  Just too easy to get 15 yards on a play.  It would be too easy to attempt to give up 30 yards of field position.

4th and 25, then maybe I would consider it.  Maybe!

[pdxgreen]

It's new and unconventional so that means the Pats will exploit it.

[Tony The Wiz]

Leave the on side alone but take back that stupid 2018 rule where you can't about lining up for the kick. 

[Irish Jet]

Trash like every rule change that comes every god damn year.

[slats]

I’m with everyone who’d like to see the old kick-off rules reinstated so that the play is fun again. 

I’m a little torn on this proposal. On the one hand, I think that it would be a very exciting play. On the other, I think it would be another case of the rich getting richer. The teams with powerhouse offenses would have one more tool in their toolbox. Belichick will do something with it year one that’ll bring the rules committee back to the table next year to fix the thing he exploited. 

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

This is a horrible idea.  You have to earn possessions in the NFL.  You score - you kick.  That's the game of football.  You don't get to "decide" to keep the ball after scoring.  A team that fought all game to build a late lead can have that lead disappear with late game scores and then this gimmick play?  At least with an onsides kick, you have to recover the ball to "regain" possession.  Add in the horrible defensive pass interference, defensive holding, and roughing the passer calls that are made each game and this has disaster written all over it.

Either keep the rule as is, go back to the old onside kick rule, or make it much much harder than 4th and 15 -  and a penalty only gives the team another shot at the play, not a first down.  

[Nixhead]

Im against it. The current rule is after a TD you kick the ball to the other team. You can't take that away. Go back to the old onside kick rules where the kicking teams a better chance. Either that or make it 25 yards. Either way the team in need of the ball back will go for it. Longer yards just reduces the chance that a team that just scored and has the defense reeling will keep trying for the 15 yards.

[The Crusher]

1 hour ago, Il Mostro said:

This just seems so contrived.  What happened to making a stop on defense in order to get the ball back?  There is great football drama when the D is pumped up after a score and are going balls out to get the ball back. 4th and 15 seems way to easy in today's offense skewed game.

Agreed. 

[slats]

43 minutes ago, jetstream23 said:

What about a penalty for an automatic 1st down on that 4th and 15?  That's one thing that would irk me is a team using this new "onside kick" method and having a debatable holding call or something create an automatic conversion that lets a team retain possession of the ball.

This is a great point. My first thought was that you could just make a defensive penalty on the play a non-call do-over, but then you’re giving the defense a free pass to commit penalties to prevent the first down. Ugh. 

[JoJoTownsell1]

4 minutes ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

This is a horrible idea.  You have to earn possessions in the NFL.  You score - you kick.  That's the game of football.  You don't get to "decide" to keep the ball after scoring.  A team that fought all game to build a late lead can have that lead disappear with late game scores and then this gimmick play?  At least with an onsides kick, you have to recover the ball to "regain" possession.  Add in the horrible defensive pass interference, defensive holding, and roughing the passer calls that are made each game and this has disaster written all over it.

Either keep the rule as is, go back to the old onside kick rule, or make it much much harder than 4th and 15 -  and a penalty only gives the team another shot at the play, not a first down.  

You don't get to decide to keep the ball anymore than when you decide to keep the ball when you attempt an onside kick. 

It's just replacing the luck of a ball bouncing in the right direction with an offense vs defense talent based outcome..

And you make it seem as if making a4th and 15 is 50/50.

Not to mention the huge downside for that team if they don't make it. You are giving the ball to the other team in GREAT field position.

 

[Barry McCockinner]

3 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

You don't get to decide to keep the ball anymore than when you decide to keep the ball when you attempt an onside kick. 

It's just replacing the luck of a ball bouncing in the right direction with an offense vs defense talent based outcome..

And you make it seem as if making a4th and 15 is 50/50.

Not to mention the huge downside for that team if they don't make it. You are giving the ball to the other team in GREAT field position.

 

Yea the risk basically limits teams to using it in traditional onsides kick type scenarios at endgame. I'd be interested in what the league 4th & 15+ conversion rate is vs. the old expected onsides kick recovery rate. My gut tells me the conversion percentage is probably higher for 4th & 15+.

I think it would have to be an untimed down or teams could try it with seconds left at the end of the half to try and get back to back scores.

[Barry McCockinner]

I just read the text of the proposed rule and it says the game clock starts on the snap - so it's not an untimed down. This would result in teams using this rule attempting to score TD's if they score with less than 5 seconds left in the half.

[GKnight83]

Need to say no to this idea.  This severely penalizes a team with poor DBs and no pass rush - get  what I am saying here?

[Warfish]

1 hour ago, KRL said:

What do people think of the proposal?

Just like the de facto elimination of the kickoff, I am not a fan of this proposal.

I'd also say for some teams, "4th and 15" is a hell of alot easier to accomplish than an on-sides kick would be.

At some point the game will need to be renamed, as there is damn little "foot" involved in football these days.

[Spoot-Face]

Step 1: score TD

Step 2: elect for the 4th and 15 play

Step 3: send all receivers out and wait for a defensive penalty flag

Step 4: profit

[bealeb319]

Say you are a team like the Patriots of old and you really carved up the opposing defense on your first two drives they seemingly could not stop you. Your coach is a dirtbag like bb who loves to run up the score and now you have a chance to basically never give the other team the ball. Another scenario...your offense has played exceptional football but your defense was too distracted with things like "where tha hoes at" to show up, why let the defense come out if they are just going to give up scores anyway instead of taking shots at trying to double down each possession? Too many things could go wrong with this rule imo it is significantly easier for a good football team to exploit this than it is for a bad football team to succeed at using this as intended.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using JetNation.com mobile app

[Drums]

This tips the scale too much I think. The Chiefs can basically have the ball the entire game if they wanted to. 

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

2 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

You don't get to decide to keep the ball anymore than when you decide to keep the ball when you attempt an onside kick. 

It's just replacing the luck of a ball bouncing in the right direction with an offense vs defense talent based outcome..

And you make it seem as if making a4th and 15 is 50/50.

Not to mention the huge downside for that team if they don't make it. You are giving the ball to the other team in GREAT field position.

 

No team is going to elect this option unless it is late in the game and a defensive stop would not matter.  It will only be used by teams who will lose if the other team is in or close to a kneel down situation.  There will be no advantage for the defensive team stopping a 4th and 15 other than putting them in the same position had they recovered the onside kick. Take a knee or three and celebrate the victory.  This rule proposal is inane.  It is horrible. It completely changes the endgame in the favor of the team that is losing after 59 minutes.  

[JustEndTheSuffering]

For those concerned about good teams keeping the ball away from bad teams all game in pretty sure that it’s limited to twice a game. Also even the Chiefs wouldn’t go for a 4th and 15 from their own 25 in the first quarter vs the Bengals. 

[Web72]

I HATE this

[Jetsfan80]

If I have a decent offense, I'd just go for the 4th & 15 shot every single time.  Try to keep the other team's offense from ever getting the ball, lol.  Games would just get embarrassing if you did that and converted on...say...60 % of your tries.

Scoring is so easy in today's NFL that giving the other team the ball at your 25 isn't too terrible of a consequence.  It keeps your defense from getting gassed by long possessions.  

 

EDIT:  I see teams would be restricted to two attempts at this per game.  Still.  

[Jetsfan80]

If they make this rule change, the Chiefs are going to put up 60 points a game.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/reid-on-onside-alternative-mahomes-can-do-4th-and-15s

Reid on onside alternative: Mahomes 'can do 4th-and-15s'

Adam Maya

NFL.COM DIGITAL CONTENT PRODUCER

 

The possibility of a fourth-and-15 play in lieu of an onside kick prompted Patrick Mahomes to tweet a smiling emoji with a bead of sweat. That proposal will be voted on by NFL owners next week. If it passes, Chiefs opponents might be sweating but not smiling.

"We've got a guy that can do 4th-and-15s," Kansas City coach Andy Reid said Friday. "He'd give us the opportunity to be able to do that."

Technically, Mahomes hasn't attempted such a play in his three-year career. But he thrived on third-and-15-plus situations last season, completing 12 of 16 passes for 255 yards and three touchdowns. That doesn't include his biggest conversion, a 44-yard completion to Tyreek Hill on third-and-15 in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl to ignite the Chiefs' rally against the 49ers.

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reported Friday the league amended the initial proposal, originally submitted by the Eagles, to no longer require teams to trail while attempting to retain possession. The rule change would grant teams the option of running one play from their own 25-yard line with 15 yards to gain rather than kicking off. There'd be a limit of two fourth-and-15 attempts per game, which opens the door for scoring up to three straight times without your opponent touching the ball.

Reid intimated he'd actually prefer the proposal to be denied.

"I've got kind of mixed thoughts on it," he said. "Being an old guy, I'd probably stick with the integrity of the game as it sits right now, but I can also see where the other part could be exciting too."

Especially, and ironically, for Chiefs fans.

[New York Mick]

It’s not replacing it, it’s another option. Since they ruined onside kicks I like the idea. 

[slimjasi]

Why not just change onside kicks back to the way they were?

[TuscanyTile2]

Terrible rule, which is why I think it'll probably get passed.

[Larz]

Thus ushering in the era of the 7’3” WR

[GREENBEAN]

This just seems so contrived.  What happened to making a stop on defense in order to get the ball back?  There is great football drama when the D is pumped up after a score and are going balls out to get the ball back. 4th and 15 seems way to easy in today's offense skewed game.

I agree entirely.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Barry McCockinner]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

If they make this rule change, the Chiefs are going to put up 60 points a game.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/reid-on-onside-alternative-mahomes-can-do-4th-and-15s

Reid on onside alternative: Mahomes 'can do 4th-and-15s'

Adam Maya

NFL.COM DIGITAL CONTENT PRODUCER

 

The possibility of a fourth-and-15 play in lieu of an onside kick prompted Patrick Mahomes to tweet a smiling emoji with a bead of sweat. That proposal will be voted on by NFL owners next week. If it passes, Chiefs opponents might be sweating but not smiling.

"We've got a guy that can do 4th-and-15s," Kansas City coach Andy Reid said Friday. "He'd give us the opportunity to be able to do that."

Technically, Mahomes hasn't attempted such a play in his three-year career. But he thrived on third-and-15-plus situations last season, completing 12 of 16 passes for 255 yards and three touchdowns. That doesn't include his biggest conversion, a 44-yard completion to Tyreek Hill on third-and-15 in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl to ignite the Chiefs' rally against the 49ers.

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reported Friday the league amended the initial proposal, originally submitted by the Eagles, to no longer require teams to trail while attempting to retain possession. The rule change would grant teams the option of running one play from their own 25-yard line with 15 yards to gain rather than kicking off. There'd be a limit of two fourth-and-15 attempts per game, which opens the door for scoring up to three straight times without your opponent touching the ball.

Reid intimated he'd actually prefer the proposal to be denied.

"I've got kind of mixed thoughts on it," he said. "Being an old guy, I'd probably stick with the integrity of the game as it sits right now, but I can also see where the other part could be exciting too."

Especially, and ironically, for Chiefs fans.

The rule is only allowing 2 attempts per game. It's also risky if you don't convert