Dismiss Notice
Guest, I have a big favor to ask you. We've been working very hard to establish ourselves on social media. If you like/follow our pages it would be a HUGE help to us. SoSH on Facebook and Inside the Pylon Thanks! Nip

2019 NFL Rule Changes

Discussion in 'Blinded by the Lombardis: Patriots Forum' started by tims4wins, Jan 30, 2019.

  1. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,374
    I'm not sure why we think this is a result of losing to the Pats, as opposed to just not liking the rule. If they had lost to the chargers in same fashion, I'd imagine they'd still be just as bitter. Reid and BB are notoriously friendly. But we need our persecution complex here so.....

    I'd like to see the college style, but there's nothing wrong with what they use now. As Bowhemian said, you want to win, stop us, otherwise shut up.
     
  2. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,295
    If they didn’t like the rule why didn’t they suggest it after SB LI? They should have noticed and have been worried about this potential scenario. Teams only care when something affects them. And the Patriots are the only team that makes anyone pay. Unlike the Saints.
     
  3. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,374
    Did I suggest otherwise? My point isn’t that they didn’t do it because they were salty, my point was it doesn’t immediately mean they did it because ‘we’re jealous of the Pats and want to take them down’.
     
  4. snowmanny

    snowmanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    9,962
    Well the leave it as it is, but even then we had two fifteen minute ties this year. Ten minutes each team will almost certainly get the ball and it’s normal football. If it’s a tie it’s a tie.

    And of course you can always do a different OT rule for the playoffs. Sudden death in the regular season, a timed period in the playoffs.

    I’m not a fan of deciding games with a faux version of the sport, whether it’s putting a runner on second in extra innings, shootouts in hockey, the college football OT rule or whatever.
     
  5. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,295
    No you are right they would have been doing this if they lost to anyone else in the same fashion, I don’t disagree with that. It’s just that the Pats havemade multiple teams pay for this and that’s when teams get salty. So it is kind of related. Highly doubt the Chiefs would be proposing this if they got the ball first and Mahomes hit Hill for 75 yards on the first snap. It is so, so salty and I love it.
     
  6. ConigliarosPotential

    ConigliarosPotential Well-Known Member Silver Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,501
    A semi-random thought: How about keeping the OT rules basically as they currently are, but making it so that a team that scores a TD on the first possession of OT has to successfully convert the extra point to win immediately? If the XP is missed, the other team gets to come down and try to score a tying TD. It's not much and wouldn't affect too many games - unless the distance of OT XPs is increased, which is a separate idea that could work - but a) it would add another inflection point to a one-sided OT possession that *could* change things; b) if a team does miss its XP, the other team could then come down and win with a TD + PAT, not just tie; and c) I always enjoy the dynamic of games that end with a walk-off kick more than those which end with short walk-off touchdowns that you kind of know is coming (e.g., Super Bowl LI), although maybe that's just me.
     
  7. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,374
    Yeah, it's just you.
     
  8. Over Guapo Grande

    Over Guapo Grande panty merchant SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,474
    Because PP is all of us. We are all PP.

    (or that's what my 6 year old says.)
     
  9. BaseballJones

    BaseballJones goalpost mover SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,430
    It's not even really "stop us". It's "just hold us to a field goal".

    The system as is produces a 55-45 ratio in terms of winners (55% for the team who has the ball first, 45% for the team who has the ball second). That's about as close to dead even as you're going to get.

    As evidenced by championship weekend itself. The great Patriots got the ball and immediately won. The great Saints turned it over and lost.
     
  10. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,374
  11. soxhop411

    soxhop411 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,591
  12. singaporesoxfan

    singaporesoxfan Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    7,855
  13. BaseballJones

    BaseballJones goalpost mover SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,430
  14. SumnerH

    SumnerH Malt Liquor Picker Dope

    Messages:
    25,679
    I guess at least it's known ahead of time so you can plan 4th quarter endgame strategy with that in mind? Seems like pretty thin gruel to me.
     
  15. bankshot1

    bankshot1 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    15,424
    The Bronco's substitute for an on-side kick is an interesting twist. I'm still debating whether I like it or not.

    The Chiefs proposal seems geared to mollify their fans and appears pretty light. Why should the coin flip winner pre-game know they also have the options in OT for the entire game?
     
  16. snowmanny

    snowmanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    9,962
    The coin flip winner pregame would likely defer and receive the second half kickoff. So they would have a chance at an extra possession in the second half: this is important because this rule change proposal is driven by the circumstance where both teams QBs are hot at the end of the game facing tired defenses, so an extra second half possession is theoretically more valuable than an extra first half possession.

    Then that team would ALSO get the OT kickoff and have a chance at a game-winning score after both teams scored TDs or FGs on their OT initial possessions. So they could get two extra second half/OT possesions based on the one coin flip.

    It seems stupid.

    Ed: I assume the Chiefs put that in because they won the first coin flip and they wished they could have just had the ball in OT.
     
    #66 snowmanny, Mar 8, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  17. soxhop411

    soxhop411 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,591
    Yes. It’s clear they put the coin thing in because they won the coin toss
     
  18. fiskful of dollars

    fiskful of dollars Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,217
    The Broncos solution sounds awful to me. 4th and 15 is a much higher probability than a traditional on-sides kick. With the way first downs are accrued through BS DPI, holding, etc....no way!

    The new kickoff rules make the OSK almost impossible however.

    My proposal: In an obvious OSK situation, simply allow the kicking team to DECLARE their intent to attempt an OSK - it's usually obvious anyway. Once they declare, the old kick-off formation would be allowed for the announced attempt(s) only. A surprise OSK is still allowable but the kicking team's formation would be the same as a "regular" kid-off. The safety issues prompting the new rules seem to irrelevant in an OSK attempt. Just a thought.
     
  19. Joe Sixpack

    Joe Sixpack Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,871
    4th and 15 is just under 20% success rate, onside kick before the rule change had historically been around 20%.
     
  20. snowmanny

    snowmanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    9,962
    Sort of like how Jon Gruden wants to eliminate replay:

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/touchd...den-replay-eliminate-expand-time-machine/amp/

    From the article:

    He still has to be having nightmares of the tuck rule game replaying in his head on a weekly basis. That’s the only logical explanation. One time Gruden lost a chance to go move on in the playoffs and because a rule was interpreted correctly on replay, he did not get that chance. Therefore, all replay from henceforth — or from the point of that call — was bad and there is no way we can tell Mr. Gruden otherwise.
     
  21. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    20,295
    I posted about this in the OT thread. If coaches see a big advantage in deferring the opening toss, I wonder if the data correlates with a higher winning %. No one is bitching and moaning that the opening coin toss is unfair, but what if data showed that teams that defer until the 2nd half win 53% of the time? I'd be curious to see that data. And I'd also probably argue that the coin toss should be eliminated for both the opening kickoff and OT - let the road team have choice to start the game, then the home team gets the choice in OT. Or reverse it so the home team gets to pick first. Whatever. Just make it procedural and not a flip of the coin.
     
  22. dcmissle

    dcmissle Deflatigator Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    26,621
    Wonder if that 4th and 15 % is historically consistent or whether it has spiked in recent years.

    Intrigued by Broncos’ proposal because I think there is no way they are going back on the kickoff rules.
     
  23. axx

    axx lurker

    Messages:
    6,062
    You know how much the NFL hates the kickoff, eliminating it in OT might make sense, if only to save time. Make the starting position back to the 20 though.
     
  24. VORP Speed

    VORP Speed Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,881
    The Broncos scenario should be how all kickoff situations are handled. Get the ball on your own 35, 4th and 15, and go from there. You can gamble to go for it or you can punt. No more kickoffs, but you still get returns—plus a greater variety of outcomes with blocks, great punts pinning the opponent deep, returns, fakes, etc, and average field position would be around the 20-25.
     
  25. soxhop411

    soxhop411 Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    33,591
    Broncos onside kick proposal was shot down and the KC OT proposal was tabled (via Tom Pelissero)
     

Share This Page