Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: New Story: New Kickoff Rule is a Game Changer

  1. #1
    All Jets 24/7
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    JI Land
    Posts
    1,846
    Post Thanks / Like

    New Story: New Kickoff Rule is a Game Changer

    As soon as the NFL announced the new rule change for kickoffs a debate was sparked and almost instantly it seemed a general consensus was reached among most players, coaches and fans. That consensus was one of confusion and disappointment.

    Earlier this week the NFL announced that they would be moving the spot of the kickoff up five-yards from the 30-yard line to the 35-yard line, which will allow just about every kicker to boot the kickoff deep enough to all but eliminate kickoff returns from the game.

    The league's reasoning? For safety reasons and the health of the players of course...

    [url=http://www.jetsinsider.com/blogs/christopher_nimbley/?p=1029]More...[/url]

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,042
    Post Thanks / Like
    Obviously it'll be tough for guys like Hester, Leon, Brad, Cribbs etc to have the same impact on the game as before. I don't really like this rule change as it detracts from the spectacle of the game

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sunny SoCal
    Posts
    400
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hate this rule change. More neutering of the league.

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Jersey shore
    Posts
    2,064
    Post Thanks / Like
    Didn't they come up with a special kickoff ball to help keep the ball out of the end zone, a few years back? If so, wouldn't it be easier to switch back to the regular ball that gives more distance on kickoffs?

  5. #5
    Undrafted Free Agent
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JETranger 206B;3988471]Didn't they come up with a special kickoff ball to help keep the ball out of the end zone, a few years back? If so, wouldn't it be easier to switch back to the regular ball that gives more distance on kickoffs?[/QUOTE]

    Good point, and I think selling this as a safety issue is BS. They just reduced their roster needs by one spot. Nobody is going to pay a kick returners anything.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Elizabeth, NJ
    Posts
    3,453
    Post Thanks / Like
    An otherwise good article spoiled by political commentary. Did we need the teacher comment?

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    13,228
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is sure to take away from the excitement and entertainment value of the game. I do not support this at all.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,628
    Post Thanks / Like
    This rule change isn't about player safety.

    It is a small-scale power play on behalf of the owners to send a message to the players (and to a lesser extent, the courts) as to who is really in charge of the league.

    -Notice the timing of the decision: after the NFLPA decertifies and before the court injunction hearing.

    -NFL insiders and reporters all agreed that this rule change came out of [I]nowhere[/I]. It was not discussed or hinted at during the season, or in seasons past.

    -Owners nearly unanimously agreed on the rule change. I think it was something like only 4 "No" votes. When have the owners ever come this close to full consent on anything as non-essential to the game as this?

    The rule change is a sabre-rattling intimidation move by the owners at a time when the players are challenging for more of a stake in the league than ever before. The rule change is meant to prove a point, and win unquantifiable leverage. And it's a shame that, yet again, the integrity of the game and the enjoyment of the fan experience has to suffer.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,541
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Zombo;3988908]An otherwise good article spoiled by political commentary. Did we need the teacher comment?[/QUOTE]

    +1

    ridiculous

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    37
    Post Thanks / Like
    It wasn't meant as political commentary, although I admit reading it back now it clearly comes across that way.

    It was simply meant to point out (in my opinion, cause I wrote this as a column not a straight news article obviously) the fact that the rule change is a political strategy from the NFL and it's completely hypocritical and disingenuous.

    I don't pretend to having a medical degree and or understand the complexities of football injuries, but I can safely assume there are bigger risks to these players than kickoffs.

    I would say the same about the teachers statement, but still your right that it comes across as me making a political statement of sorts, which trust me was not my intention as I have very little patience for politics, so I shouldn't have used that comparison and should have thought of something else.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cnimbley;3989286]
    I don't pretend to having a medical degree and or understand the complexities of football injuries, but I can safely assume there are bigger risks to these players than kickoffs.
    .[/QUOTE]

    the kickoffs are, by far, the most dangerous play in any given game.

    there are injury stats to back this up and better believe it was these stats that made the comp committee change the rules.

    the NFL is in a wierd place, they know that in the future the CTE science will be clearer, and if they don't at least appear to care about player safety they are setting themselves up for litigation that could crush the sport.

    ***

    also learning more about this rule...(from Peter King MMQB)

    it's actually not as bad as we believe it will be

    they are outlawing the running starts from more than 5 yards from the kicker... last year guys were lining up 15 yards behind the kicker and getting full sprint by the kickoff line, that change means players won't get down the field as fast

    they kept the touchbacks at the 20 which means even if the kick goes into the endzone, it's more advantageous for teams to run it out.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    37
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm not saying kickoffs aren't dangerous, but I stick by what I said in the article that making sure retired players have proper health coverage seems far more important.

    It's one thing for the players to get hurt while they have the care of the best doctors, but with all the health problems players are facing years after they leave the game, it's my opinion that should be their main concern and everything I've heard following the lockout, that is hardly a concern of the owners.

    I agree with you that this is a tricky situation for the league as NO ONE really knows the best way to handle all this, but I also agree mostly with what you said about, "and if they don't at least APPEAR to care about player safety..."

    And that was my original point, the rule change is a political strategy aimed at appearing to be concerned about player safety, while not having to take money out of the owners pockets.

    Even if the rule has the best of intentions, they will need to concede more than some rule changes to make anyone truly believe they are concerned for player safety.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us