No Kickoffs

[Lord_Byron]

This proposal is fascinating to me, once I get beyond the radical change. After a score a team punts from its own 30-yard line, or has the option to run a 4 and 15 play to retain possession of the ball.

It would be kind of exciting. I'd like to see a Conference adopt it on a trial basis for a year.

Schiano Kickoff Proposal

[1987alum]

Really interesting idea. You're right, though, that you have to get past that initial "too big of a change" response to give it full consideration.

I think a kickoff return for a touchdown is one of the most exciting plays in all of football, but maybe the trade off would be worth it. Either way, I'd love to hear a full-blown discussion on the topic before it's killed.

[Falconfreak90]

Definitely different...interesting thoughts.

[Warthog]

I'm on board with the concept. On-side kicks are scary dangerous. But like Schiano says, it might need some tweeks to the yardage and distances. I'd like to see what the average net punt is, then adjust the line of scrimmage such that the average starting point for the offense is their own 25 yard line.

And for the 'go for it' option, make it a distance that would be converted like 5% of the time. And make the line the of scrimmage such that the line to gain equals something close to where an on-side kick would be recovered, like your own 45.

But I'm wondering if you need to make those line of scrimmages that same place? Can it be the 30 if you are running a play or the 40 if you are punting? If they aren't, how about trying a fake punt and gaining the 15 yards? Maybe they do need to be the same...

[daspollak]

It sounds great on paper, but you could potentially see very high scoring games.

[Warthog]

It sounds great on paper, but you could potentially see very high scoring games.

Why?

[h2oville rocket]

Unless I missed something there is the potential for a game to be like a basketball "make-it-take it", 11-0 game where one team never touches the ball. Not sure how that makes the game any better.

[1987alum]

H2O: That's not how I'm reading it. It seems to introduce a high-risk option to get the ball back. Same as an onside kick, but with less danger.

[orangeandbrown]

I don't mind the idea. How often would a team try that 4-15 on their own 30? Probably not very many--even in the most over-matched situations, those are rarely converted, and you'd be giving the ball up in your territory.

[h2oville rocket]

I don't mind the idea. How often would a team try that 4-15 on their own 30? Probably not very many--even in the most over-matched situations, those are rarely converted, and you'd be giving the ball up in your territory.

I gotta introduce you to this guy-Tom Amstutz.

And I said "potentially" I suppose this could happen in today's game anyway but at least there is no possibility to dictate the offense through the entire game. If Enormous State University plays, say, a smallish MAC school from out in the sticks and scores repeatedly and easily, which might be expected given who that school's former coach was (he's to blame) they might repeatedly take advantage of the 4th and 15 option, leading to a 124-0 gmae where only one team runs an offensive play.

At least with on-sides kicks the receiving team has the chance to receive-

[Lord_Byron]

. . .And I said "potentially" I suppose this could happen in today's game anyway but at least there is no possibility to dictate the offense through the entire game. If Enormous State University plays, say, a smallish MAC school from out in the sticks and scores repeatedly and easily, which might be expected given who that school's former coach was (he's to blame) they might repeatedly take advantage of the 4th and 15 option, leading to a 124-0 gmae where only one team runs an offensive play.

At least with on-sides kicks the receiving team has the chance to receive-

If Ignoramus State University were so dominant that they could repeatedly convert 4th and 15s over Smallish MAC Sticks University, then under current rules, ISU would never punt, score on every offensive possession and crush SMSU's offense repeatedly and never allow a first down. Hence, the 124-0 result also "potentially" happens under today's rules.

[factman]

I believe BGSU beat Findlay that bad under the old rules!

[h2oville rocket]

. . .And I said "potentially" I suppose this could happen in today's game anyway but at least there is no possibility to dictate the offense through the entire game. If Enormous State University plays, say, a smallish MAC school from out in the sticks and scores repeatedly and easily, which might be expected given who that school's former coach was (he's to blame) they might repeatedly take advantage of the 4th and 15 option, leading to a 124-0 gmae where only one team runs an offensive play.

At least with on-sides kicks the receiving team has the chance to receive-

If Ignoramus State University were so dominant that they could repeatedly convert 4th and 15s over Smallish MAC Sticks University, then under current rules, ISU would never punt, score on every offensive possession and crush SMSU's offense repeatedly and never allow a first down. Hence, the 124-0 result also "potentially" happens under today's rules.

But SMSU's offense gets the opportunity to BE crushed. In my scenario their offense never sees the field - two or three successful consecutive conversions of the 4th and 15 has SMSU's defense tongue-hanging tired and they still have a half to play with no field time for the offense. Under your alternate scenario the score is more likely to be 98-0 which is sort of like a regular BG-Temple game from the mid-2000s.

My scenario is unlikely but the whole thing is unlikely and what is a sports message board for if not to posit unlikely scenarios as if they were the absolute future?