TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Good points by PD and others...but again, all they are doing is resetting things back to how they were up until sometime in the mid-1990s. I don't really believe this is a very big rule change at all. Plus, with guys getting a slower running start on coverage, returners won't have any problem bringing out kicks that are a couple yards deep in the end zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinzwiz Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 What was wrong with the previous rule?? Player safety?? Yeah right. What's next...no tackling. It's football! These players know that everytime they take the field that they could get injured. It's part of the reason they get paid so much! If it aint broke, dont fix it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumplestilskin Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 Good points by PD and others...but again, all they are doing is resetting things back to how they were up until sometime in the mid-1990s. I don't really believe this is a very big rule change at all. Plus, with guys getting a slower running start on coverage, returners won't have any problem bringing out kicks that are a couple yards deep in the end zone. That was 20+ years ago. Todays athletes in general are bigger, faster have better and more innovative training and are more fine tuned to their craft. That includes kickers. Put it this way. Most warm weather games will have mostly touchbacks. Every game in Denver or a dome will have mostly touch backs. The last 4 games in December or any strong wind games will have less touchbacks but still a high average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 That was 20+ years ago. Todays athletes in general are bigger, faster have better and more innovative training and are more fine tuned to their craft. That includes kickers. Put it this way. Most warm weather games will have mostly touchbacks. Every game in Denver or a dome will have mostly touch backs. The last 4 games in December or any strong wind games will have less touchbacks but still a high average. What about my second point? With less of a running start by the coverage teams, returners will have an opportunity to return kicks that travel into the end zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Goodell has been the most vocal about player safety of any league official. He is the head league official on all matters. He has changed the game more that any commish as it pertains to player safety. He has nothing to do with it? He hands out the fines and suspensions and has final say on those matters. Dont kid yourself. Sure there is a voting process from the committe but Goodell has been whining about player safety ever since he started as commissioner. Goodell has been the most vocal because he is the voice of the league. This isn't a one man show. If the committee didn't want the changes they wouldn't be happening. Goodell is not as powerful as some of the posters here seem to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumplestilskin Posted March 26, 2011 Author Share Posted March 26, 2011 What about my second point? With less of a running start by the coverage teams, returners will have an opportunity to return kicks that travel into the end zone. Ya they have a 5 yard running start but they are also 5 yards closer to the oppositions endzone at the point of the kick so it basicly makes no difference. It takes 10 yards approximately to reach top speed for the gunners. So for the 5 yards they lose in speed they make up for that in 5 yards of distance. It makes no difference for other coverage men because they dont attack at full speed as they have to be under control anyways to deal with blockers and and lane containment. If anything I think coverage teams are going to get to the ball carrier faster or at least at the same time as before. With this rational I think that the return teams will rather take a knee. My point is that both teams are going to settle for touchbacks. It will be to difficult to return kicks and too easy to kick touchbacks. The safe play is a touch back. Like I said though there will be some opertunies in extreme weather or wind. Kickers can try to rainbow kicks to try to force returns but the safe play is still the touchback. ---------- Post added March-26th-2011 at 01:44 PM ---------- Goodell has been the most vocal because he is the voice of the league. This isn't a one man show. If the committee didn't want the changes they wouldn't be happening. Goodell is not as powerful as some of the posters here seem to think. I never said he he was a one man show and I know that it is a committee who votes on the matter. I was reponding to your remark that Goodell has " little or nothing to do with player safety". Thats just false in every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozman777 Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Seems to me having an indoor stadium as a home team could have its advantages with this new rule. Teams that play more games indoors would then possibly have less kickoffs to cover therefore less chances of injury. But you could also say Devin Hester would have more chances returning because of the windy conditions. Just seem to me teams playing more indoor games have less chances of injury or big kick returns for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backpack3r Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Why does Goodell keep changing the rules? If it aint broke dont fix it, i hope someone snipes him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Why does Goodell keep changing the rules? If it aint broke dont fix it, i hope someone snipes him That's a little much. And you realize there's an entire competition committee. Its not just Goodell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Why does Goodell keep changing the rules? If it aint broke dont fix it, i hope someone snipes him Wow. You're a first-class moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 I think it's hilarious (awful) that throughout the last 6 years we've run the gamut through kickers like Suisham and John Hall who's biggest problem were their weak leg on kickoffs. Furthermore, we've had guys like Rock Cartwright (solid, but not a game breaker) and Randle El (ugh) returning punts and kicks. This rule change would've been absolutely awesome for us had it happened earlier, as it would've disguised our weaknesses in those areas. Now that we've got a guy like Banks returning punts and kicks, and Gano with his strong leg on kickoffs... the rule, of course, changes. Wonderful, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel__44 Posted March 27, 2011 Share Posted March 27, 2011 Thanks Phillip. BTW you are stronger than Chris Cooley and Dre put together! LOL.. Better get a hyberbaric chamber for next year because you guys are going to be on the field more often! Kick Butt man.---------- Post added March-25th-2011 at 11:07 AM ---------- Also great point from a pro who experiences it first hand. No body brought up that point about the D being out there longer and more often but it makes perfect sense! The goal of the D is to get off the field and give the O back the ball. The D actually prefers a longer playing field. This makes No sense. ---------- Post added March-27th-2011 at 06:16 PM ---------- i hate the rule... all i can say is at least we aren't in the Ravens division. Billy Cundiff averaged 71.1 yards per kickoff last season... no one will be running out against the Ravens this season How did you come up with that? So players will be willing to not run it out from 6 YDs deep especially considering the the coverage teams get less of a running start? The year before they switched it from the 35 to the 30. Less than 30% of the KOs resulted in a touchback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Thanks guys.Why mess with something that worked just fine? Seriously, has there been ANY good to come out of Goodell's time? Sighs. And I guess BB will just have to continue tearing it up on punt returns if kick returns become less and less. Kid still has great value, and excites the heck out of me like no Redskin has in eons. Hail. You do realize that Goodell had NOTHING to do with this, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 The year before they switched it from the 35 to the 30. Less than 30% of the KOs resulted in a touchback. I'm entertained by the number of people who are acting like they are changing the size of the field or something that has been a staple for 75 years. I guess that will happen when there is no other off-season news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 You do realize that Goodell had NOTHING to do with this, right? Goodell isn't perfect but his predecessor wasn't great either. Tags was so great that the owners hated the last CBA from day one and once they got the chance to opt out of it, they did. Tags was so great that 4 franchises relocated, including 2 from LA. I think that reason alone, is keeping Tags from the Hall. Pete Rozelle was the only really great NFL commissioner. ---------- Post added March-28th-2011 at 10:25 AM ---------- You do realize that Goodell had NOTHING to do with this, right? Goodell isn't perfect but his predecessor wasn't great either. Tags was so great that the owners hated the last CBA from day one and once they got the chance to opt out of it, they did. Tags was so great that 4 franchises relocated, including 2 from LA. I think that reason alone, is keeping Tags from the Hall. Pete Rozelle was the only really great NFL commissioner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Goodell isn't perfect but his predecessor wasn't great either. Tags was so great that the owners hated the last CBA from day one and once they got the chance to opt out of it, they did.Tags was so great that 4 franchises relocated, including 2 from LA. I think that reason alone, is keeping Tags from the Hall. Pete Rozelle was the only really great NFL commissioner. I'm not saying that Goodell is the best commish ever (though, I'd take him any day over the commishes of the other 3 main pro-leagues in the US). I was just saying that he can't be blamed for this rule change; he had nothing to do with it. It was an issue that was brought to the table by a group of owners and the Rules Committee heard and voted on it. Also, I think that Goodell has done a decent job at trying to clean up the league. Some people may not like it, but the players have needed someone to come in and lay the law down for years. Tags was too lenient on players' discretions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumplestilskin Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share Posted March 28, 2011 The goal of the D is to get off the field and give the O back the ball. The D actually prefers a longer playing field. This makes No sense.If it makes no sense to you take it up with Phillip Daniels as it was his point (post 98). The rule change was created for the purpose of player safety and to reduce injuries but the fact that the defense will be on the field more is a reality and drives are going to originate more from the 20 than ever before. Due to this point its going to force offenses to drive longer fields more often and odds are that the longer the drive the greater the risk of injury and big hits. How can it not make sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins Talk Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Don't know if you guys saw this, but Peter King has some great points about kickoffs in his MMQB column today. I don't think we'll have to worrk about Banks' value taking a hit. There won't be more than 40 percent touchbacks in 2011, and I'd guess it'd be closer to about a third of all kicks. At most. A couple of important factors are at play here. If the touchbacks were resulting in the ball being brought to the 25, you can bet that any kick four- or five-yards deep would almost automatically be downed. The 25 is a good place to start if you field the kickoff in the end zone. But with the ball being brought out to the 20, teams will be more likely to tell returners to return it as normal if it's fielded two or three yards deep. And remember this: Kickoff team members can start only five yards behind the ball. Used to be they could get a running start for wherever the players wanted to, and that, for most teams, was about 15 yards behind the kickoff spot for the fastest on the kick team. Now that they can't start more than five yards behind the ball, they won't have the same head of steam built when the ball is booted. They'll still have the advantage of the ball being kicked five yards closer to the opposition's goal line, but it may not be the great advantage it'd seemed at first blush. So if the average kick will land at the half-yard line, and if it pays for returners to take a gamble unless the kick is at least halfway into the end zone, I still see five or six returns per game, on average. Hardly a revolution. Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/03/27/mmqb/index.html#ixzz1HuVxZbqd http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/03/27/mmqb/2.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I don't get all of this sniveling about 5 yards on kickoffs. Some of our greatest kick off returners starred when the ball was kicked off from the 40 yard line. Heck alot of the records should have an asterisk instead of lumping everyone together if people are going to whine about kickoffs from the 35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel__44 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 The goal of the D is to get off the field and give the O back the ball. The D actually prefers a longer playing field. This makes No sense.If it makes no sense to you take it up with Phillip Daniels as it was his point (post 98). The rule change was created for the purpose of player safety and to reduce injuries but the fact that the defense will be on the field more is a reality and drives are going to originate more from the 20 than ever before. Due to this point its going to force offenses to drive longer fields more often and odds are that the longer the drive the greater the risk of injury and big hits. How can it not make sense? Think about it. What defense wouldn't want a longer field to protect? And more importantly if they made a stop on 3rd down then they would be off the field. Let me also repeat this stat... The year before they switched it from the 35 to the 30. Less than 30% of the KOs resulted in a touchback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumplestilskin Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share Posted March 28, 2011 Think about it. What defense wouldn't want a longer field to protect? And more importantly if they made a stop on 3rd down then they would be off the field. Let me also repeat this stat... The year before they switched it from the 35 to the 30. Less than 30% of the KOs resulted in a touchback. That was 23 years ago! If you dont think kickers are stronger now I dont know what to tell you. And your point has nothing to do with the argument of player safety which is why the rule was implemented. Sure it favours the defenses but thats not the point. As a matter of fact your point only reenforces that there will be way more touchbacks becasue teams are going to kick for touchbacks everytime to favour the defense. All that being said it will still increase injury and thats the point Daniels was making. Furthermore if you dont think it will have an impact then why are players like Cribbs, Banks, Washington and Hester being so vocal about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel__44 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 That was 23 years ago! If you dont think kickers are stronger now I dont know what to tell you. And your point has nothing to do with the argument of player safety which is why the rule was implemented. Sure it favours the defenses but thats not the point. As a matter of fact your point only reenforces that there will be way more touchbacks becasue teams are going to kick for touchbacks everytime to favour the defense. All that being said it will still increase injury and thats the point Daniels was making. Furthermore if you dont think it will have an impact then why are players like Cribbs, Banks, Washington and Hester being so vocal about it? 17 Yrs ago...And yes kickers are physically stronger now but It's not like every kicker has range from 50+ on FGs or will be kicking the ball out of the endzone. Billy Cundiff lead the league with his KOs averaging 1 YD deep. (so add 5 and that's only 6 YDs deep). Factor in the fact that the coverage team will only get a 5 YD head start instead of 15 and it's not a big deal. As far as reducing injuries?? Why not shorten the length of a football field from 100 YDs to 90, 80, etc. Most of the players complaining haven't thought it through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumplestilskin Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share Posted March 28, 2011 17 Yrs ago...And yes kickers are physically stronger now but It's not like every kicker has range from 50+ on FGs or will be kicking the ball out of the endzone. Billy Cundiff lead the league with his KOs averaging 1 YD deep. (so add 5 and that's only 6 YDs deep). Factor in the fact that the coverage team will only get a 5 YD head start instead of 15 and it's not a big deal. As far as reducing injuries?? Why not shorten the length of a football field from 100 YDs to 90, 80, etc. Most of the players complaining haven't thought it through. Your right I am not sure why I was thinking 23 years ago. Still a long time ago. I guess only time will tell the real effect of this rule on the return game and will see just how far the kickers can boot it next year. IMO most kickers dont put everything into kickoffs but that will change some this year. Anyhow I will hold to my opinion that the 5 yard head start is meaningless and will have little to no change in the time it takes the coverage team to get down field as they make up for it by starting 5 yards closer upfield. All players except the gunners are the only players to run at full speed anyways. The rest have contain and lane assignments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryGreenMonk Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Was going to start a thread, but I'm bumping this now. We've now seen this rule change in action. There will be very very very few kick returns this year. While I think it will be almost certain they will change the rule back next year after fan complaints, because lets be honest.. this rule completely sucks. Banks has very little value now and probably won't make this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichmondRedskin88 Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Banks stock just went Bankrupt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.