4th and 15 Proposed Rule to replace On-Side Kick

Let's face it. Most of the rule changes in recent years didn't improve the game but they did change it. They not only usually favor the offense but they add one more thing for officials to screw up.

The 4th & 15 rule did not pass. It was tabled: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-tables-fourth-and-15-onside-kick-alternative-proposal

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Let's face it. Most of the rule changes in recent years didn't improve the game but they did change it. They not only usually favor the offense but they add one more thing for officials to screw up.

ratings wise, money wise, the NFL has never been this good. that's all the improvement they want.

they need to find a better balance though. i never liked the 10-3 football games, that can get boring. but some of these shootout type games are also getting out of hand. they need to stop trying to help the offense.

imo, they should bring back old school bump and run coverage. that isn't a detriment to players health (which you hear about whenever they neuter the defence) and it would still allow to great QBs and WRs to stick out, just makes it a bit harder.

i think that would really bring some balance back.

Originally posted by TheGore49er:
ratings wise, money wise, the NFL has never been this good. that's all the improvement they want.

they need to find a better balance though. i never liked the 10-3 football games, that can get boring. but some of these shootout type games are also getting out of hand. they need to stop trying to help the offense.

imo, they should bring back old school bump and run coverage. that isn't a detriment to players health (which you hear about whenever they neuter the defence) and it would still allow to great QBs and WRs to stick out, just makes it a bit harder.

i think that would really bring some balance back.

I agree that more balance would be nice but I'm not sure we'll see it. The casual fan loves those high scoring games. It's usually only people that played or purists who can appreciate a low scoring, well played game. Low scoring games can be exciting when the caliber of play is high and 2 good teams are slugging it out. I was at the 1990 Giants game when the Niners and Giants were each 10-1 and pounded the crap out of each other with the Niners coming out with a 7-3 win. There was a lot at stake so it was really exciting. That was the first time two 10-1 teams ever met and the Niners were going for the 3 peat. They lost the week prior to that game 28-17 to the Rams. The only other losses were 13-10 to NO and the championship game 15-13 to the Giants. The Saints had a good defense at that time and the Niners only beat them 13-12 in their first meeting that year. So that was 4 games where a great Niners team scored 13 points or less and every game was exciting because they meant something.

I hate this rule and hope it doesn't happen. And Teams with horrible defenses will have an even bigger disadvantage. Imagine a defense being on the field for a 6+ minute drive and then having to stay on the field again for the 4th and 15 play.

Originally posted by JTB1974:

I hate this rule and hope it doesn't happen. And Teams with horrible defenses will have an even bigger disadvantage. Imagine a defense being on the field for a 6+ minute drive and then having to stay on the field again for the 4th and 15 play.

Oh no a bad defense being exposed.

The proposition was tabled. I'm sure all the coaches on the competition committee are all too archaic to implement it effectively so they fear what they can't actually take advantage of.

I wouldn't mind this, if they allowed holding replays on Oline men.

This is the dumbest thing ive ever heard. Just play football. How about that. Why reward losing.

Lets call this the keep gamblers watching commercials until the very last minute rule.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Lets call this the keep gamblers watching commercials until the very last minute rule.

This is what the sport has become. The owners have to come up with more and more revenue. Betting is the final frontier, make money on every second the game is played. Horse racing had it down pat, as much as 15-25% is taken out of every dollar. They're off, you lose.

Originally posted by glorydayz:

The 4th & 15 rule did not pass. It was tabled: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-tables-fourth-and-15-onside-kick-alternative-proposal

That's good that it didn't pass.

So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by Jcool:

The NFL is NOT going forward with the alternative end of game 4th and 15. Missed opportunity

Instead of bringing the best players on the field for what would be one of the most exciting plays in all of sports let's bring on the nerdy kicker and see if we get a lucky bounce. Smh

— Danny Kanell (@dannykanell) May 28, 2020

Wow going hard at the Kickers/punters. Bet he wouldn't say that s**t to Janikowskis face

No he wouldn't, cause Janikowski would just rufi him.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
So the people who are saying no to the rule are good with being down by 2 scores with no timeouts and less than enough time to get the ball back is a done deal?

Yeah I'm okay with that. If a team is trailing by that much after 58 minutes then they shouldn't get a chance to pull something out their butt in the final 120 seconds to win the game. It would kind of be like having a 5 point shot in the NBA. Kinda, still have to drive another 60 yards.

The main issue for me though is what some have brought up. On that 4th & 15, what is there's a ticky tack defensive holding call? Or a successful conversion but there was blatant offensive holding that was missed? It's another opportunity for the refs to heavily influence the outcome with a subjective call.