šŸ“” Kickoff rule change: CBS: "...killing the sport." CECIL HURT: "NCAA kickoff decision too drastic?"

The latest rule change spells doom for what some believe is the most exciting football play

This is only the beginning -- the beginning of the end of kickoffs.

At least that's the opinion of Texas coach Tom Herman after considering the biggest rule change for 2018.

And he is not alone.

"I have told our coaches, 'Before we retire … I firmly believe you're not going to see kickoffs,'" he said.

That prospect seems closer than ever before after the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel this week rubber-stamped a proposal. Beginning this fall, when a player fair catches a kickoff inside the 25-yard line, the result will be a touchback. The ball will be spotted at the 25.

The intent -- as usual -- is player safety. Studies have shown that the intensity of injuries are increased on kickoffs. This despite kickoffs making up only a small percentage of total plays in a college football game.

At issue is eliminating a component of football that is as old as the game itself. In 2012, the kickoff was moved from the 30 to the 35 to increase the likelihood of touchbacks. Touchbacks immediately increased by 50 percent, according to then-NCAA secretary rules editor Rogers Redding.

That same year, touchbacks were moved from the 20 to the 25. That supposedly gave returning teams more incentive to fair catch the ball. Spotting the ball 5 yards closer to the opposition's end zone mathematically increased the likelihood of scoring on a given drive.

How has that worked out?

"The data is convincing," said Bob Bowlsby, NCAA Football Oversight Committee chair. "The [injury] frequency isn't any higher. The severity is higher. There's the talk about [how] we used four-man wedges; we got rid of that. We used to have three-man wedges; we got rid of that. We still have two-man wedges. A lot of the challenge is, you've got a kicking team that's running full speed. You've got a receiving team that's trying to diffuse that."

Ever since former Rutgers coach Greg Schiano floated the idea of eliminating kickoffs seven years ago, the football world has reacted in varying degrees. There was the usual put-'em-in-skirts reaction from the Joe Six Pack fan who decried a reduction in physicality. There was reasoned thought as head trauma became an issue.

Boil it down: Not only are players safer without the collisions involved in a kickoff, legal liability is lessened. That will get the attention of the NCAA more than anything.

The association is still dealing with the impact of a landmark decision in the Adrian Arrington case. The NCAA eventually settled that contentious legal battle, throwing $70 million into a pot players could use for diagnosis (though not treatment) of head trauma. Protocol and return-to-play standards were also refined.

Alabama coach Nick Saban has a simple solution that seems to satisfy a lot of folks: move the kickoff up to the 40. That better assures a touchback.

"When you go back and kick the ball out of the end zone, nobody gets blocked," Saban said. "If a guy fair catches the ball, by the time he decides weather he's going to fair catch or not, they would have done most of the contract. I guess I would have chose a different way to do it."

Schiano first put the idea in everybody's head in 2011. That was after Rutgers player Eric LeGrand was paralyzed during a kickoff against Army in 2010.

Schiano suggested the scoring team, rather than attempt an onside kick, take over the ball on its 30 on a fourth-and-15 play. The team can either go for it -- trying to retain the ball -- or punt. Statistics show that injuries on punts aren't as bad for as frequent as on kickoffs.

The idea gained traction. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell first suggested the idea of eliminating kickoffs in December 2012.

Now, we enter 2018 with essentially a 35-yard area in which to fair catch the ball on kickoffs.

"The hardest part for coaches to wrap their head around is the arbitrary yard line to put the ball on, especially if you have an elite returner or an elite guy who has that skill," Herman said.

"Maybe on average, when this guy returns a kick, your offense is starting on the 34-yard line. You're going to take that 9 yards away from that team [every time you fair catch]."

The rule change doesn't eliminate the onside kick but does impact the so-called "sky kick."

Saban is a fan of blooping the ball high and giving his kickoff coverage team enough time to pin down a returner.

With the enhanced touchback zone, "You still gotta go cover, because the guy could fumble," Saban said.
 
Does seem to have a lot of fallen soldiers on KOs....
Maybe the "4th and 15 from the 30 " makes sense .....
Hate to see KOs go....maybe alcohol is next.....or laying out in the sun....or cigarettes completely....some risk with a lot of things... ?
 
So they basically want to take an opportunity to score off the board? How many games have been won and lost with kickoff returns? To me, you just have to understand the consequences and either play, or don't play. The lame attempt above by that Tweet to speak of assets is as dumb as it gets. You don't make a business decision over one asset or eleven when you have a billion dollar company at stake and at risk.

The Kick Six wasn't a kickoff, but it was kickoff style with the length of field and running start afforded the players. Actually it was worse because one team had more numbers than the other.

Mack Wilson stated he wasn't happy about the rules. I think we all know why.
 
So they basically want to take an opportunity to score off the board? How many games have been won and lost with kickoff returns? Oh, let's just alter a major part of the game that is usually a key to the game or a noted major part from a coach's perspective. To me, you just have to understand the consequences and either play, or don't play. The lame attempt above by that Tweet to speak of assets is as dumb as it gets. You don't make a business decision over one asset or eleven when you have a billion dollar company with hundreds of movibg pieces at stake and at risk.

I also want to make a comment about the earnings potential of kickoff and special teams players. A lot of guys are introduced to the college game as special teams players in efforts of getting them game time prep and up to speed with the college game. Let's not even get into the money aspect that the NFL pays well to a lot of guys that make livings off just being special teams guys. Devin Hester is the obvious example.

The Kick Six wasn't a kickoff, but it was kickoff style with the length of field and running start afforded the players. Actually it was worse because one team had more numbers than the other.

Mack Wilson stated he wasn't happy about the rules. I think we all know why.
 
This change would actually be a plus for Bama. Bama isn't elite on the return and the other teams tend to get the ball down the filed on us too often. If you can avoid the injuries then this is a plus.

Most likely would have costed us a National Championship against Clemson the first time. Not sure if the surprise onside would have caught them as off guard either, so that's two instances in one game it could have hurt us.
 
Most likely would have costed us a National Championship against Clemson the first time. Not sure if the surprise onside would have caught them as off guard either, so that's two instances in one game it could have hurt us.

Without a doubt, we needed every point we could get our hands on in that game. Without the onside kick and Kenyan Drake's big return, we would have had mucho difficulty changing the momentum and scoreboard in that game.
 
Schiano suggested the scoring team, rather than attempt an onside kick, take over the ball on its 30 on a fourth-and-15 play. The team can either go for it -- trying to retain the ball -- or punt. Statistics show that injuries on punts aren't as bad for as frequent as on kickoffs.
As radical a change as this would be, I don't hate it. I dont have a problem with looking at ways to evolve the game to account for the safety of players while maintaining competitiveness for teams and excitement for fans. Schiano's proposal would actually be more exciting and add a great deal more strategy to the game IMO.

It maintains opportunity for both teams on STs.

Plus, it raises the value on elite returners and punters with great range and hang time. So, even recruiting strategies would need to be relooked.
 


TUSCALOOSA, Ala. -- The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel announced approval to alter football’s kickoff rules, but Alabama head coach Nick Saban isn’t the rule’s biggest fan.

ā€œI would have liked to have seen a different solution,ā€ said Saban in a press conference after Saturday’s scrimmage. ā€œI understand the reason, and I respect the reason, which is player safety.ā€

The new rule will allow the receiving team to fair catch a kickoff inside the 25-yard line and still have it result in a touchback. All other aspects of the kickoff play will remain the same.

Like Saban said, the NCAA’s Football Rules Committee made the proposal to continue efforts to increase the number of touchbacks during kickoffs since fewer injuries obviously occur during kickoffs that result in touchbacks than on kickoffs that are returned.

The new rule is the latest in a series of kickoff changes the committee has made in recent years in hopes of making play safer. Before the 2012 season, kickoffs were moved from the 30-yard line to the 35. The committee also changed the starting position on touchbacks that year so that the receiving team started its drive on the 25-yard line instead of the 20.

ā€œI guess I’ve been around long enough where we used to kick off from the 40-yard line, and there were too many touchbacks, so we moved it back to the 35,ā€ Saban said. ā€œSo, for us old timers, I thought it would be an easier solution to just move it back up to the 40-yard line, because you would get more touchbacks, but you could still sky kick, still onside kick, which you can still do some of those things.

ā€œBut you sky kick trying to give somebody bad field position, they fair catch the ball on the 15-yard line and get the ball on the 25. That takes some of the strategy out of the game, to me, with the result that you have. You would have gotten the same result if you had just moved it up five yards because almost everybody in college football would have kicked nothing but touchbacks. You still would have had all the strategies you could have used in other circumstances.ā€

The rules oversight panel also approved a package of rules with the goal of making it easier for players, coaches and officials to understand, execute and coach blocking below the waist.

The most noticeable will not allow offensive players to block below the waist when the block occurs more than five yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Additionally, other than the interior offensive linemen, all blocks below the waist must be from the front.

Pace of play was also discussed, as the panel approved two proposals that further its efforts to keep the game moving. After a touchdown, the play clock will be set at 40 seconds to expedite the extra point or two-point conversion attempt. Circling back to kickoffs, the play clock will now be set to 40 seconds afterward to restart play more quickly.

Other significant rules changes include:

-- The addition of a 10-second runoff was approved when instant replay overturns the ruling on the field inside of one minute in either half, and the correct ruling would not have stopped the game clock.

-- The panel approved the continuation of an experimental collaborative decision-making model for instant replay that is not limited to the press box in the stadium. For example, officials involved in the replay process could be located in a conference office.

-- Leaping rules on field goals and extra points were adjusted to mirror similar rules regarding leaping the shield on punting plays. It is illegal to leap over the frame of the body of an opponent.

-- On successful field goals, penalty enforcement will be the same as on made extra points. Namely, all personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct fouls by the defending team will have the option to be enforced on the ensuing kickoff.
 
[QUOTEThe intent -- as usual -- is player safety. $$$MONEY$$$[/QUOTE]

This is what it is all about. Lawsuits. None of the sanctioning bodies of any sport, NFL,NBA, MLS, MLB, NCAA.....want to give up any of their profits. All the fines the NFL deals out for hitting "unprotected" players is about cutting down on CTE and the likes to cut down on lawsuits.

I can see them continuing to change things up and our favorite sports will go by the way of NASCAR. You will excommunicate the ones that got you there and you will be left with a crappy product no one wants to see.
 
my whole thing on this, is...

with how quickly our guys get down field on kickoffs, it can really be a game-changer (figuratively speaking...for the most part) for our guys.

on high kickoffs, our guys were always downfield fast and would make a tackle well inside the 20. that's why Coach Saban basically taught our kickers to kick it short of the end zone; so our guys would have a better chance of making a tackle and leave the opponent pinned way back on their end of the field. now, they know that all they have to do is call a fair-catch and they'll get it way out at the 25.

so, to me, this is really going to hinder those teams that do a good job of getting downfield quickly on kickoffs and making a tackle before the returner has a chance to get going.

it just doesn't make any sense to me.
 
CECIL HURT: NCAA kickoff decision too drastic?

The clothesline by Mekhi Brown in the College Football Playoff Championship Game just over three months ago. The explosive tackle by Reuben Foster on Leonard Fournette at the end of regulation in the 2014 Alabama win at LSU. Mack Wilson’s pro bono dental work on Texas A&M’s Speedy Noil at Bryant-Denny Stadium in 2016.

Those hits are part of the reason that kickoff returns are an endangered part of college football. For some people, they are emblematic of why kickoff returns should go. For others, those same plays are why kickoff coverage should stay.

It’s not just the returners who run a risk on kickoff returns. It’s also all those flying wedge blockers and wedge busters. The current environment is about protecting players from as many full speed hits as the game will allow, and the latest NCAA rules decision — allowing any kickoff fielded by fair catch inside the 25-yard line to come out to the 25 as a touchback — was made with that motive. But it also has yet another leveling effect on teams like Alabama, ones with abundant fast, strong athletes on coverage teams. Part of the Crimson Tide strategy, at least on some kickoffs, was to put the ball high and just short of the end zone and fly down with a dual purpose. First, if Alabama could stop an opposing returner inside the 25, that just meant more yardage that had to be gained against the Alabama defense. Second, if a Crimson Tide player could deliver one of those missile-warhead hits, there was a certain intimidation factor at play.

That’s why Nick Saban would like to have seen some compromise.

ā€œI would have liked to have seen a different solution,ā€ he said after Alabama’s Saturday scrimmage. I understand the reason, I respect the reason — which is player safety, but I guess I’ve been around long enough to remember when we use to kick off from the 40-yard line.

ā€œSo, for us old timers, I thought it would be an easier solution to just move it back up to the 40-yard line, because you’d get more touchbacks but you could still sky kick, onside kick — which you can still do some of those things, but you sky kick trying to give someone bad field position and they can fair catch the ball on the 15-yard line and get it on the 25.

ā€œThat takes some of the strategy out of the game, to me … and you would have had the same result if you just moved it up five yards. You still would have all the strategies that you could have used in other circumstances.ā€

The fact is, kickoffs would have been abolished altogether if not for the onside kick, which is the only thing that gives any chance to a team that trails by more than one score in the latter part of the fourth quarter.

Without a chance to at least try for an onside kick, teams would have to see the team with the lead simply awarded the ball and, in many endgame clock/score situations, that would be that. Now, a team can at least try — and, a couple of times or so in every college football season, succeed dramatically. There’s also at least the possible element of surprise, as in the Alabama-Clemson title game in 2015.

Even old-timers, as Saban calls himself (and some of the rest of us) understand that injuries — especially concussions — are an issue that must be addressed. But we also wonder if there might be a less drastic change that could serve the purpose.

https://www.tidesports.com/cecil-hurt-ncaa-kickoff-decision-too-drastic/
 
I would take this option over the NFL's solution which has pretty much made the kickoff completely a non-issue.

But to the person saying Alabama has had bad return and kickoff coverage teams, on what planet are you living? I dont think Bama has even allowed a KOR TD in like 4 years.
 
This change would actually be a plus for Bama. Bama isn't elite on the return and the other teams tend to get the ball down the filed on us too often. If you can avoid the injuries then this is a plus.
Permitting kick-offs and returns to continue to influence the outcome of games diminishes the impact of coaching geniuses like Saban. Every Bama/Saban fan should support getting rid of such unpredictable and unmanagable aspects of the game. Every player who stands to have an NFL future should too. It's a no brainer, in my opinion.
 
This change would actually be a plus for Bama. Bama isn't elite on the return and the other teams tend to get the ball down the filed on us too often. If you can avoid the injuries then this is a plus.
Permitting kick-offs and returns to continue to influence the outcome of games diminishes the impact of coaching geniuses like Saban. Every Bama/Saban fan should support getting rid of such unpredictable and unmanagable aspects of the game. Every player who stands to have an NFL future should too. It's a no brainer, in my opinion.

Yeah because Saban didn't totally prove his genius by utilizing an onside kick in a national title or anything...
 
This change would actually be a plus for Bama. Bama isn't elite on the return and the other teams tend to get the ball down the filed on us too often. If you can avoid the injuries then this is a plus.
Permitting kick-offs and returns to continue to influence the outcome of games diminishes the impact of coaching geniuses like Saban. Every Bama/Saban fan should support getting rid of such unpredictable and unmanageable aspects of the game. Every player who stands to have an NFL future should too. It's a no brainer, in my opinion.

Yeah because Saban didn't totally prove his genius by utilizing an onside kick in a national title or anything...
Your belligerence towards me from one thread to the next is diverting too much blood flow away from your brain.

There's nothing about Saban's brilliant on-sides kick that negates my point, which you totally misunderstood. I'm saying he's so brilliant that he would be even more dominant by removing the most variable and unpredictable part of the game, which everyone understands "special teams" to be. Coaches are no more helpless than on a special teams play. If you reduce the game to offense and defense, you reduce it to the elements most manageable and manipulated by coaching. And this kind of reform would naturally favor the best coaches.

I agree the game would lose some excitement, but players are just too strong and too fast these days to be colliding at full speed with so much real estate in play.
 
There's nothing about Saban's brilliant on-sides kick that negates my point, which you totally misunderstood. I
He's not the only one that misunderstood what you said.
Permitting kick-offs and returns to continue to influence the outcome of games diminishes the impact of coaching geniuses like Saban.
When it was that acumen responsible for noticing Clemson's return team formation (including others) and began practicing that onsides kick. That's what makes your post confusing.
Every Bama/Saban fan should support getting rid of such unpredictable and unmanagable aspects of the game. Every player who stands to have an NFL future should too. It's a no brainer, in my opinion.
This doesn't clear it up any. It's the unpredictability that has given us games like the 2007 Fiesta Bowl where Boise State upset Oklahoma. Every Bama fan and/or Saban fan should want to get rid of things like that?

Then there's the manageable aspects of the game this also eliminates.
 
Back
Top Bottom