Rich Eisen just asked about my scenario

[dcfanatic]

I posted this to Rich Eisen on Twitter...

DCFanaticRadio

@richeisen OT Scenario - Team A gets kickoff. Kicks FG. Then does onside kick. They recover. Team B loses & still never had the ball. 37 minutes ago via web in reply to richeisen
---------------------------------

He just asked Rich McKay about it on NFL Network.

Game over was the answer.

So the game could end on a pile up scrum of bodies as all of these guys are fighting for that onside recovery.

In a playoff game!

And your telling me this isn't some scenario where a player can get a concussion?

I thought the NFL was all about stifling injuries.

Just throw 10 minutes on the clock and play an extra 'quarter'...

[youtube]hNQaGh4Etow[/youtube]

 

[Jay]

Who in God's name is going to onside kick with a 3 point lead in overtime of a playoff game?

I mean come on. If someone actually has the stones to do that, then they should just go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a field goal. If you have that little faith in your defense, then go for the TD to put the game away.

And I can't recall ever seeing an injury on an onside kick.

 

[DFWJC]

Who in God's name is going to onside kick with a 3 point lead in overtime of a playoff game?

I mean come on.

And I can't recall ever seeing an injury on an onside kick.

Wow...I was thinking that too. That would take huge nads and/or little brains.
So, it could happen.

 

[theogt]

If it's true that a team can kick an on-side kick on the opening kickoff of overtime, recover the ball, and then kick a field goal to win (as Chris Mortenson explained), then every team should open overtime with an on-side kick. Even if they give up a FG, they'll still have their opportunity to score.

 

[Hoofbite]

If it's true that a team can kick an on-side kick on the opening kickoff of overtime, recover the ball, and then kick a field goal to win (as Chris Mortenson explained), then every team should open overtime with an on-side kick. Even if they give up a FG, they'll still have their opportunity to score.

No ****. Why wouldn't you do that? You basically do not lose anything but some yardage.

At best, you recover and move the ball about 25 yards and win outright.

What stupid system.

I'm with Golic.

 

[WoodysGirl]

On overtime onside kicks

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on March 23, 2010 4:46 PM ET

We know many of you have questions about the new overtime rules, so let's try to answer one more.

Some of you have asked what happens if a team recovers an onside kick on the first kickoff of overtime. In that scenario, the recovering team could win the game on a field goal. The rules read:

"A kickoff is the opportunity to possess for the receiving team. If the kicking team legally recovers the kick, the receiving team is considered to have had its opportunity."

So a team could get a "walkoff" win by recovering the kick and going in for a score. Sudden death rules would then apply. The same rules apply if the receiving team fumbles a kickoff.

In theory, this could make coaches more bold to open overtime. They could fail to recover the onside kick, still hold the opposing team to a field goal, and get the ball back.

In practice, we suspect most coaches will avoid risking so much field position, just like in regulation.

Safety wins in new overtime

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on March 23, 2010 4:24 PM ET

MDS and I have wondered over the last few weeks what happens if there is a safety in the now accepted overtime format.

We assumed a safety would win the game, and Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times confirms that's correct.

Yes, it's strange that two points could win the game if an initial possession field goal won't win the game. But it would be far, far stranger to keep playing.

The idea here is that both teams get a chance to score unless the first team to get the ball scores a touchdown. That would be the case when a safety happens.

If a safety occurs, both teams will have had their chance. The team on offense that started with the ball instead gave points to the other team. It makes no sense to give that team another chance with the ball, just to perform a free kick down 2-0.

 

[casmith07]

Who in God's name is going to onside kick with a 3 point lead in overtime of a playoff game?

I mean come on. If someone actually has the stones to do that, then they should just go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a field goal. If you have that little faith in your defense, then go for the TD to put the game away.

And I can't recall ever seeing an injury on an onside kick.

Who in God's name comes out of half time in the Super Bowl and kicks an onside kick?

 

[theogt]

The league will likely just issue a statement clarifying the rules such that this loophole doesn't exist.

 

[Jay]

Who in God's name comes out of half time in the Super Bowl and kicks an onside kick?

A team that desperately needed some momentum on their side?

That's a terrible comparison in my opinion. You're talking about a desperate team vs. a team who has a 3 point lead and would win the playoff game if they held their opponent. Why put your opposition 10 yards away from field goal position immediately?

Hopefully our coaches aren't thinking like some of you posters.

 

[dcfanatic]

If it's true that a team can kick an on-side kick on the opening kickoff of overtime, recover the ball, and then kick a field goal to win (as Chris Mortenson explained), then every team should open overtime with an on-side kick. Even if they give up a FG, they'll still have their opportunity to score.

Exactly.

And if you already have your three on the board. And you know that all you have to do is stop them from scoring a TD to NOT LOSE then why would you not onside in the scenario I put up.

You give yourself one play to win the game. But even if you don't recover then the other team still has to score a TD to win. If they score a FG it's still only a tie game.

Then after that the first team to score wins.

 

[dcfanatic]

Who in God's name is going to onside kick with a 3 point lead in overtime of a playoff game?

I mean come on. If someone actually has the stones to do that, then they should just go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a field goal. If you have that little faith in your defense, then go for the TD to put the game away.

And I can't recall ever seeing an injury on an onside kick.

Think harder.

 

[JustDezIt]

I posted this to Rich Eisen on Twitter...

DCFanaticRadio

@richeisen OT Scenario - Team A gets kickoff. Kicks FG. Then does onside kick. They recover. Team B loses & still never had the ball. 37 minutes ago via web in reply to richeisen
---------------------------------

He just asked Rich McKay about it on NFL Network.

Game over was the answer.

So the game could end on a pile up scrum of bodies as all of these guys are fighting for that onside recovery.

In a playoff game!

And your telling me this isn't some scenario where a player can get a concussion?

I thought the NFL was all about stifling injuries.

Just throw 10 minutes on the clock and play an extra 'quarter'...

if he actually got the question from your twitter post and used it, that's pretty damn cool.

 

[casmith07]

A team that desperately needed some momentum on their side?

That's a terrible comparison in my opinion. You're talking about a desperate team vs. a team who has a 3 point lead and would win the playoff game if they held their opponent. Why put your opposition 10 yards away from field goal position immediately?

Hopefully our coaches aren't thinking like some of you posters.

How is it a terrible comparison? Isn't every team desperate to win in the playoffs?

Why not kick the onside kick, recover, and score and end the game without giving your opponent a shot?

The argument can be made both ways, and neither way is right or wrong, because the overtime rules are ludicrous.

 

[dcfanatic]

A team that desperately needed some momentum on their side?

That's a terrible comparison in my opinion. You're talking about a desperate team vs. a team who has a 3 point lead and would win the playoff game if they held their opponent. Why put your opposition 10 yards away from field goal position immediately?

Hopefully our coaches aren't thinking like some of you posters.

Because it cuts down the opportunities.

One play against maybe 8-10 plays.

Guys are tired. Guys are dinged up.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

Exactly.

And if you already have your three on the board. And you know that all you have to do is stop them from scoring a TD to NOT LOSE then why would you not onside in the scenario I put up.

You give yourself one play to win the game. But even if you don't recover then the other team still has to score a TD to win. If they score a FG it's still only a tie game.

Then after that the first team to score wins.

True, but part of the effectiveness of an onside kick is that it comes as a surprise. I think with these rules, you keep all your guys on the line ready for it.

I think if i have 3 on the board, i kick and play defense.

 

[dcfanatic]

if he actually got the question from your twitter post and used it, that's pretty damn cool.

I think he did. I posted it and within 15-20 minutes he was on NFLN.

Now 872 other people could have posted it also, but a boy can dream that Rich Eisen is my BFF for a few minutes.

:laugh1:

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Onside kicks in the NFL are successful 26% of the time. It’s true, but it’s also very misleading. Onside kick success rates are very dependent on whether the receiving team is expecting one.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09/onside-kicks.html

So basically if the receiving team goes into it prepared then its almost guaranteed to fail. Keep in mind that they changed the rules so you cannot overload a side anymore either.

This assumption that the team would do it everytime is baseless.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/09/onside-kicks.html

So basically if the receiving team goes into it prepared then its almost guaranteed to fail. Keep in mind that they changed the rules so you cannot overload a side anymore either.

This assumption that the team would do it everytime is baseless.

Exactly. Most coaches won't give up 25 or 30 yards of field position.

 

[viman96]

If the kicking team recovers the onside kick but fails to score points and the other team scores a FG then I believe the game is over. Both teams would had position of the ball.

 

[KJJ]

I posted this to Rich Eisen on Twitter...

DCFanaticRadio

@richeisen OT Scenario - Team A gets kickoff. Kicks FG. Then does onside kick. They recover. Team B loses & still never had the ball. 37 minutes ago via web in reply to richeisen
---------------------------------

He just asked Rich McKay about it on NFL Network.

Game over was the answer.

So the game could end on a pile up scrum of bodies as all of these guys are fighting for that onside recovery.

In a playoff game!

And your telling me this isn't some scenario where a player can get a concussion?

I thought the NFL was all about stifling injuries.

Just throw 10 minutes on the clock and play an extra 'quarter'...

[youtube]hNQaGh4Etow[/youtube]

That scenario would NEVER happen. LOL No way would a team who just kicked a FG in OT do an onside kick and risk giving their opponent a short field. That would be beyond stupid. You kick it deep and force them to travel a distance.