Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat
Its intriguing, but I don't like it.
The reason this change is being proposed is because other rule changes have made on-side kicks even more unlikely to succeed than they were previously.
But this proposed change takes, what was a special teams play, and gives it to the offense. Fundamentally, i don't like that, and i think teams would do this with success much more frequently. As a result, what has always been historically been a last-ditch, "hail mary" type-play to give the losing team a glimmer of hope now becomes something that is fairly easily attainable. It's giving the losing team a significant advantage compared to what they've had historically.
And why do we want to do that, other than to add "unearned" drama into a game? If a team wants to win a game, they should play better during the first 56 minutes of regulation. The league shouldn't give them a boost to help them win games when their play for 56 minutes shows they don't deserve it.
|
Agreed, plus trying to help come backs doesn't add drama, it takes some away IMO.
The drama comes from the idea that a team will manage to do something highly unlikely, not that they'll manage something that we're trying to put them in position to be able to do...
Okay, I know, a 4th and 15 is not a gimme, but this sport and its rules are a beauty, they make sense, as a whole. After a score, the ball is put back in play by a kickoff. Like in so many other sports.
Giving the ball back to the offense that just scored makes no sense at all.