Effects of new 35 yards kickoff rule so far.

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
During the offseason the NFL changed the kickoff to the 35 yard line. I know many wondered how this would effect the returns. I think we have our answer. So far this year the number of kick returns per game is down. This is comparing 130 games played so far this year to the total number of games during the regular season 2010.
Code:
        KO          TB        % of TB      Returns      Ave. Return
2010    2465        406        16.6%          1969      21.1 yards
2011    1314        608        46.3%          673      24.4 yards
Looks like the NFL got their wish. Less returns on KO.

Edit: Corrected number of games played so far this year.
 

RustyShackleford

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
46
Reaction score
3
I never quite understood why they changed the rule the way that they did. If they really didn't like the runbacks then they should have just done away with them completely.

My biggest problem with the rule change though is the fact that they are still sandwiching the kickoffs between commercial breaks. With all the touchbacks, it's too much time between meaningful action. Nowadays when I have a game DVR'd and am forwarding through the commercials I don't even stop for the kickoffs. I just assume a touchback and continue scrolling.
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
I never would have imagined that there would have been over 1,000 kickoffs per season!
What's interesting is that the avg. return yards has actually gone up!
Does this mean that they could spot the ball at the 25 yard line eventually?

The claim to move the ball to the 35 is to reduce injuries which I don't think happens all that often on special teams.
Well, is that happening?
Are less special teams players getting injured on the KOR?
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
This is interesting..

Anything on the amount of returns for a TD? Compared to last year? Although that isnt a real true sample...

I think a true sample would to take the the last 5 years of returned ko for TDS and average them out and then take this year?
 
OP
OP
Raptorman

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
This is interesting..

Anything on the amount of returns for a TD? Compared to last year? Although that isnt a real true sample...

I think a true sample would to take the the last 5 years of returned ko for TDS and average them out and then take this year?
Last year, 23 returns for a TD. So far this year, 6.
 

Texas9erFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Messages
471
Reaction score
97
Location
Round Rock, TX
I HATE this new rule. Sometimes I think the NFL rules commitee is just bored and pulls new rules out of their ****. They are dumbing down the game. A lot can happen on a kick-off play that changes the flow of a game. The on-side kick is just one obvious example. Belichick wants to eliminate the kick-off and extra point altogether. He wants TD's to be worth 7 automatically and have teams just start their drives on the 20. For this he gets my :poop: stain of the decade award.

I'm also a bit pissed about the new helmet to helmet contact rule. IT'S FOOTBALL for **** sake. It's a contact sport... no, it's a collision sport!! Too many huge penalties are giving stalled drives new life and changing the face of the game. These players get payed HUGE amounts of money to put their life on the line for the sake of the play. It should remain that way.

For what it's worth I'm also not a big fan of the pass interference penalty costing a defense the length of the play. It should be like college, 15 yards and an automatic 1st down.

And I'd move the hash marks on the pro field to the width they are on a college field to make field goals harder. They are PROS after all. Why make it easier?!?!
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
I HATE this new rule. Sometimes I think the NFL rules commitee is just bored and pulls new rules out of their ****. They are dumbing down the game. A lot can happen on a kick-off play that changes the flow of a game. The on-side kick is just one obvious example. Belichick wants to eliminate the kick-off and extra point altogether. He wants TD's to be worth 7 automatically and have teams just start their drives on the 20. For this he gets my :poop: stain of the decade award.

I'm also a bit pissed about the new helmet to helmet contact rule. IT'S FOOTBALL for **** sake. It's a contact sport... no, it's a collision sport!! Too many huge penalties are giving stalled drives new life and changing the face of the game. These players get payed HUGE amounts of money to put their life on the line for the sake of the play. It should remain that way.

For what it's worth I'm also not a big fan of the pass interference penalty costing a defense the length of the play. It should be like college, 15 yards and an automatic 1st down.

And I'd move the hash marks on the pro field to the width they are on a college field to make field goals harder. They are PROS after all. Why make it easier?!?!
I agree with most of your post.
The part I don't agree with is the second bit about helmet to helmet.
 

Forget Favre

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
9,115
Reaction score
1,807
Jon Gruden suggested that the H to H call should be reviewable on a challenge. I hate to slow down play even more than it is, but I tend to agree.
I do too.

And I really agree with your point about pass interference.
It's just retarded to think the receiver would have caught it had he not been touched.

Knowing that he cheated I don't think anything Bill Bellicheat says in regards to rule changes should be taken seriously.
Why listen to a cheater?
Besides, leaving the xtra point kick does give teams the option for a 2 pt. try or for something exciting to happen if the kick ever gets blocked.
 

Kitten

Feline Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Philly/ South Jersey area
Might as well just eliminate the KO altogether and automatically start them on the 20th yard line. Why bother with the KO if they are going to do that?
 

GreenBlood

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
251
I love that they put the kickoff back up to the 35 yard line. That's where it was before they changed it in the 90s anyway. It works to our favor. Our coverage teams have been pretty bad for years. Now our opponents are starting on their 20 yard line instead of their 35 or 40 yard line. We have no trouble going 80 yards to score, so I'm all for it.
 

Pat4DaPack

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
136
Location
Lincoln, Nebraska
I wonder if any of the players just think, "I'm just gonna return it no matter what." Like as long as it doesnt go out of bounds, I have seen returners return it from 9 1/2 yards back.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
The NFL certainly got its wish – that’s a drastic increase in the percentage of touch backs. I don’t remember ever seeing a report of the number of injuries related to KOs, but I assume the league’s concern is based on stats. It makes sense to me there would be increased injuries because in no other play do 9 or 10 world class athletes run full speed at their opponents from the beginning of the play (punt teams have to block first). They started to address this by changing the rule about how many players could form the wedge on KORs.

With regard to the number of KOs, keep in mind there are 256 games in the regular season and more than two KOs in each game, so there are 512 before a TD or FG is scored. Although they’ve changed the rules a lot regarding KOs, I don’t think they should be done away with. As noted, the reduced number of returns have actually increased the average return even with the 5-yard difference and Packers fans know first hand how exciting KORs can be. Also, what about onside KOs? Again Packers fans know first hand they aren’t used exclusively in desperate end-of-game situations.

Regarding pass interference I understand the complaint. But what about late in a game or half and a defender is about to be beaten for a 60 yard gain? Currently PI puts the ball on the spot the DB grabs the receiver. Under college rules, the DB would be foolish not to interfere. IOW, I see a flaw in both college and NFL PI rules.
 

Bogart

Duke Mantee
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
839
Location
Mobile, AL U.S.
I don't like the rule either, I swear Goodell is trying to make this league soft.

Look at the way Quarterbacks get treated today vs 20 years ago, and it's an entire different league.
There is way more roughing the passer calls today than I have ever seen.

ONE FUMBLE in the 1990 NFC Championship game, and San Francisco would have played Buffalo in the Super Bowl. I go back and watch old games all the time and constantly say to myself "That would be an incomplete pass today" regarding fumbles.

The Tuck Rule should be ****ing banned.

You can believe this, defenses like the 1990 Bills, and 1985 Bears, and even the 1970's Steelers and 1970's Cowboys, there would be flags everywhere ALL DAY LONG for roughing the passer, cause those defenses tried to kill the quarterbacks, and successfully did injure tons of them.
 

cupacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
103
Reaction score
15
Location
Greenville, SC
I HATE this new rule. Sometimes I think the NFL rules commitee is just bored and pulls new rules out of their ****. They are dumbing down the game. A lot can happen on a kick-off play that changes the flow of a game. The on-side kick is just one obvious example. Belichick wants to eliminate the kick-off and extra point altogether. He wants TD's to be worth 7 automatically and have teams just start their drives on the 20. For this he gets my :poop: stain of the decade award.

I'm also a bit pissed about the new helmet to helmet contact rule. IT'S FOOTBALL for **** sake. It's a contact sport... no, it's a collision sport!! Too many huge penalties are giving stalled drives new life and changing the face of the game. These players get payed HUGE amounts of money to put their life on the line for the sake of the play. It should remain that way.

For what it's worth I'm also not a big fan of the pass interference penalty costing a defense the length of the play. It should be like college, 15 yards and an automatic 1st down.

And I'd move the hash marks on the pro field to the width they are on a college field to make field goals harder. They are PROS after all. Why make it easier?!?!

In regards to the hash marks, the pro width makes it harder for defenses IMO. On a college field, if the ball is on the right hash, there isn't as much room the D has to worry about than if it was on the right hash on a pro field. I think that overrides the fg difficulty b/c there are obviously far more plays from scrimmage than fg attempts. Plus, as a whole, NFL kickers are for more accurate than college kickers, so I don't think it would make much difference.
 

Texas9erFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Messages
471
Reaction score
97
Location
Round Rock, TX
In regards to the hash marks, the pro width makes it harder for defenses IMO. On a college field, if the ball is on the right hash, there isn't as much room the D has to worry about than if it was on the right hash on a pro field. I think that overrides the fg difficulty b/c there are obviously far more plays from scrimmage than fg attempts. Plus, as a whole, NFL kickers are for more accurate than college kickers, so I don't think it would make much difference.
That's an excellent point.

I'll allow it! :roflmao:
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top