Is the NCAA really going to eliminate the kickoff?

[BrendanP]

This was published today:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2652707-ncaa-afca-reportedly-have-discussed-eliminating-kickoffs-in-college-football?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

[AFOpie]

The team that scores gets '4/15' at their 40 yard line after a score. They can punt or choose to go for it.

[BrendanP]

This is really going to happen? There isn't any other way we can maintain a kickoff?

[Fatman325]

It is possible that the KO goes away. Listening to the Arkansas coach yesterday on the radio he said that the risk for injury on a KO is twice what it is on any other play. Let's see what options we can come up with that are equitable for both the scoring and non scoring team.

The team that scores gets '4/15' at their 40 yard line after a score. They can punt or choose to go for it.

The nonscoring team gets the ball at the 25. This is where a lot of possessions start now.

Other suggestions???

[BrendanP]

How about leaving it alone and not freaking out over the fact that injuries occur in a contact sport. If you really want more touchbacks, move the KO up to the 40. But while it's been vehemently denied that we're going to have flag football a few years from now, this is one giant leap toward that very existence. Injuries occur during tackling, you know, so let's ban that too!

[Aussie-Zebra]

As most officials realize the reason most injuries occur during kick plays is that players are running at each other at full speed and despite the padding and other protective gear, injuries are frequent.

In our state colts (U19) league, to date we have restricted free kicks to the start of each half. After a score Team B takes over on their 35. Punts are so far unchanged.

[Eastshire]

How about leaving it alone and not freaking out over the fact that injuries occur in a contact sport. If you really want more touchbacks, move the KO up to the 40. But while it's been vehemently denied that we're going to have flag football a few years from now, this is one giant leap toward that very existence. Injuries occur during tackling, you know, so let's ban that too!

Except that it's not. Taking the one play which is unlike every other play in the game and turning it into a normal scrimmage down is not a giant leap towards flag football. The 4/whatever suggestion is, I think, the future of the kick-off as it retains both the possibility of the scoring team retaining the ball and the possibility of a TD return while significantly reducing the risk of injury on the play.

[refbuz]

The Ivy's are experementing with kicking off from the 40 in their League games this year...

PRINCETON, N.J. -- The Ivy League will use an experimental rule for the 2016 football season to move kickoffs to the 40-yard line and touchbacks to the 20-yard line in an effort to reduce concussions and further promote the safety and welfare of its student-athletes.

"This experimental rule change is another example of The Ivy League leading the nation in concussion prevention," said Executive Director Robin Harris. "Our data showed us that kickoffs result in a disproportionate number of concussions and this rule will allow us to assess whether limiting kickoff returns will reduce the incidence of concussions."

The goal of the experimental rule is to limit kickoff returns, which account for 23.4 percent of concussions during games despite representing only 5.8 percent of overall plays. The League will evaluate the concussion and kickoff return data after the 2016 season.

The request was made to the NCAA as a part of The Ivy League’s overall review of concussions, which began with football in 2010 and has included eight other sports to date (men’s and women’s lacrosse, men’s and women’s ice hockey, men’s and women’s soccer, wrestling and rugby).

As a result of this comprehensive review of concussions, the League began an all-sports concussion data collection and study in 2013. Data from this study prompted discussion of kickoffs, which led to The Ivy League head football coaches suggesting this experimental rule change. The NCAA granted The League’s request for conference games only.

This experimental rule is the latest in a series of Ivy policies and rules that are designed to limit the incidence of concussions. Most recently in May, The Ivy League formally adopted another policy originating with the League’s eight head football coaches to eliminate to-the-ground ("live") tackling in practices during the regular season, which will also go into effect with the 2016 campaign. Changing practice rules does not require NCAA approval.

Link

[bama_stripes]

Doesn't moving the TB spot to the 20 give B more incentive to "run it out"?

[refbuz]

Doesn't moving the TB spot to the 20 give B more incentive to "run it out"?

Heck if I know, they're the "smart" ones. 

I'd get my kickers working on high kicks that land between the 5 & GL ASAP

[BrendanP]

Except that it's not. Taking the one play which is unlike every other play in the game and turning it into a normal scrimmage down is not a giant leap towards flag football. The 4/whatever suggestion is, I think, the future of the kick-off as it retains both the possibility of the scoring team retaining the ball and the possibility of a TD return while significantly reducing the risk of injury on the play.

Yes it truly is. First we took hitting out of the game in the name of "player safety" and now we're going to eliminate the kickoff, an essential part of the game that dates back to early rugby in the 19th century. My fear is that with the concussion madness, that we're going to keep fundamentally changing the sport until it's something that would be unrecognizable today. With every element of the game you remove/drastically change in the name of "player safety" the more steam the next rule change gets behind it, and before you know it, we'll be playing something like the 7-on-7 route-running/cornerback practices we used to do in high school because that's a non-contact safe game with no chance of injury, save for an occasional sprained ankle.

Nobody wants to see a player seriously injured. But as with anything in life, *stuff* (feel free to substitute that word with another that starts with S) happens. I just don't think we have to drastically neuter the sport to achieve the goal of fewer injuries because unfortunately bad things happen. Heck, there was a study out showing a dramatic increase in ankle, leg, and knee injuries because so many teams are moving over to rugby style tackling instead of just blowing up an opponent.

But as for the kickoff, fine, let's move it forward to the 40. Heck, maybe they'll move the touchback out to the 30. But to scrap it altogether is a dramatic change that I don't think will ever, and should never happen.

[Kalle]

Yes it truly is. First we took hitting out of the game in the name of "player safety" and now we're going to eliminate the kickoff, an essential part of the game that dates back to early rugby in the 19th century.

I didn't know you don't like forward passes

The game evolves and sometimes changes quite a bit. I bet the current game would be bizarre to the players who played in the 1890's.

[Fatman325]

Another article on the topic.

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/2016/07/22/college-football-kickoffs/87425384/

[BrendanP]

Another article on the topic.

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/2016/07/22/college-football-kickoffs/87425384/

Articles with that kind of attitude are why I fear football becoming the new cockfighting. Something that a lot of people hold near and dear, but everybody else wants to ban.

[JasonTX]

Back before helmets, how many concussions where there?  I guarantee you they thought before using their head.  I vote to get rid of helmets.   

[Fatman325]

The more I hear and read on this topic I think we are headed to some rule changes before it gets eliminated. Move the KO spot up. No double teams allowed. etc.

[Aussie-Zebra]

Back before helmets, how many concussions where there?  I guarantee you they thought before using their head.  I vote to get rid of helmets. 

or make them optional at least 

[BrendanP]

I'm starting to think we need a new XFL. 

[Joe Stack]

How about leaving it alone and not freaking out over the fact that injuries occur in a contact sport.

Because politicians can't wait to get involved in these things. Also, with only __ players suited up (60??), coaches are as concerned about injuries as ever. I'm not sure it is freaking out to want a player you recruited who has the skills you want to be on crutches on the sideline rather than in uniform and available.

With that said, I don't really like the 4th and whatever. Make both teams unable to advance a free kick. Any free kick, touched or not, that goes into the end zone is a touchback. Move Team A's line back to the 30. No foul for out of bounds kicks. If you see where I'm going with this, you might add more parts to it that I haven't thought of, but the basic gist is to take the return part and essentially the blocking out of free kicks. Onside kicks would stay largely like they are now.

You could even say that Team B (on the free kick) will put the ball in play no closer to their goal line than the 20. While you don't want to give the free kick Team A too much of an advantage, you do want to reward them like you would a punter who can nail an opponent inside the 5 on every punt. Take this template and improve it -- or tell me why it wouldn't work.

[scrounge]

I think there's easier ways of accomplishing the same goal without overcomplicating things or resorting to gimmicks like 4th and 15, etc. Just give the kicking team the option of:

a) choosing to give the receiving team the ball on the 20, or

b) onside kicking from the 30 or whatever. If the ball travels more than 25 yards, then R gets it 25 yards past the kick (provided there was no R penalty) or the dead ball spot, their choice. This would just mirror what we already have for free kick out of bounds. Keeps the on-side kick in play, doesn't really change things when they're used, cuts out a dangerous, almost always anti-climactic play (not quite as much in NCAA with the 25 yd line touchback, which ironically IMO is encouraging short/pooch kicks but would like to see actual data), and lets everyone move on.

Frankly, for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth on this issue, I don't think we'd miss it all that much at all.

[Joe Stack]

I just don't think we have to drastically neuter the sport to achieve the goal of fewer injuries because unfortunately bad things happen.

I agree with your statement, but we're talking about a KICKOFF (free kick, whatever). How many people during the summer say, "man, I can't wait to see 'Bama's kickoff team..." Yes, there might be a dynamic kick returner like Leland McElroy was for A&M in the '90s, but those guys come along a couple of times a decade at most. And while a KO return for a TD is an exciting play, eliminating it is not going to come anywhere near "drastically neuter"ing the sport.

[dvasques]

Speaking as a former not so great player back in my days, I'd suffer a lot to see the KO go away. That was my (and some of the players I've known) place. That was where I made a difference on the team.

Granted... I'd never get a scholarship for any college by being a star runner on kickoffs. But getting over with that play would get me very sad for losing my spot

But then again, I wasn't so great. So maybe I shouldn't be playing...