- Joined
- Aug 31, 2008
- Messages
- 15,897
- Reaction score
- 28,559
- Points
- 135
Is the rule official?Has the 4th and 15 replacing onside kicks rule been discussed in here? I can't believe this could even possibly happen. It would be such a gimmick. I am curious how others feel about it.
Supposedly, 4th and 15 has been converted 23% of the time since 2000. If I am losing, I'd go for it every single time. It just seems ridiculous to me. Why punish the team that is winning the game by giving the opponent such a high percentage chance at getting the ball back again?
Can you imagine losing a game like this....
Up 13 with 4 minutes left. Dominated the entire game. Give up a late TD. Normally, it would not matter much because you'd recover the onside kick and the game is over/very likely over. Instead, the opponent goes for 4th and 15 and converts because of a bogus pass interference or hands to the face penalty (seems like this would be a GREAT rule for rigging games if you believe in that kind of thing). Opponent gets the ball. Goes down and scores and the game is over. You lose.
It just doesn't feel right to me. Yes, to a random observer, it would make games more exciting because there is a more likely chance of big comebacks late in games... But if you are talking about what is actually "fair" and "pure to the game," it just feels insane. It's a gimmick you'd see in the XFL or Arena League.
If it is, they also need to make penalties like illegal contact (which is ticky tack but 5 yards and an automatic-first down) not automatic first downs.
This rule just seems to support more scoring and keeping games closer. A team down 30 at halftime could theoretically play offense the entire second half and come back.