huskrinmissouri Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 This post has pretty much nothing to do with the topic line, but I figured the tag line might at least spark your interest. Like many others, I'm more of a lurker, but I post once in a blue moon. I do have a gripe though, but not about the UCLA game, but a new rule that I heard about within that game. I don't know if anyone else has brought this up. Can someone explain how it would be possible to ever recover an onside kick with the new rule? It's a low percentage happening as it is, but now you can call for a fair catch after the ball bounces once? That pretty much leaves one option - to dribble it down the middle which the defense is/was obviously waiting for. What other scenario would work? I saw that Wisconsin almost pulled it off - almost, but not quite. I'd like to see a team that does, because I see the new rule putting the chances of this happening pretty much at a zero in a situation where an onside is expected. I know it's a rule to protect the players, but come on, it's football. Pretty soon kick off's will be reduced to two hand touch. Quote Link to comment
tyvodka23 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 My only though after hearing that rule is to kick it at one person as hard as you can and hope it bounces of them and back to the kicking team, other than that, I can't think of a way it would ever have even a remote chance of working. Quote Link to comment
Blackshirts007 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 It's a bullsh#t rule and you are correct. If you do the standard onside to tryn lift the ball, you are screwed. If the fair catch is called you cannot even touch the guy or else it will be a kick catch interference and a 15 yard penalty, the only way to recover would be a missed catch Quote Link to comment
skersfan Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Within a few years the kick off will be gone from college football. Too many serious injuries, life threatening injuries. Numerous top coaches are already saying do away with it. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Also, why wouldn't the receiving team just put one guy up there (to avoid someone accidentally touching the ball), call for the fair catch, and then let the ball fly where it will without anyone touching it? If you call for the fair catch you don't actually need to catch it. You can just let the ball be downed where it stops and retain possession. Quote Link to comment
HuskerShark Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Also, why wouldn't the receiving team just put one guy up there (to avoid someone accidentally touching the ball), call for the fair catch, and then let the ball fly where it will without anyone touching it? If you call for the fair catch you don't actually need to catch it. You can just let the ball be downed where it stops and retain possession. ?.... If I get what you're saying correctly, it makes no sense. If he just lets the ball go, the other team can recover it and take back possession. On a kickoff, or onside, the receiving team has to recover it unless the ball doesn't roll 10 yards. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Also, why wouldn't the receiving team just put one guy up there (to avoid someone accidentally touching the ball), call for the fair catch, and then let the ball fly where it will without anyone touching it? If you call for the fair catch you don't actually need to catch it. You can just let the ball be downed where it stops and retain possession. ?.... If I get what you're saying correctly, it makes no sense. If he just lets the ball go, the other team can recover it and take back possession. On a kickoff, or onside, the receiving team has to recover it unless the ball doesn't roll 10 yards. If that's the case then a kick-off fair catch is different than a fair catch on a punt. If the punt returner calls for a fair catch he can let the ball sail over his head and they (the receiving team) retain possession. So I guess it must be different than a punt fair catch. Otherwise the kickoff team would always call for a fair catch and just let the ball roll. OKay, I get it. Duh. Quote Link to comment
HuskerShark Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Also, why wouldn't the receiving team just put one guy up there (to avoid someone accidentally touching the ball), call for the fair catch, and then let the ball fly where it will without anyone touching it? If you call for the fair catch you don't actually need to catch it. You can just let the ball be downed where it stops and retain possession. ?.... If I get what you're saying correctly, it makes no sense. If he just lets the ball go, the other team can recover it and take back possession. On a kickoff, or onside, the receiving team has to recover it unless the ball doesn't roll 10 yards. If that's the case then a kick-off fair catch is different than a fair catch on a punt. If the punt returner calls for a fair catch he can let the ball sail over his head and they (the receiving team) retain possession. So I guess it must be different than a punt fair catch. Otherwise the kickoff team would always call for a fair catch and just let the ball roll. OKay, I get it. Duh. On a punt, the returner doesn't even have to call for the fair catch. He could just let it roll and as long as he doesn't touch it, the kicking team can down it. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 The rule is absolutely stupid. Let me ask you this, when was the last time you remember a player being severely injured on an on-side-kick? 2 Quote Link to comment
HuskerShark Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 The rule is absolutely stupid. Let me ask you this, when was the last time you remember a player being severely injured on an on-side-kick? Quote Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I know one guy that got a boo boo and another that chipped a nail (gasp). Oh the horror. Quote Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Also, why wouldn't the receiving team just put one guy up there (to avoid someone accidentally touching the ball), call for the fair catch, and then let the ball fly where it will without anyone touching it? If you call for the fair catch you don't actually need to catch it. You can just let the ball be downed where it stops and retain possession. ?.... If I get what you're saying correctly, it makes no sense. If he just lets the ball go, the other team can recover it and take back possession. On a kickoff, or onside, the receiving team has to recover it unless the ball doesn't roll 10 yards. If that's the case then a kick-off fair catch is different than a fair catch on a punt. If the punt returner calls for a fair catch he can let the ball sail over his head and they (the receiving team) retain possession. So I guess it must be different than a punt fair catch. Otherwise the kickoff team would always call for a fair catch and just let the ball roll. OKay, I get it. Duh. Yes. Once the ball passes the 10 yard mark on a kickoff, it is anyone's ball. Quote Link to comment
308_Husker Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I wasn't even aware that they changed this rule. I guess that better explains ours at the end of the game. Quote Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I wasn't even aware that they changed this rule. I guess that better explains ours at the end of the game. I wasn't either. Sneaky bastards. Quote Link to comment
shyndy Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 The rule is absolutely stupid. Let me ask you this, when was the last time you remember a player being severely injured on an on-side-kick? exactly what i was thinking Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.