The Rest of College Football

[Jamie H]

The pros should definitely do that. I wouldn't be against it in college, but it would make being a kicker on a good team really boring.

[SeanB]

I always thought it would be way more fun if the guy who scored the TD had to attempt the kick.

Probably not too safe for the holder, though!

[lineygoblue]

Here's some ideas I've had.

1. Kickoff is an elective situation. You can kick as usual, or give the receiving team the ball on their own 25. Or, if its a situation where you want to "onside', you can do that. Clock starts on the ensuing snap.

2. If your offense crosses the 50 yard line, a punt becomes elective. You can "elect" to "PLACE" instead of PUNT, which will give the receiving team the ball on their own 15 yard line. Or, you can actually punt, to try and pin them deeper. If you do NOT cross the 50 yard line, you must punt as usual. Clock starts on the READY FOR PLAY.

3. FG's should be ascending by yardage, from the SPOT OF THE KICK. From inside the 20 its only 2 points. inside the 50, its 3. Outside the 50, its 4. That puts some strategy and risk into place kicking.

There is a lot of sentiment in HS ball about eliminating all or parts of the kicking game. Studies have shown, that there are more serious injuries on special teams, than in any other part of the game. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like these changes in the not too distant future, at least at the HS level.

I always thought it would be way more fun if the guy who scored the TD had to attempt the kick.

I think this is an excellent idea. But I'd add that the kick would be a free kick, from outside the 20 yard line, on the same angle that he entered the endzone. For instance, if he went into the endzone in the corner, the officials would spot the ball at the 20, on a straight line back from where he entered the endzone. On a pass reception, a straight line back to the 20 from where the ball was caught.

[Wild Hoss]

3. FG's should be ascending by yardage, from the SPOT OF THE KICK. From inside the 20 its only 2 points. inside the 50, its 3. Outside the 50, its 4. That puts some strategy and risk into place kicking.

I've had similar thoughts before, and while the particulars might be tinkered with I think its a really good idea. It would radically change late-game strategic thinking.

[WM Wolverine]

Average starting distance after kickoffs is like the 30, that is about the minimum 'elective' spot you could start the opposition. 35 is more what I had in mind...

I hate kickoffs myself and wouldn't mind never seeing them again. Punts after kickoffs probably shouldn't be 'defended' (attempted to block). Or how about we just go back to the old rules where you keep the ball after you score. ;)

[Jamie H]

I can see getting rid of them in High School. But once you get to college, I think you just leave things alone.

I'm trying to remember--how many kids has Michigan had seriously injured on kickoffs? I remember serious injuries like Dadrian Taylor and Justin Fargas and Tripp Wellbourne, and Justin Feagan, but I believe they were all hurt on regular plays.

[Jamie H]

Getting rid of kickoffs means you get rid of one of the most exciting plays in football, which is the kickoff return for a TD. I think that would stink.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Isn't that the rugby rule for point after tries?

[Jamie H]

Yep. It will never happen in American Football. But in rugby it is fun watching guys run around IN the end zone trying to get a better placement for the extra-point. In rugby it isn't a "touch-down" until you touch the ball down on the ground. Hence the name. The name really only makes sense in rugby.

[amaizenblue]

Er, I thought in rugby it was called a "try" not a touchdown.

[Jamie H]

Whoops, looks like I'm wrong. From Wikipedia:

In the laws of both forms of rugby, the term touch down formally refers only to grounding the ball by the defensive team in their in-goal. Although occasionally people refer to a try as a 'touchdown', the correct usage for the action is 'grounding the ball'.

Dunno who told me that, but I guess I shouldn't have believed them. It made so much sense I didn't question it! The term "touchdown" is used in rugby, but not the way I thought it was.

Here is the real reason for the term "touchdown" in American football, again from Wikipedia. Looks like it was originally a derivative of the rugby rules.

When the touchdown was introduced into American football in 1876, it did not award a score; instead, it only allowed the offense the chance to kick for goal by placekick from a spot along a line perpendicular to the goal line and passing through the point where the ball was touched down, or through a process known as a "punt-out", where the attacking team would kick the ball from the point where it was touched down to a teammate. If the teammate could fair catch the ball, he could follow with a try for goal from the spot of the catch, or resume play as normal (in an attempt to touchdown the ball in a spot more advantageous for kicking).

[Ghengis Jon]

Best way to improve the game of football, imo, is to radically reduce the number of tv timeouts. Us old pharts remember what its like to see a game that wasn't broadcast on tv. Smooth and flowing, where momentum ebbs and flows almost visibly. The last home game that wasn't broadcast on ANY tv was a Purdue game in the early 90's, I think. I remember the crowd bursting into laughter when the stadium announcer said, "There'll be a break for a <long pause> RAY-DEE-OH timeout..."

I'd limit tv timeouts to one per quarter, say at the first change of possession after the 7:30 mark of the quarter. Now if there's an injury timeout, fine, try and squeeze a comercial in there too. Use the change of quarters for commercials. Let tv hammer halftime with ads as well. They don't broadcast the halftime shows any more so inane corporate drivel would be no worse than the current inane talking head drivel. Drasticly reducing the number of tv timeouts would proportionally improve the game experience. Plus it would return the game to a point where it no longer would be just 4 plays, timeout, 5 plays, timeout, measure for a 1st down, timeout...

[Jamie H]

Problem is, TV ads pay for the entire sport of college football now.

[Mackenzie]

Ditto and as we all know... money makes the world go round. Also, regards half-time, I do enjoy seeing some of the bands perform, even if it is for just a bit, and think it's a nice reward for the band members who work so hard during the year.

[Jamie H]

Jon, regarding half-time ads, the problem is, no advertisers WANT the halftime ads (or at least they don't want them as much), because they know that is when people go away from the game for a while to watch something else, get some food, go to the bathroom, etc. Advertisers want time DURING the game.