Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

You can not defend the onside kick

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:17 pm
  • With the new 2018 rules, the sudden onside kick will never work.

    https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/09/07/nfl-k ... -clarified

    Here are the rules so the sudden onside kick will always go into the "set up zone" that means the other team is ALWAYS WATCHING YOU!!!! The old way players on the receiving team would just turn their backs to the kicking team and run back to set up the blocks. That is not how kickoffs are done anymore, the receiving team now stands and watches the kicking team to follow their assignment through the "set up zone" to block them in the hitting zone.

    Long story short old man Pete forgot about the new rules. That is on the special team's coach to say "That doesn't work anymore with the new rules."
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2444
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 7:17 pm
  • I think he was pretty much going for the surprise. That part was good. Unfortunately, it wasn't a very good kick. Risky play call that didn't work. Knowing the stats on Sea-bass now makes it look really bad.
    MD5eahawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 991
    Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:10 pm
    Location: Baltimore, Maryland


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:00 pm
  • MD5eahawks wrote:I think he was pretty much going for the surprise. That part was good. Unfortunately, it wasn't a very good kick. Risky play call that didn't work. Knowing the stats on Sea-bass now makes it look really bad.



    You're missing the point you can't surprise them anymore the receiving team is always watching the kicking team with the new rules.
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2444
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:28 pm
  • They sure surprised everybody else. I’d be willing to bet you weren’t expecting it. I get it that it’s harder to do now but maybe that’s why they did it.
    I guess I didn’t notice that they never used to watch the kicking team until the rules were changed.
    MD5eahawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 991
    Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:10 pm
    Location: Baltimore, Maryland


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:31 pm
  • It was a bad call but it's not the reason Seattle lost.
    Northwest Seahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1244
    Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 4:10 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:33 pm
  • 0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 13356
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:37 pm
  • Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?

    And that’s probably the reasoning right there. Hence the surprise.
    MD5eahawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 991
    Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:10 pm
    Location: Baltimore, Maryland


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:38 pm
  • It was yet another head scratcher by Carroll. Guess he didnt think the d could stop them. It did cause them to lose the game imo.
    Cyrus12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6581
    Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:20 am
    Location: BC Canada


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:44 pm
  • I just don't know what makes them think that they are competent enough to try it.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3869
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:45 pm
  • Cyrus12 wrote:It was yet another head scratcher by Carroll. Guess he didnt think the d could stop them. It did cause them to lose the game imo.

    While I didn’t necessarily agree with it, I don’t think it lost the game. Defense lost the game. They had no answer for the crossing routes.
    MD5eahawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 991
    Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:10 pm
    Location: Baltimore, Maryland


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 9:04 pm
  • KitsapGuy
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 5556
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:09 pm
    Location: Kitsap County


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 9:16 pm
  • With the new rules, it will fail 99.99% of the time. It will only work if the other player tries to run with the ball and fumbles it. The kick coverage unit doesn't get a running start anymore so they can't cover that ground as fast as they used to. The receiving tram no longer turns their back to the kicking team so they will ALWAYS SEE THE SHORT KICK. The rules changed it is dumb to even waste practice time on it.
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2444
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 9:31 pm
  • It's pretty easy to defend because our defense was getting shredded. Even if the chance of success was very low, so was our chance of stopping them from bringing the ball back to midfield. Maybe one is 10% and one is 15% but without having a time machine and the 1.21 gigawatts necessary to power it then it's all just conjecture as to which was better. For all we know, we were better off with this outcome because they scored in less time than they would have if we kicked it away.

    In general, it is smart for underdogs to seek risk in order to maximize their chances of an upset.
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3725
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 10:02 pm
  • Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?


    Yeah, except for that one in January 2015.

    Quick to forget.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1682
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 7:06 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Sun Nov 11, 2018 10:02 pm
  • AgentDib wrote:It's pretty easy to defend because our defense was getting shredded. Even if the chance of success was very low, so was our chance of stopping them from bringing the ball back to midfield. Maybe one is 10% and one is 15% but without having a time machine and the 1.21 gigawatts necessary to power it then it's all just conjecture as to which was better. For all we know, we were better off with this outcome because they scored in less time than they would have if we kicked it away.

    In general, it is smart for underdogs to seek risk in order to maximize their chances of an upset.



    In 2017 I agree because it could work. In 2018 and beyond it will never work the rules are fundamentally changed.
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2444
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:09 am
  • NINEster wrote:
    Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?


    Yeah, except for that one in January 2015.

    Quick to forget.

    The stat is in reference to Janikowski, not the Seahawks.
    bigskydoc
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2530
    Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:27 am
    Location: Kalispell, MT


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:08 am
  • bigskydoc wrote:
    NINEster wrote:
    Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?


    Yeah, except for that one in January 2015.

    Quick to forget.

    The stat is in reference to Janikowski, not the Seahawks.



    Oh ok.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1682
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 7:06 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:19 am
  • Yeah, they were playing a great game all day. Then they call that crap. ZERO excuse for trying that, let alone giving that offense a short field. You also can't defend then not rolling Russ out more and trying to make him Tom Brady sitting in the pocket :roll:
    Look, I like Pete, but him and his coaching staff have been outcoached in the 4th quarter in just about every loss this year.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11948
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:33 am
  • Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?


    I really think Pete was thinking our defense can't stop a long sustained time eating clock drive, so let's try the onside kick. If we get it great, but if not hopefully we can hold them to a FG, leave time on the clock and win it at the end of the game. And it almost worked.
    nwHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1142
    Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:14 am


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:01 am
  • sdog1981 wrote:With the new rules, it will fail 99.99% of the time. It will only work if the other player tries to run with the ball and fumbles it. The kick coverage unit doesn't get a running start anymore so they can't cover that ground as fast as they used to. The receiving tram no longer turns their back to the kicking team so they will ALWAYS SEE THE SHORT KICK. The rules changed it is dumb to even waste practice time on it.


    I brought this up a week ago. Sadly Pete didn't get the "newsflash". :roll: Even knowing the new rules making it more difficult, I don't believe Pete is even aware of how historically bad SeaBass is at attempting them. :pukeface:
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6464
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:38 am
  • Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?


    This is the part of the equation for me that I don't get.

    I have no problem with the call. Your defense hasn't stopped the Ram's offense all day, you just scored a FG and don't want to give the ball back............but there's no way Pete can trust Seabass to execute the onside when he's 0 for his career on onside kicks. I don't care if he executed it in practice all week..........he stinks at it. Didn't even get the damn kick 10 yards.
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 14691
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:40 am
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Aros wrote:0-25 in onside kicks. What part of that stat makes you feel confident that THIS time it will work?


    This is the part of the equation for me that I don't get.

    I have no problem with the call. Your defense hasn't stopped the Ram's offense all day, you just scored a FG and don't want to give the ball back............but there's no way Pete can trust Seabass to execute the onside when he's 0 for his career on onside kicks. I don't care if he executed it in practice all week..........he stinks at it. Didn't even get the damn kick 10 yards.


    There are lot of things this team does out of seeming necessity that it doesn't usually do because of aptitude.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3869
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:52 am
  • They practiced it, and it was apparently working enough in practice to gamble on the opportunity.

    Attempting the onside kick when it is less anticipated does increase the odds of success. The Rams didn't have their "hands team" in there. Had the onside kick not been badly shanked, maybe they would have had a successful recovery -- which would have been a game-changing play and the equivalent of a turnover.

    You also have to factor in the way that the Rams were moving the ball with relevant ease into the red zone. They very well could have still ended up with a field goal (or worse, a TD, in certain hypothetical scenarios). And the Rams would have probably taken more time off the clock.

    It was unconventional and a sad testament to how little resistance the defense was mustering, until the Rams reached the red zone, where there was less space for their offense to exploit.
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3082
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:21 am
  • hawknation2018 wrote:They practiced it, and it was apparently working enough in practice to gamble on the opportunity.

    Attempting the onside kick when it is less anticipated does increase the odds of success. The Rams didn't have their "hands team" in there. Had the onside kick not been badly shanked, maybe they would have had a successful recovery -- which would have been a game-changing play and the equivalent of a turnover.

    You also have to factor in the way that the Rams were moving the ball with relevant ease into the red zone. They very well could have still ended up with a field goal (or worse, a TD, in certain hypothetical scenarios). And the Rams would have probably taken more time off the clock.

    It was unconventional and a sad testament to how little resistance the defense was mustering, until the Rams reached the red zone, where there was less space for their offense to exploit.


    The element of surprise doesn't turn something with a 10% chance of working into a 60% chance of working (5000 basis points!). Whatever amount you think surprise adds to the chances, start really really low on the initial chance.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3869
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 9:47 am
  • mrt144 wrote:
    hawknation2018 wrote:They practiced it, and it was apparently working enough in practice to gamble on the opportunity.

    Attempting the onside kick when it is less anticipated does increase the odds of success. The Rams didn't have their "hands team" in there. Had the onside kick not been badly shanked, maybe they would have had a successful recovery -- which would have been a game-changing play and the equivalent of a turnover.

    You also have to factor in the way that the Rams were moving the ball with relevant ease into the red zone. They very well could have still ended up with a field goal (or worse, a TD, in certain hypothetical scenarios). And the Rams would have probably taken more time off the clock.

    It was unconventional and a sad testament to how little resistance the defense was mustering, until the Rams reached the red zone, where there was less space for their offense to exploit.


    The element of surprise doesn't turn something with a 10% chance of working into a 60% chance of working (5000 basis points!). Whatever amount you think surprise adds to the chances, start really really low on the initial chance.


    Maybe it adds 5%? Number pulled from my backside. So let’s say there was a 15% chance to successfully execute the onside kick that they practiced. They knew the Rams would probably move the ball as well or better than they did in their last meeting at CenturyLink.

    I would guess that the Rams had a greater than 35% chance to advance the ball to midfield, regardless. Such a drive would have drained more time off the clock. It would have further depleted an already tired defense. Those are all factors to consider.

    In the end, it was a desperation move that was not executed as practiced.
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3082
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:00 pm
  • Basically what others have said - either we hold the Rams to a field goal or a touchdown, because we hadn't stopped them all game. Give them the length of the field and it's just more opportunity for them to consume time. If they score a TD, game's effectively over anyway. if we keep them to a field goal, we get the ball with time on the clock and have a chance.

    As far as the rules go, there is one that needs to change for onside kicks. Currently the fair catch rule bars the kicking team from interfering with the path of the ball in the event a fair catch is called, as well as the receiver having his bubble of protection. They need to allow the kicking team to compete for the football even if a fair catch is called by the receiving team. That would make the drop-kick kickoff far more effective as it's easy to get height under the ball and allow both sides to compete for the kickoff.
    KiwiHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2302
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 3:22 pm
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:05 pm
  • KitsapGuy wrote:


    Maybe Pete Carroll should look closely at the rule changes and also SeaBass's history of choking under pressure of OSK's. Hell, did Pete see last weeks attempt?

    That was a dumb ass gamble with ZERO upside and shows no confidence in your ability to stop the opponent. :141847_bnono:
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6464
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Nov 12, 2018 1:07 pm
  • Just a plain stupid decision. ZERO excuse for calling that crap.
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11948
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:58 am
  • Seymour wrote:
    KitsapGuy wrote:


    Maybe Pete Carroll should look closely at the rule changes and also SeaBass's history of choking under pressure of OSK's. Hell, did Pete see last weeks attempt?

    That was a dumb ass gamble with ZERO upside and shows no confidence in your ability to stop the opponent. :141847_bnono:

    Yeah Pete, that's what I think when I'm 150 yards away from the green . I need a high ball with a slight fade and drop right on the green. That's the way it worked at the driving range. Put a 100 bucks on it!
    had2bhawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 202
    Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:44 am
    Location: Portlandia


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Thu Nov 15, 2018 10:32 am
  • KitsapGuy wrote:


    No kidding!
    jammerhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 5899
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:58 am
  • Apparently Chicago disagrees with the ZERO chance. Yes, the percentage for success has been decreased. But it is still a possibility to pull it off.
    MD5eahawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 991
    Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:10 pm
    Location: Baltimore, Maryland


Re: You can not defend the onside kick
Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:05 am
  • The big reason they work less often really doesn't have a lot to do with the receiving team. The real problem with the new rules is that on onside kicks the kicking team no longer gets a running start. This means the receiving team gets almost a full second to get on the ball. Unless they fumble it or something, not much chance for the kicking team to get there.

    :229031_shrug:
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 16086
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Kent, WA




It is currently Tue May 21, 2019 9:23 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online