Saturday, December 8, 2012

Eliminating kickoffs makes no sense

Roger Goodell recently said he is open to eliminating kickoffs in a Time magazine interview that hits shelves this week. 

While it can be said that the move is a measure to promote safety of players, his replacement for the kickoff is sure to cause a stir with diehard football fans. 

Goodell said, via an article by Sports Illustrated, he is considering adding another offensive chance for the team that scored. 

What this means is that if the Green Bay Packers scored, the offense would get the ball back on their own 30-yard line and have one shot to gain 15 yards or to punt. 

If the team makes it, it gets a new set of downs, and the other team's defense remains on the field. If it fails, there is no explanation to what happens, but I would guess that the other team gets the ball where you are stopped.

This might bode well for teams like the Packers with a quarterback like Aaron Rodgers who makes 15-yard completions in his sleep, but most teams would punt to avoid giving the other team a chance to score.

But does eliminating kickoffs really help with safety? What about the defenses? 

If a team finally scores on the Baltimore Ravens, makes it a 10-7 game and then gets the ball back, the Ravens defense now has to be on the field even longer. 

And what happens to defenses when they are on the field too long? Injuries. 

Eliminating kickoffs might limit athletes colliding at high speeds but it adds more chances on the defensive side. 

And the added insult to defenders is just one aspect of this that doesn't make any sense. 

The move would also eliminate onside kicks and, while the added offensive opportunity is like an onside kick, teams would actually be in a tougher position to comeback with only one shot to gain 15 yards. 

Not to mention that teams that employ several special team players would need to overhaul their rosters, with kickoff specialists a thing of the past and the need for a Devin Hester-type player lower on the list.   

Despite the oddity of the change, Goodell backed up his claims in the interview. He said he doesn't do anything just for the press time.

"I don't do things for public relations," Goodell said in the interview. "I do things because they're the right thing to do because I love the game."

Well, Mr. Goodell, if 

"I don't do things for public relations," Goodell said in the interview. "I do things because they're the right thing to do, because I love the game."
Well Mr. Goodell, if you really loved the game, you would realize that this isn't the right thing to do. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive