Onside kick it to start OT.

I'm imagining a scenario like the Super Bowl against the Packers. We were not stopping that offense. If it went to overtime and Green Bay won the toss then I think the best chance to win would be an onside kick.

 

Interesting thought. But like going on 4th down more often it trying 2pt conversions more often - statistical evidence may indicate an advantage to being more aggressive, but coaches are loathe to take tisks with limited upside, but potentially catastrophic downsides.

Case in point, when did the Steelers cool their jets about aggressively going for 2? Right after the Dallas game where they were 0-4 on two point tries. The Steelers had been aggressive and successful prior to that, but the advantage was only 1-2 pts a yr. Nothing compared to reaction of an irate fan base that thinks the game was lost in part to excessive aggression on 2pt tries.

 

If there is a week spot in the rule Belecheat would have already tried it .

 

I'd actually be more surprised if a Google search produced a 60% accurate answer.

 

Not only this but how do the new kickoff rules affect onside kicks where everyone now seems to be required to look like statues until the kicker has actually booted the ball. Is all that phony baloney sideways shifting still allowed? Even if they are allowed to run around like a you know what fire drill they will now be 5 yds back from where they used to be able to be when the ball was first touched by the kicker. I think HAL needs to recompute the odds of success given the rule change.

 

What happens if we do an onside kick and the other team recovers it? That will count as our possession and now a FG by them would win it.

 

The question there would be - does our onside kick result in an 'opportunity to possess" for us?

 

No, it does not count as an opportunity to possess for the kicking team. That is one of the main reasons it would make sense. Even if not recovered a FG will not beat the kicking team as they will still get a chance to respond.

 

It doesn't make sense..... look at more recent stats, not some google study from 2009. So in 2015 there were 67 attempts and 10 recoveries.... you would be at 60% if 3 out of 5 were 'surprise' onside kicks..... but once you 'surprise' once... it's over, you'll have tape and skepticism on every kick for the rest of the year..... so the element of surprise would be gone..... so why waste that on week 1?

I seriously doubt the accuracy of the stats..... let's not forget, they eliminated the overloading one side of the kick team a while back.

 

Where is that written?

 

I wasn't advocating doing it in the last game necessarily. AS I mentioned in another post I was thinking of a situation where we are facing a potent offense that our D had trouble stopping. It seems like in that situation it would be a really good move. As you said it would work once and then teams would be expecting it, although thatmight at least make it harder for them to block for a good return.

 

If you read what Thigpen quoted as an opportunity to possess it follows that a failed onside kick is not an opportunity to possess by the kicking team. Also I just found this which indicates the same: https://www.denverpost.com/2015/09/...-in-nfl-isnt-so-dumb/?productCode=WebAccessSP