Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

someone explain the kickoff election with :01


PhillyB

Recommended Posts

The fair catch kick is considered to be obscure and unusual, and it is only rarely used. Because most fair catches are made well out of field goal range, and in most cases a team that has a fair catch within theoretical range will attempt a normal drive to score a touchdown, the fair catch kick is most viable to use when a team has fair caught within field goal range and there is insufficient time to score a touchdown. At the professional level, the last successful fair catch kick was made in 1976.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So from my understanding, if you fair catch a punt with time left on the clock, you can choose to kick a field goal from that spot with no rush. So, since you have to have 11 v 11, it's essentially just a kickoff look. If it's short, like a normal FG, it can be returned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SgtJoo said:

The fair catch kick is considered to be obscure and unusual, and it is only rarely used. Because most fair catches are made well out of field goal range, and in most cases a team that has a fair catch within theoretical range will attempt a normal drive to score a touchdown, the fair catch kick is most viable to use when a team has fair caught within field goal range and there is insufficient time to score a touchdown. At the professional level, the last successful fair catch kick was made in 1976.

Good detail on how the rule works. Now why the hell is the rule there? What's the carrot and what's the stick (as they say)? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I didnt know about this, but I think it might become more common just thinking about it.  With how strong kickers legs are getting, you give them a kick with no one in front of you, a 70 yarder might even happen.  Let's say down by 2, get the ball back with 1:30 to go at your 40, it might not be the worst idea.  Slye had more than enough distance from the 50, if practiced it might be more feasible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_catch_kick

I wrote the article on Wiki about this and it's a good read, but the basics:

1) After ANY fair catch, you can attempt an uncontested field goal from the spot of the kick. This can even be done if you fair catch with zero seconds left.

2) It's essentially a kickoff, but you have to use a holder; it's worth three points if you make it, like any other field goal.

3) The defense cannot rush but they can return the kick, like any other type of kick.

4) This has not been successfully made since the 70s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Brother you've been WR driven for going on almost two decades now.  No need for us to discuss further.
    • First, apologies @MHS831, I know you began this about tackles, and it was good. But... Frank, your post is just another Bryce sucks post. You obviously believe, like your buddy, that if we draft a WR it's all about evaluating Bryce Young or coddling Bryce Young. In short, it would be about improving the damned team. If anything, if Bryce is as destined to fail (or is already a failure right now... irredeemable), then another playmaker at WR would just seal the envelope and send him on his way. In my world, that's a good thing.  If some of you think that Bryce is a lame duck, then why wouldn't you want to set the offense up for the next QB to come in and be dropped into the offense to have success? Or, maybe you think it's all a moot point anyway because Tepper sucks, Dan Morgan sucks, Canales sucks, Ejiro sucks, Brandt Tilis sucks---everybidy sucks! If that's the case, then why does anyone care who or what we draft? Obviously some of you have all the answers and can run a gotdamn franchise better than the FO does now.
    • Yeah man, idk. I’m not super big on looking at the position group overall and damning the group. I’ll do the same with less words for WR. I think Proctor is the ultimate fit because he could be your future left or right tackle or left or right guard. Guys a starter, how much Zavala, Christensen, Curhan, and Corbett did we see last year again? Mauigoa will not be there when we pick, but you take him for the same reason you take Proctor minus maybe the LT. Freeling *could* be an upgrade at LT for the future. You don’t take Miller or Iheanahor because the position flexibility isn’t there, likely RT only guys. Those Utah guys are light in the ass, don’t want. Now I do WR. All extremely unproductive when compared to previous Round 1 WR. Tate- Gone Lemon- Complete player, not a burner, would take at 19 Tyson- Made of glass, Colorado washout  Cooper- Not the best hands. Like 300 of his yards were lucky ass stumble blooper looking poo. Bernard gives you similar but better in the 2nd. KC- Slaps then catches the ball. Lightning fast for about 20 yards. Good return man. poo QBs probably more to unlock. Would take at 19 if Proctor, Freeling, Lemon were gone. Washington guy- Lumbers, the smoothness Canales hyped for TMac, not there with him. We need a different style player.    
×
×
  • Create New...