onside kicks

[orangeCougar]

When did onside kicks become routine after a score, like a lot of teams do now? Seems like you're giving away half the field every time, and lots of teams are doing it .
(in the East , anyway)

 

[ModeratorMike]

We did an onside kick almost every time we kicked back in the late 90s. That might've had to do with the fact that our defense wasn't great and we were almost always trailing in games, though.

 

[Tigerfan85]

Everyone has an opinion about this. Generally it’s a team doesn’t have a great kicker so they go with the onside and try to get the recovery. Others say when opposing team has a guy that is a speedster they will do the onside. I’m not for the onside personally but I get the arguments. I have seen the kids in youth programs learning to kick and how that’s carried on into high school and having a kicker who can kick it out of the end zone. Which is ideally what ya want. And then there’s the coaches that just like to roll the dice even if they have a good kicker. I spoke to a coach a few years ago that said they recovered almost 40% of the time. That seems really high to me but hey I’m just a fan.

 

[tonylogsdon]

I understand the fear behind overusing onside kicks. It is just too important to have good special teams not to try to have good ones. That isn’t a side quest. That’s where the yard line is set. Its touchdowns or stopping them. It’s blocking two or four points. It’s making two or four points. Neither offense or defense is going to matter for the vast majority of small 11 and 6 man schools if they are always behind because their special teams hurt the effort. They just don’t have the talent to overcome those setbacks. Relying on onside kicks is just a visible symptom of a much deeper lack of overall training strategy in my eyes. Just like not making extra points or ever blocking them. That’s my opinion, right or wrong. It may not be always true but very often it is.

 

[Texlonghorn75]

I was surprised how much teams rely on onside kicks the last twenty years. From what I have witnessed, coaches normally go with the onside when they have a poor tackling team and the players fail to rally to the ball and make timely stops. Making the receiving team chase a wounded duck bouncing randomly gives the kickoff team a better chance to make a tackle or even recover the ball. On the other hand, a dominant team will kick onside when they determine the opposition isn't good on returns.

 

[Lightnin52]

Two years ago our team would steal at least 3 possessions per game with the onside kick. So I can see teams taking advantage of it to end games sooner

 

[Coach Linman]

I always felt like it was a chance to steal a possession. If I can recover 1 or 2 a game, that can potentially turn into a 24 point swing. Field position doesn't matter much in the six man game in my opinion just like stats don't matter much. Not much difference if i am defending at the 20 or the 40. What matters is number of possessions and number of defensive stops and stealing a possession or two can make a big difference. And you better make your EP kicks and block a few of theirs.

 

[Lightnin52]

I always felt like it was a chance to steal a possession. If I can recover 1 or 2 a game, that can potentially turn into a 24 point swing. Field position doesn't matter much in the six man game in my opinion just like stats don't matter much. Not much difference if i am defending at the 20 or the 40. What matters is number of possessions and number of defensive stops and stealing a possession or two can make a big difference. And you better make your EP kicks and block a few of theirs.

When you've got Rendon and Heflin going for that ball they got you three or four each game

 

[freeagent]

If I have a kicker who can boom the ball out of the end zone for a touchback, I think I'd kick it deep every time.

But it was pointed out that in 11-man, on kickoffs, your players have about an 11-yard wide "lane" to defend. In 6-man, that lane extends out to closer to 20-yards. Plus, in 6-man. chances are one broken tackle means a touchdown, well, putting the ball on the ground to either reduce any return or get a turnover is a safer option.

 

[tonylogsdon]

I always felt like it was a chance to steal a possession. If I can recover 1 or 2 a game, that can potentially turn into a 24 point swing. Field position doesn't matter much in the six man game in my opinion just like stats don't matter much. Not much difference if i am defending at the 20 or the 40. What matters is number of possessions and number of defensive stops and stealing a possession or two can make a big difference. And you better make your EP kicks and block a few of theirs.

If you have a team with talent yes. Most have one or two at best though. I’ve watched multiple games lost because of them. I’ve seen 6 returned for scores by a team that was not nearly as good as the kicking team and that kicking team lose the game. I’ve seen mediocre teams hang with much more talented teams because of them. I’m no fan of it at all when used habitually or by any non-talent packed team.

 

[Ilovefridaynights]

Motley co started doing it when Coach Bigham got to Motley co in 06. He likes to get the best hitters on the field to hit the person about to catch the ball

 

[Leman Saunders]

Early 2000s I would say.

In the mid-late 1990s I would argue a majority of teams kicked deep most of the time.

 

[Steele]

For me, the kick returner matters. If we can't kick it out of the endzone and the other team's best open field runner is the returner, that matters. Coaches work all week to limit the amount of touches the best offensive player from the other team gets in space so I don't want to give that kid a freebie on a deep kick. I would love to get an onside or 2 back but if I'm limiting the amount of touches your best kid gets in space that is reason enough for me.