Cory's Corner: Nixon Can Be That Guy Again
The NFL kickoff is about to get interesting again thanks to the new touchback rule.
I wasn’t so sure about the “dynamic kickoff” when the NFL rolled it out in 2024. At first it looked a little clunky as the coverage team lined up on the receiving team’s 40-yard line.
But it worked on two fronts: 1. The NFL is reporting that concussions are down 43 percent on kickoffs — mainly because both sides cannot get a full head of steam to block or tackle and 2. The return rate rose from 21.8 percent to 32.8 percent.
Those numbers tell me that the NFL is committed to the kickoff. When I first saw kickoffs in preseason last year, I thought it was the final chapter before fading away to offenses automatically starting at the 25.
But now with the NFL incentivizing teams to stop booting it into the end zone thanks to the new touchback on the 35-yard line, kick returners will have more of an importance.
And it makes me think that Keisean Nixon is rethinking these words he said at the end of the season. “I’m kind of over it,” he said. “I don’t really want to do it no more. There’s going to be talks with the coaching staff and stuff like that, but I think it’s over with for me.”
Let’s not forget the fact that Nixon was an All-Pro kick returner in 2022 and 2023 for leading the league in kickoff return yards in both years. We all know that he’s electric and is very dynamic with the football.
Now teams have to get more precise with their kickoff approach. Instead of kicking it as hard as possible which usually ends up between the uprights or bouncing in the end zone, kickers will be forced to kick strategically. Obviously, teams will not want the opposition to start at the 35 because that would mean that they would be in field goal range after three first downs.
But is that better than risking someone like Nixon to take it to the house?
I like that the NFL is making an effort to not just keep the kickoff, but they want to make it more interesting. It’s one of the most fun plays in football and nobody wants to see that energy leave the game.
I wasn’t in favor of the stale dynamic kickoff, but with the new tweak, maybe we can see kickoff returners become a weapon again.
Desmond Howard earned himself the Super Bowl MVP because he ran back a kickoff 99 yards in Super Bowl XXXI. Just as the Patriots pulled within six points, Howard delivered the knockout blow.
That’s exactly what Nixon could provide for this team. Now he just needs to believe it for himself.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn
__________________________
Comments (49)
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 06:42 am
Now if they could get a return that isn't called back because of an illegal block we'd be getting somewhere.
Still think that the returning jobs are for the youngsters. Nixon was brought here originally to help the special teams get over the hump and was a backup on D. Now he's a full-time starter and can't be exposed constantly. Maybe every once in a while, like when we need to gamble on field position late in the half or a game and need a field goal.
murf7777
April 08, 2025 at 07:40 am
That’s an interesting take……just use him when it’s a win or lose type of proposition. Good idea!
dobber
April 08, 2025 at 07:51 am
...he's not someone who's used to handling the football on a regular basis as-is. We saw a couple situations in the last year or two where he put the ball on the ground on punts. If he's gonna be your return guy, I want him practicing it all the time. Putting him in situations he's not getting many reps at and saying "go make something happen" is asking for him to put the ball on the ground.
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 08:00 am
Good point. Like our most recent playoff game's opening kick return? They used to say that's why the play DB instead of WR.
BuckyBadger
April 08, 2025 at 08:36 am
DBs do plenty of ball drills and he is a professional football player. If he is doing returns he does reps there and he should be doing them on his own as well. DBs don't get a pass on fumbling the ball on a return anymore than a RB or WR would.
SicSemperTyrannis
April 13, 2025 at 07:59 pm
I question if returner is a position you can turn on and off like that. If you're not doing it all the time, can you achieve peak performance on a one-off?
Specifically with Nixon, not at least trying to run it back absolutely kills him. That's burned him out. He said he's done with it, I think coaches should listen to him until he voluntarily changes his mind on the subject.
Mecole Hardman can do that, as well as sparing #11 from the risk exposure of running end arounds. I'd also love to see RB Loyd used in at least the return role, better yet BOTH. The inherent durability of a RB just makes sense there, and it's a great opportunity for him to both showcase and develop.
PackEyedOptimist
April 08, 2025 at 07:18 am
It seems to me that the changes will increase the value of a dedicated roster spot for someone who has "punt returner skills" but with long speed also.
Obviously, they will ALSO play a position like WR or DB, but their return abilities might be their true roster-spot deciding factor.
I don't know if it pushes the Packers far enough to draft a Matthew Golden, Isaiah Bond, or Jaylin Noel, over a "typical" Packers' receiver, but maybe
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 07:26 am
I think the only time the Packers would draft someone strictly for special teams, is if they need a punter or kicker and I wish that they'd draft a long snapper, but don't think they would and don't remember if they have. I think they try to get them off undrafted free agents except the one they took from the (Rams?).
dobber
April 08, 2025 at 07:48 am
Hunter Bradley (LS) 2018
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 08:03 am
I knew someone would help me out, thanks.
Too bad he couldn't block. Is that why they become long snappers?
Coldworld
April 08, 2025 at 08:01 am
I think that they addressed that option by bringing in Hardman. They also have another smaller returner/receiver on the 90, Tulu Griffin (and may look a UDFAs). As a result, I doubt they draft for it unless it’s a happy coincidence in a player they otherwise like.
dobber
April 08, 2025 at 08:03 am
The question is: do you have room on the active roster for a guy who does nothing but return kicks? I think Hardman at least can help fill the bottom of the WR depth chart.
dobber
April 08, 2025 at 07:43 am
You'd think that in this day and age of modern analytics, stat bureaus could agree on what the touchback pct. is...and certainly AI is awful because it can't get its kickoff numbers to add up to 100%. But following what I could glean with a quick search, touchback numbers league wide look like this in recent years...
2020: 61%
2021: 57%
2022: 64%
2023: 70%
2024: 66%
I tend to agree that if I'm doing the kicking off and if I have a credible defense, I want my defense on the field and not relying on the bottom third of my roster to make a play on a kickoff...so if my kicker can reach the endzone, I want him to do it. Then the rules changed as touchbacks hit a maximum in 2023. That seemed to be what the league wanted, too, as they were paying lip service to minimizing concussions on these plays that seem to have a higher injury rate. But apparently the league can't make up its own mind on this.
I'm going to posit that at this point teams are still trying to figure out what to do with these kickoffs. They really didn't get much of a chance to practice them last offseason. Some teams are better at these returns than others, and any ST coach worth his salt is probably watching a lot of film on those teams to see what they're doing.
That said, it might very well be that Keisean Nixon's style of play doesn't work with the new KO format and he may not be well suited for it. The Packers are giving him $6M AAV (About $7.2M cap hit this season)...starting CB money. With Stokes gone, Nixon was the only returning Packers CB who played in all 17 games last season and played at starting CB level. It's OK by me if he doesn't return kicks, and they've got a pile of RBs and WRs who are used to handling the football who could take on that role.
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 07:54 am
I think the most important thing they need to practice is the kickoff. The Packers were actually pretty good at lofting it up and covering the return but rarely kept it inside the 20 and barely the 30. Need to practice getting down there cause a penalty or get stops. Just protect the ball on returns and don't get penalties regardless of where the offense starts with the ball. Just get the ball and keep it till you get a TD.
Guam
April 08, 2025 at 08:00 am
Didn't they acquire Hardman for this role?
dobber
April 08, 2025 at 08:04 am
He's gotta be able to make the 53. If they draft two WR--and I think they'll pick at least 2--that's no sure thing. Still, in 12 games Hardman returned 20 punts (avg. 10.0) but only 5 KO (avg. 26.3). That balance (more punts than KO) has held true most of his career, and until last season on punts, he hasn't been asked to do a lot of returns over the last 3-4 seasons. I think he's a little bit of a fishing expedition on KOs.
Guam
April 08, 2025 at 08:10 am
Fair point although as a vet Hardman is likely better prepared to survive camp than a day three rookie pick. I hope the Packers spend a day two pick on a WR but I am usually wrong about what the Packers do on draft day.
I suspect Hardman's continued employment in the NFL is going to hinge on his special teams play. If you can't be a successful WR with Patrick Mahomes as your QB, you likely aren't going to shine elsewhere as a WR. Hardman and his agent probably understand this and he will seek every special team's opportunity he can during TC to prove his worth.
GregC
April 08, 2025 at 09:40 am
I don't know how those numbers jibe with Cory's stat about the return rate increasing from 21.8% to 32.8%. But then, kick return stats have always been a mess. For years, I have been a lone voice in the wilderness in saying that kick return average (how far the returner runs with the ball) is irrelevant, because the only thing that matters is what yard line the offense starts on after the kickoff. There is only a loose relationship between those two averages. But do you think anyone has listened to me? No, they have not. I've never been able to find stats for the average starting position of the offense after kickoffs, whether for the kicking team OR the receiving team.
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 10:39 am
Do the stats show if a return was called back by a penalty? I think your starting field position idea is the key. The announcers mention this or that this team has only had 3 plays on their opponents' side of the field type stuff, so you think they'd track that stuff just like a punter that pins the other team inside the 20.
GregC
April 08, 2025 at 11:21 am
I don't know what the stats do with returns that are penalized. Maybe they just throw them out. But those plays matter a lot because they often result in the offense starting around the 10-15 yard line.
I also get peeved when a returner fields the ball in the end zone and gets credit for a long return when he would've been better off taking the touchback.
SicSemperTyrannis
April 13, 2025 at 08:12 pm
Exactly. NET yards is all that matters, but even that is not particularly informative as to an individual returner unless he's the one committing penalties.
The entire industry has a lot of room for improvement in the part of the game, including compiling and reporting stats.
mrtundra
April 08, 2025 at 07:53 am
So , what exactly, is the new kick off rule. Teams get the ball on the 35, if the ball goes into the end zone, or through it? Is that it? If the ball lands on about the 2 yard line, close to the sideline, and the receiving team gets out of bounds and then touches the inbounds ball, while out of bounds, the receiving team gets the ball on the 40. Has that changed?
SicSemperTyrannis
April 13, 2025 at 08:30 pm
Apparently nobody knows.
Hopefully this is not like defining a catch, which proved impossible for several years.
LeotisHarris
April 08, 2025 at 08:29 am
Cory wins the internet for the day for linking to Howard's Super Bowl kickoff return. I've watched it three times and am heading back for more. Watch unsung hero Lamont Hollinquest do all the right things, then turn on the speed. What a team!
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 09:44 am
I'd like the links to all the turnovers, injuries, and penalties that occur on returns.
Bitternotsour
April 08, 2025 at 11:16 am
i'd like to see the data on scoring on drives that start at 30 as opposed to starting at the 35. The numbers just can't justify the risks.
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 11:38 am
I read this a long time ago.
Obviously, the closer you start to the goalline the more often you score. It's a pretty linear relationship.
The AVERAGE punt return is 10 yards, but this is a case where average probably isn't the best measure because one long return can really skew that. You returned 19 punts for 60 yards, but then broke one for 60, and it doubles your average. Probably the mode would be a better measure, and I'd figure the most returns are 6 yards or less.
That's ONE successful offensive play. So, you can trust the bottom of your roster to go out there and get you those 6 yards without turning it over, or taking a penalty that backs us up, or you can put Love & Jacobs on the field and let them try.
There is a phrase "winning the battles but losing the war" that comes to mind when we talk about punt returns. IMO, this would be a battle that should be avoided because there's a lot of things that can go wrong.
I used to feel the same way about kick returns, but these rules changes are making it so you have to return the kick. The other team isn't going to just give you the touchback. The most important thing about returning a kick is that you don't turn it over. Getting out to at least the 20 is good, too. Other than that, just put the offense on the field and let them handle it.
LLCHESTY
April 08, 2025 at 09:38 pm
I proved LH was wrong with stats a couple years ago but he was too stubborn to admit it. This is a different article but:
"When looking at the chart above, with the % of drives ending in points we can see, minus a couple oddities, a clear gradual decrease. With every 5 yards the drive begins with to get to the end zone about a 5% decrease is seen in the ability to convert it into points. Most of the drives start at the 75 yard mark, which makes sense as this is where a drive begins with a touchback, and means when most drives begin during a game they have a 35% chance of converting to points."
The article was on Medium-"The probability of points on drives" by Nick Martin.
There were four punt returners that averaged at least 11.6 yards a return while Jayden Reed averaged 7.9 yards. Figuring that teams average between 9 and 10 drives a game having one of those returners instead of Reed would have led to 4-5 more scoring drives. Not as important as being one of the top teams in converting short yardage situations but still important.
LLCHESTY
April 08, 2025 at 10:10 pm
Here's another good article on the subject. Can't find the points per drive by distance article I found a couple years ago.
https://www. nfeloapp.com/analysis/expected-points-added-epa-nfl/
Bitternotsour
April 08, 2025 at 11:20 am
the simple solution is to stop punting.
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 12:02 pm
Why are you baiting me?
About 10 years ago or so, there were a rash of stories about a guy, Kevin Kelley, who never punted and always attempted onside kicks. It spawned some analyses at various sites, and even some college people wrote statistical summaries based on it.
Every possession is worth X points.(In Green Bay, it's 2.5 points/possession, a pretty good rate.) The theory is that the only thing more important than possession is a TD. Not even FG attempt is worth more than possession.
So if you extend your possessions, it's going reduce the # of possessions for both you and your opponent, so they'll end up scoring LESS. Also, since you will convert some of those 4th downs, you will increase the percentage of drives where you score (GB, 45.9%, 6th in the league)
The downside is that you'll invariably not convert some and you'll turn over the ball on downs and it might be a short field. Last year, the Lions attempted the fewest punts (45) and the Browns attempted the most (89). Most teams punted 3 or 4 times/game
If you have to punt, you should punt it right at the sidelines so there'll be no return. If they want to risk a fumble trying, let them. That Leatherhead Rule #11.
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 02:26 pm
I think what he meant by not punting is that they should just score on every drive. Preferably there would be no 4th down attempts. Just run it 3.35 yards a play and end in a cloud of dust or pellets depending on the surface. Maybe he didn't mean that.
Bitternotsour
April 09, 2025 at 09:10 am
no, i mean stop punting in all but the most extreme circumstances. LaFleur needs to view his offense as a four down offense and call plays accordingly.
GregC
April 08, 2025 at 09:48 am
At least they have moved the touchback spot to the 35-yard line, which is where it needs to be for this kickoff format to make a real difference.
I still need to get used to the new format, though. It's just kind of......weird. The word that comes to mind is "static." Everyone is standing around, and then they don't run very far. The thing that made the old kickoff play dangerous (players running long distances at high speed before colliding) is also what made it exciting. You can't have it both ways, apparently. But maybe I'll get used to the new format after a few years.
LambeauPlain
April 08, 2025 at 09:57 am
Nixon's opinion he does not want to return kicks will only take effect if Hafley tell's LaFleur he wants his CB to concentrate on Defense.
Then it will be up to the Assistant HC and ST Coordinator Bicassia, recently enriched with another salary increase with an extended K, to coach up a replacement.
Given the performance of STs rankings under Bisaccia of 22nd, 29th, and 22nd (last season), this should be an easy task for the specialist guru, right?
Shouldn't there be another article about Hardman's likeliness to "carpe diem" as the new return phenom? OK, I will show myself out.
Guam
April 08, 2025 at 10:18 am
Good chuckle LP! Well done.
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 10:45 am
Don't you think the low standings were based on all the missed kicks by the kickers they were giving tryouts to on game days? Even if Bicassia could only put out the kickers he was supplied with, it's still kind of his fault and I think he did choose a couple of them.
LambeauPlain
April 08, 2025 at 01:42 pm
Penalties and giving up a PR TD didn't help either.
But Rich did lobby for family friend Carlson. After that failed, he had high praise for the Packers getting Narveson, saying he was a kicker he had been keeping an eye on.
McManus has been a game changer, but he wasn't due to Rich. Had McManus not had an off field, er I mean an "in air issue", he'd never have become a Packer. Gutey even stated it was the only reason the kicker was available.
For what Rich is paid, he should have Teams performing as a top unit in all phases. Status quo.
FITZCORE1252
April 09, 2025 at 01:50 pm
There is no K in contract.
SicSemperTyrannis
April 13, 2025 at 08:37 pm
Sad news that RB got both extended and a raise :/
He has not lived up to his contract so far, so let's chase good money after bad.
BRILLIANT!
Alberta_Packer
April 08, 2025 at 11:03 am
Due to the principle of self-preservation - it seems Nixon doesn't want to be that guy again. He has already been in the League for 6 years - starting his career as a UDFA on Special Teams. So a lot of high collision contact over the years. At some point - neither the body or the mind want to do it anymore. Nor should the Packers expose their CB 1/2 to any additional risk(s).
Lphill
April 08, 2025 at 11:25 am
didn't Nixon fumble in the Eagles playoff game?
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 01:44 pm
Yes, but we're not going to talk about that. Yes, the hit should have been penalized, IMO, but it wasn't and it gave the Eagles an early 7 points. They finished with 22.
I've been paying attention to this for a long time, and I'm firm in my belief that you shouldn't return anything you don't have to, you should punt less than we do, and punt at the sidelines to prevent returns.
Imagine going through an entire season without a single turnover on special teams, or a single penalty, or a single injury. Not a single punt got returned. 0 yards.
T7Steve
April 08, 2025 at 02:29 pm
Not only was that not penalized, but he recovered his own fumble, and it was ignored.
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 02:50 pm
Agreed. We got screwed. It reminds me of that summer day, over a half-century ago, when the beautiful Evil Eve smiled at me and said "Life is a shit sandwich, eat it or starve". I can still picture her walking away. It was quite the view.
I guess I'm different because I just expect to get boned by the refs. Football, basketball, baseball...whatever. I could tell you stories.
So yeah, it's part of doing business. It's like hitting yourself on the thumb when you're doing a big job with a hammer and nails....it's kind of inevitable. You will get screwed. LIfe is not fair.
GregC
April 08, 2025 at 02:48 pm
It seems paradoxical that you recommend not returning punts while you also recommend punting out of bounds to prevent returns. Why are you so afraid of the other team returning punts when you don't want your own team to return punts?
And why has there never been a single coach in college or pro football, as far as I know, who has adopted this approach? I get that you want to avoid catastrophic mistakes, but you are overlooking the slow accumulation of positive yards that occurs when you seek to maximize the potential to gain yards on punts and punt returns. If you are sacrificing, say, 5-10 yards on every special teams play in order to play it safe, this can add up during the course of a game, with worse field position eventually leading to loss of scoring opportunities on offense and more scoring opportunities for the opposing team.
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 03:04 pm
Yes. I understand the conflict. I don't want to pay the price of returning punts in the form of penalties, injuries, and turnovers. I also think it's non-sensical to put the bottom of your roster out there and give them a chance to give up 7 points.
There has been a coach in college who essentially Never Punts. His name is Kelley, and you can Google him if you type in Kelley Never Punt.
Let me share this with you on the subject of punt returns:
The average team returned 27 punts last year. That's about 1 1/2 a game. 15 years ago, the average team returned 36 punts. So coaches are moving in my direction on this.
This notion of surrendering 5 yards on two plays, in order to prevent a long, game-changing return, is worth it. On offense, I'll take the fair catch and put my offense on the field. You're talking about the distance of ONE successful play, on two separate possessions.
I guarantee you, someday you'll see an analytical approach to this and the coaches will not return punts or kicks they don't have to, and they will simply punt the ball to the sidelines to eliminate the return.
Do me a favor. This season, every game, write down what happens on every punt. Then at the end of the season, tell me what you think. Look at the returns....most of which are only a few steps.....and balance them out against the turnovers, penalties, and injuries. Let me know what you think.
GregC
April 08, 2025 at 03:44 pm
Assuming your numbers are correct, that is an interesting trend. I suspect it's mostly due to punting teams putting a greater emphasis on hangtime, rather than a change in decision-making by teams that receive punts. Seems like there is a lower percentage of returnable punts nowadays.
SicSemperTyrannis
April 13, 2025 at 09:19 pm
Do the math:
your predicted 5-10 yard gain
vs
loss due to penalty (could zero that out or worse)
return for TD or even just terrible field position
injury.
Risk / reward ratio just isn't favorable. Yes, a long return is a very exciting play to watch, sometimes the best of a game, season, or decade. Even there the total points scored in a season per player or team doesn't change the risk / reward ratio. Now factor in that we're stuck with a ST coach in Rich Bisaccia who is at best bottom third in the league, and who has shown 0 acumen for adjusting to rules changes. In fairness, most ST coaches haven't figured out how to be successful with it yet, either.
Certainly I'd prefer shopping for a brilliant leader in this league wide power vacuum and it seems inevitable that some team will benefit from that. Since we obviously don't have that, reducing the risk seems like an appropriate approach. And RB's salary doesn't count against the cap so it probably doesn't affect the team at all (?)