I agree with both of those criticisms. Those two arguments are weak.
But the other arguments are good enough, imo. Throw out those two bad arguments and there is still enough there to convince me.
I mean...yes, the KO can be exciting. I don't agree with that criticism. But the Schiano version replaces that with another exciting situation...one that is less dangerous, and puts the ball in the hands of the starters. And the lack of grace in the onside kick is...silly. It's an exciting play.
To me the compelling arguments are that the KO is basically pointless since it doesn't matter much where you get the ball to start with, and the high injury rate. So it becomes a question of what it accomplishes...and the Schiano proposal accomplishes the best features of the KO as well, maybe even better.
