NCAA Clock-Rule Proposals

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

 

1-3 I have no issues with but 4 is just stupid.

[Don Johnson 4744]

If these pass, will need to have two sets of record books.  Pre-2023 and Post 2023.

[MAUFRAIS 6571]

#2 should get me home in time to play one extra game of rock paper scissors.

[PittsburghTiger 6136]

Maybe cut a couple commercials

[Uncle Nate 2097]

Like Mike Leach always said, "I just don't understand why the powers-that-be think fans want less football rather than more."

[Js1 85056]

I’m not against any attempt to cut down on 3.5-4 hour games 

[Pato del Muerto 52322]

2 is dumb because if you earn an extra play you should get it and also how many untuned downs are there?

4 is a fundamental change to the game 

[n64ra 1075]

I like 1 and 2 but don't want 3 and 4. Four means you can't even spike the ball to stop the clock? If 4 passes, I bet teams get 10 timeouts per half.

Edited February 20, 2023 by n64ra

[SquishMitten 10395]

Number 1 is the only one that I know I would like to see changed. It doesn't happen that often, but it's super annoying when it does. 2 seems pointless as it has such minor impact. 3 is easily the most impactful for overall runtime. I can argue for and against 4, and I'm not sure which side I come down on it. I think cutting back a couple ads would have a bigger impact than all four of these rules combined, but we know that ain't happening

[Surly Bevo 24692]

They simply need to adopt the NFL clock rules, except the 2 minute warning and be done with it.  As a tradeoff eliminate the targeting rule as it is now (you can still call it as 15 yard unsportsmanlike but make it the same where you need two in a game to get ejected).  Klatt has been banging that drum for years, that if it is REALLY about player safety you fix it by reducing the number of plays over the season.

 

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

4 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

Number 1 is the only one that I know I would like to see changed. It doesn't happen that often, but it's super annoying when it does. 2 seems pointless as it has such minor impact. 3 is easily the most impactful for overall runtime. I can argue for and against 4, and I'm not sure which side I come down on it. I think cutting back a couple ads would have a bigger impact than all four of these rules combined, but we know that ain't happening

The thing is with the amount networks are paying for these rights they're not cutting back ads at all, so anyone who brings that up should full stop. 

IMO rule 4 changes the game fundamentally as mentioned earlier. With rule 4 proposal how does that work on long incompletions including with play clocks and etc?

3 is the best way to speed up games without messing up too much of the game. The NFL runs that rule and their games are about 3 hrs to 3 hr 10 minutes, not including OT. It feels like most college games are 3hr 15min to 3:30 min. 

 

Speeding up the games also allow the networks to control the windows and such more so than a say game where we play Tech that starts at 2:30 and ends at 6 or 630.

Edited February 20, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[SquishMitten 10395]

5 minutes ago, n64ra said:

I like 1 and 2 but don't want 3 and 4. Four means you can't even spike the ball to stop the clock? If 4 passes, I bet teams get 10 timeouts per half.

I hadn't even considered that. I was only thinking about actual incomplete passes. I wonder if that falls under the same definition? If so, then that's an enormous rule change and something that's fundamental to the game. 

[Js1 85056]

7 minutes ago, n64ra said:

I like 1 and 2 but don't want 3 and 4. Four means you can't even spike the ball to stop the clock? If 4 passes, I bet teams get 10 timeouts per half.

I could see spiking the ball being an exception to rule 4

[SquishMitten 10395]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

The thing is with the amount networks are paying for these rights they're not cutting back ads at all, so anyone who brings that up should full stop. 
 

I did

[Surly Bevo 24692]

13 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Like Mike Leach always said, "I just don't understand why the powers-that-be think fans want less football rather than more."

As much as I love Mike Leach he is wrong....fans don't want 4 hour games.  Now the fans that are hard core and sit online posting away about what such and such school's right tackle back up depth looks like may want more but the broader "Fans" which is who TV and the money men care most about do not have that kind of attention span, particularly in the younger generations.  

[Mr. Drummond 2183]

Games stretch to almost 4 hours all the time.    I haven't made it through a non UT football game in years.    Anything that gets it to 3 hours i am for.

Number 3 being the most obvious.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

1 minute ago, Surly Bevo said:

As much as I love Mike Leach he is wrong....fans don't want 4 hour games.  Now the fans that are hard core and sit online posting away about what such and such school's right tackle back up depth looks like may want more but the broader "Fans" which is who TV and the money men care most about do not have that kind of attention span, particularly in the younger generations.  

I'm talking number of plays, not necessarily length.

Worst thing about college football right now is the amount of time they spend reviewing plays.  I would like to see college football adopt the NFL's rules for reviewing plays instead of having the replay official buzz down whenever they feel like they need to interject themselves into the game.

[ouflak 60]

2 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

As much as I love Mike Leach he is wrong....fans don't want 4 hour games.

But if they implement these rules, we aren't going to get 'shorter' games. We'll get less football, sure. But they will make up that time with more commercials.

[Surly Bevo 24692]

Just now, ouflak said:

But if they implement these rules, we aren't going to get 'shorter' games. We'll get less football, sure. But they will make up that time with more commercials.

You wiill get less football (in terms of number of plays) sure....and as already mentioned that addresses player safety concerns.  But they are not going to keep the presentations at 3.5-4 hours.....they know they need to solve that issue as well so I don't buy that bogeyman.  

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

6 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

I'm talking number of plays, not necessarily length.

Worst thing about college football right now is the amount of time they spend reviewing plays.  I would like to see college football adopt the NFL's rules for reviewing plays instead of having the replay official buzz down whenever they feel like they need to interject themselves into the game.

Agree with the NFL reviewing method. That would tremendously speed up games instead of having so many damn reviews.

5 minutes ago, ouflak said:

But if they implement these rules, we aren't going to get 'shorter' games. We'll get less football, sure. But they will make up that time with more commercials.

Wrong. Look at the NFL....

[Zeus 5943]

27 minutes ago, PittsburghTiger said:

Maybe cut a couple commercials

Plus limit the official reviews to a certain time and fire big 12 officials for reviewing and having meetings about obvious shit every other play. 

Their proposal is to "limit plays" not limit time of the game, so it's probably going to add commercials in somehow lol

[Pato del Muerto 52322]

Why are there different rules for inside of 2 minutes, all designed to extend the game and add plays?  Why not just play with the same clock rules throughout?

[Deej 76511]

Maybe just fix the problem of incessant and overly long replay reviews?

[ouflak 60]

10 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Agree with the NFL reviewing method.

Wrong. Look at the NFL....

It's been mentioned a couple of times already. For those of us who have no intention of looking at the NFL, do they have review time limits or something? I wouldn't be opposed to something like that. I think they could make that work. But I still don't think they are going to give up commercial revenue. Not one penny. Ofcourse that doesn't necessarily mean more commercials though I suppose. They may just charge more for the decreased time frame and make up for it like that. We'll see.

Edited February 20, 2023 by ouflak

[Surly Bevo 24692]

The other thing.  With a 12 game regular season, a conference championship game, and the potential for a team to play 3-4 playoff games to win a national championship with likely less of a break between the end of the season and the start of the playoffs they almost have to reduce the number of plays to make sure the product at the end isn't just a question of "who is less banged up?" each and every year.

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

1 minute ago, ouflak said:

It's been mentioned a couple of times already. For those of us who have no intention of looking at the NFL, do they have review time limits or something? I wouldn't be opposed to something like that. I think they could make that work. But I still don't think the are going to give up commercial revenue. Not one penny.

Do you live under a rock and never watch NFL in the past 10-20 years?


 

[Surly Bevo 24692]

4 minutes ago, ouflak said:

It's been mentioned a couple of times already. For those of us who have no intention of looking at the NFL, do they have review time limits or something? I wouldn't be opposed to something like that. I think they could make that work. But I still don't think the are going to give up commercial revenue. Not one penny.

NFL only reviews TDs, Change of possession (turnovers) and anything at their discretion in final 2 minutes of each half.  Otherwise coaches have a challenge system but if they are wrong they lose a timeout and the challenges are limited to two per game (you can earn a third challenge if you win your first two)

Edited February 20, 2023 by Surly Bevo

[Uncle Nate 2097]

5 minutes ago, ouflak said:

It's been mentioned a couple of times already. For those of us who have no intention of looking at the NFL, do they have review time limits or something? I wouldn't be opposed to something like that. I think they could make that work. But I still don't think the are going to give up commercial revenue. Not one penny.

They have automatic reviews for turnovers, scores, player disqualifications, and plays that start after two-minute warning and all plays during overtime.  Any other review has to be a challenge from the head coach.  Each team has two challenges per game, each of which requires the use of a timeout. If the challenge is ruled in the team's favor, the team gets its timeout back. A third challenge is allowed if a team wins its first two challenges.

THIS is what the NCAA should be adopting post haste.  The current NCAA review process is absurd and is the #1 reason the games are so damn long.

Edited February 20, 2023 by Uncle Nate

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

1 minute ago, Uncle Nate said:

They have automatic reviews for turnovers, scores, play disqualifications, and plays that start after two-minute warning and all plays during overtime.  Any other review has to be a challenge from the head coach.  Each team has two challenges per game, each of which requires the use of a timeout. If the challenge is ruled in the team's favor, the team gets its timeout back. A third challenge is allowed if a team wins its first two challenges.

THIS is what the NCAA should be adopting post haste.  The current NCAA review process is absurd and is the #1 reason the games are so damn long.

I believe the NFL refs have a time limit of 90 seconds to complete the review unless that has changed. IMO that is another thing that should accompany what you're suggestion as well. Some of these college reviews can like 3-5 minutes.

['stache 21743]

33 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

2 is dumb because if you earn an extra play you should get it and also how many untuned downs are there?

4 is a fundamental change to the game 

You would still get the play at the start of the next quarter as a timed play. I honestly never knew or thought of an untimed down at the end of the first or third quarter. No real impact with this one it seems.

32 minutes ago, n64ra said:

I like 1 and 2 but don't want 3 and 4. Four means you can't even spike the ball to stop the clock? If 4 passes, I bet teams get 10 timeouts per half.

The spike play is already an exception to the intentional grounding rule, it would certainly also be an exception here. I would change the spike rule to where the QB or sideline has to indicate at the end of the preceding play that it'll be a spike and all the offense has to do is line up and spike and the defense just has to get on their side of the ball. The fake spike is as bad as the fake slide that was done away with. If a defensive player in an obvious spike situation plows through and tackles the QB it'll be 15 yards, and possibly an ejection, fine, or suspension. So they have to lay off at the snap, but if the QB fakes it, they're already a step or two behind having expected the spike. It's completely unfair. I'm shocked how few times I've seen teams try and fake a spike.

[Js1 85056]

13 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Plus limit the official reviews to a certain time and fire big 12 officials

fify

[ouflak 60]

10 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Do you live under a rock and never watch NFL in the past 10-20 years?


 

Now that someone actually asks, I think it's actually been longer than 20 years since I've bothered to watch an NFL game. The last clear memory I have of putting an NFL game on just to have it in the background is about 23 - 25 years ago when I lived in Dallas. But that doesn't mean I don't think they have some good rules college football could adopt. If the 90 second review time limit that was mentioned earlier is actually a thing, that would be very very nice to have.

 

Edit: Just remembered I went to a Super Bowl watch part when I live in Vegas. That was just about 20 years ago.

Edited February 20, 2023 by ouflak

['stache 21743]

I watched parts of the XFL and they seemed to have the guy doing the reviews able to get them decided within a few seconds. I'll never understand why the NFL doesn't have guys watching the plays who can determine right away if a review is warranted and get them resolved in 30 seconds or less.

['stache 21743]

I also wish the NCAA and NFL would coordinate on rules better. I just don't understand why there are such drastic differences in the rules. Like one foot in bounds for a catch. Is the skill level really that different that two feet is too hard for college players or one foot is too easy for the NFL? Are kickers really so different that the hash marks need to be narrower in college? And basketball is the worst, I've never heard a coherent argument for why men's college basketball is stuck on two halves instead of four quarters. 

[Surly Bevo 24692]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I also wish the NCAA and NFL would coordinate on rules better. I just don't understand why there are such drastic differences in the rules. Like one foot in bounds for a catch. Is the skill level really that different that two feet is too hard for college players or one foot is too easy for the NFL? Are kickers really so different that the hash marks need to be narrower in college? And basketball is the worst, I've never heard a coherent argument for why men's college basketball is stuck on two halves instead of four quarters. 

Point of order; the NFL is the one with narrower hash marks, and that isn't all about kicking but also spacing on the field during plays.  Your point on basketball is good, especially considering even HS hoops run a quarter system.  

[Richard Kimball 1492]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I believe the NFL refs have a time limit of 90 seconds to complete the review unless that has changed. IMO that is another thing that should accompany what you're suggestion as well. Some of these college reviews can like 3-5 minutes.

Especially when they dick around for five minutes determining whether it's third and five or third and six. 

 

[Bartles 769]

NFL with only 32 teams is able to spend a ton of money on quick, professional replay systems and personnel. College has to account for C-USA stadiums with cables dangling out of the press box, and retired refs who never even learned how to FF/REV on a VCR.

[Reynolds Woodcock 4656]

Love 3. 

[boilerhorn 1334]

3 minutes ago, Bartles said:

NFL with only 32 teams is able to spend a ton of money on quick, professional replay systems and personnel. College has to account for C-USA stadiums with cables dangling out of the press box, and retired refs who never even learned how to FF/REV on a VCR.

 

[Deej 76511]

21 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Some of these college reviews can like 3-5 minutes.

Sometimes, the Big12 rep has gone to the shitter and the refs have to wait for him to get back to find out how they are supposed to call it. 

[LTtxfan 48928]

 

• 1&2  agree
• 3  clock runs after 1st downs entire game
• 4  HELL NO !!!

One tweek on #4 if they must change it, is the clock stops on incompletions under 5mins in each half. 

Add a two minute warning at end of both halfs as well.

 

Edited February 20, 2023 by LTtxfan

['stache 21743]

Four seems like a bridge too far and not necessary at this point. My guess is that 1-3 pass easily and 4 is taken of the table for now to see how much 3 helps.

['stache 21743]

9 minutes ago, Bartles said:

NFL with only 32 teams is able to spend a ton of money on quick, professional replay systems and personnel. College has to account for C-USA stadiums with cables dangling out of the press box, and retired refs who never even learned how to FF/REV on a VCR.

Pretty much every FBS game is televised these days and has the infrastructure for multiple cameras and officials in the box. I'd be okay with an exception for games that are not televised or with significantly limited broadcast crews. 

[HRSchenker 2257]

Option 4 fundamentally changes the game of football. I don't understand why college football needs a pace-of-play initiative like this

[Huckleberry 32685]

Agree with most that 1-3 are fine but 4 is dumb at this point.

Also, mentioned above that the spike is already an exception to the intentional grounding rule but it's silly that it is. The IG rule is about avoiding a sack, a spike is not intended to avoid a loss of yardage so it shouldn't be IG anyway. 

[Helobious 9477]

10 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

 

• 1&2  agree
• 3  clock runs after 1st downs entire game
• 4  HELL NO !!!

One tweek on #4 if they must change it, is the clock stops on incompletions under 5mins in each half. 

Add a two minute warning at end of both halfs as well.

 

The clock should stop after a first down in the NFL within 2 minutes of a half. How stupid is it that games are decided on the ability of 60 year old refs to hustle down and get the ball spotted.

[Blotto 23418]

1 hour ago, SquishMitten said:

Number 1 is the only one that I know I would like to see changed. It doesn't happen that often, but it's super annoying when it does. 2 seems pointless as it has such minor impact. 3 is easily the most impactful for overall runtime. I can argue for and against 4, and I'm not sure which side I come down on it. I think cutting back a couple ads would have a bigger impact than all four of these rules combined, but we know that ain't happening

Not really, at least according to SI

https://www.si.com/college/2023/02/20/college-football-shorter-game-rules

Quote

College football conducted a field study last season to ascertain the impact of the proposed changes. A running clock after a first down would eliminate about seven to nine plays per game. A running clock after an incomplete pass could eliminate more than twice that number.

I question this stat, but presumably someone looked into it. There is just a lot of fucking around time built into todays game. 

Quote

Television commercials don’t impact game time significantly. From 2018-2020, games not televised finished only about two minutes sooner than those televised.

 

[pyrohornIII 4801]

Would be nice if they concentrated more on the weak referee work and horrendous announcers.  Then the length of the game wouldn't be as important.   Those two things often make watching games a beating.   

I have gotten to where I set it up at the start of the game and pause it.  Then I go do something else for a while, and when i return, I can fast forward through the commercials and replay shit.  I usually FF through the halftime drivel too, stopping for the updates on other games.  

It means I can't get involved with the game thread, so there is that downside.

 

['stache 21743]

1 hour ago, Surly Bevo said:

As much as I love Mike Leach he is wrong....fans don't want 4 hour games.  Now the fans that are hard core and sit online posting away about what such and such school's right tackle back up depth looks like may want more but the broader "Fans" which is who TV and the money men care most about do not have that kind of attention span, particularly in the younger generations.  

Yeah, I attended some OSU-Tech games in the mid 2000's that went 4.5 hours or so. I enjoy gameday atmosphere but at some point I'm ready to get it over with and back to the tailgate/bar. I'm for rule changes to bring them within reason. 

[Surly Bevo 24692]

I generally don't like rule number 4.  But hey, look on the bright side.  We don't lose the Ok State game this year with those rules in place....there wouldn't have been nearly enough fucking time 🤣

Edited February 20, 2023 by Surly Bevo