The Rules Have Changed Slightly
The NCAA's passed some new rules. (One thing they did not pass: the anti-grad-transfer legislation. /waves tiny flag) Let's consider them.
Overtime must end
There was a seven-OT game that ended 74-72 last year, causing consternation amongst TV executives, players, coaches, and persons who fall asleep at reasonable times. There will never be a seven OT game again:
Moving forward, if a game advances to a fifth overtime, the teams will run alternating two-point plays instead of regaining possession from the 25-yard line like in prior overtime periods. … As part of the change, the NCAA is instituting two-minute rest periods after the second and fourth overtimes.
The degenerates of college football twitter hissed at this, because seven OTs is an event to remember. People who are not into late-night delirium are more numerous, unfortunately.
If they had to bring a definite end to a football game, two-point conversions are dumb. The article linked above calls it "football's version of penalty kicks," which is correct because penalty kicks are also dumb. That crazy California playoff OT system Spencer found is way better:
The format of The California Tiebreaker is butt-simple. The ball starts on the fifty. The winner of the coin toss gets possession, and each team receives four plays to move the ball however they like in the direction of the other team’s endzone.
The weirdness kicks in here: Each team trades possessions, and works the ball from the spot where their opponent left it on the previous play. Complete a pass to the opponent’s 35 yard line on the first play? That’s where they play their first. Because this is a godly solution to football’s overtime problem, field goals and punts are not allowed. If no one scores or turns the ball over after four plays, then the victor is determined by field position.
That ends a game in exactly eight plays and features passes in which receivers can run more than 13 yards downfield.
I still think OT periods should start from the 35 so you don't get a reasonably makeable field goal for going three and out.
[After THE JUMP: targeting roulette!]
Targeting roulette may get less random
No more booth cop-outs on targeting reviews:
…penalties for targeting will either be confirmed or overturned. There will be no more plays where a call on the field “stands” like in a situation where a replay review is ultimately inconclusive. … Only targeting fouls confirmed by replay will be upheld.
This sounds like they imagine all the "stands" ejections will turn into no call at all, but surely some percentage of them will end up moving into the "confirmed" bin, with the accompanying ejection. That would still be a reduction in the number of ejections… but not the number of reviews. Womp womp.
Also they've added a one-game suspension if you get three targeting calls in a season. That will be rare. In 2017 one player, Akron CB Alvin Davis Jr, had three targeting calls go against him. Only seven players drew two flags.
No more decleaters
This is probably overdue:
Any block deemed to be a blind-side block “attacking an opponent with forcible contact” will be a 15-yard personal foul penalty. If the block “includes the elements of targeting,” targeting rules will be enforced.
That strange looking punt block technique where you get in front of the dude and put your arms up as you impede his progress would still be legal, since it doesn't involve forcible contact. Hammering a guy who isn't even looking at you into next week is now a guaranteed 15-yarder. That's fine. Those hits have always been cheap shots.
Mumble mumble kickoff something
Okay:
Finally, the NCAA voted to eliminate the two-man wedge formation on kickoffs.
Every time there's a batch of rule changes they whittle away something from kickoffs. I wonder how long they'll last before being replaced by a dance-off for field position. To be clear: this is not a complaint. I am wildly in favor of field position dance-offs.
Kickoffs are boring.
April 24th, 2019 at 12:49 PM ^
A much simpler solution to the OT situation is to simply eliminate FGs. Each team gets 4 downs until they score a TD or are stopped. This would also eliminate the unfair advantage of the second team knowing they have nothing to lose by going on 4th down if the first team has scored a TD.
April 24th, 2019 at 12:52 PM ^
"Kickoffs are boring."
But the kickoff return for a TD is arguably the most exciting play in football. Every move we make in reducing kick returns means less potential excitement in the game. IMO we should keep the new anti-wedge rules and look for ways to increase safety, while going back to the old rules about where the ball is kicked from and ensuring more kickoff returns, not less.
They only mean more potential excitement in the game because they take so little time off the game clock and thus add more plays to the game. If that's the argument for kickoffs staying in the game, then you should also support adding any rules that add more plays to the game in general, as those could all potentially be exciting as well. For example, stopping the clock whenever a ball carrier goes out of bounds, not just in the final minutes of a half.
(caveat, I also am fine with kickoffs becoming more prevalent)
April 26th, 2019 at 12:54 PM ^
I mean graphically, kickoffs are the most boring play in football and I have video evidence to back it up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_SsIKgwvz4
As much as I love seeing someone erased on a kickoff, there are major safety issues, even on touchbacks. I hate Greg Schiano, but his proposal keeps all of the fun of kick returns without any of the danger of 2 large men crashing into each other with a 30 yard head of steam. Basically, the proposal is this: no more kickoffs. Punts will be the new kickoff and will occur at the 35 because collisions are at much lower speeds and punt returns are more fun than kick returns anyways. "But what about onside kicks?" I hear you. Instead of the scrimmage kick being no down, teams are placed in a 4th and 15 situation. You want to trot your offense out there and go for it, be my guest. It would also make for some fun endgames with Hail Mary x6 in some instances. And it would remove the safety nightmare that is the onside kick. https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/03/05/ncaa-kickoff-touchback-rule-change-nfl-combine
April 24th, 2019 at 12:57 PM ^
I don't agree with most of Brian's ideas for how to improve things because most of the time they are incredibly complicated and don't make it better.
HOWEVA, on his proposed change to OT I agree completely. You don't need to change a bunch of rules, simply have the teams start on the 35 instead of the 25. Most teams would have to get at least a first down to be in comfortable field goal range. It doesn't significantly shift the odds or consistently favor one style of team vs. another.
A 2-minute break after OTs. Anything to get more fkn commercials in.
I'm just here to say that all of these overtime systems are dumb. That California system is really, really dumb.
The current system is also dumb, but at least it is fun.
I'd prefer we just go sudden death-- but change it so that the offense starts out at their own 10 yard line to help even the odds.
The problem with allowing ties, is that somehow Georgia and bama would tie, every year, on their only hard game of the year.
Go with the NHL-style regular season OT, and start removing players from the field with each OT. First OT is 11-on-11, 2nd is 10-on-10, 3rd is 9-on-9, etc. You'd probably have to stop at a 7-on-7 or thereabouts, and would have to modify the rules regarding players on the LOS/in the backfield for the various situations, but goddamn that would be an interesting sight.
Moving forward, if a game advances to a fifth overtime, the teams will run alternating two-point plays instead of regaining possession from the 25-yard line like in prior overtime periods
CFB has officially turned into the 1975 film "Rollerball"... making shit up as they go along for TV.
The California OT system is inherently flawed. It punishes run-heavy or option teams in favor of pass-heavy vertical teams. Do not like. Games shouldn't punish the Georgia Techs and service academies of college football.
Just do a rugby scrum at the 50. whoever can get it into the end zone first wins.
Dance-offs are not boring.
Don Brown solves problems with aggression, but OT design can be solved with math and economics.
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2019/1/23/18194165/overtime-rule-changes
11 possible solutions, but the two that appealed to me most were:
- Yardage auction: Whoever is willing to start closest to their goalline gets the ball.
- Cut the cake: Coin toss loser picks a yardage line. Coin toss winner decides to be on offense or defense.
In either case, first to score wins. (I first thought that the offense has to score during the first possession or lose, but re-checking sources that's not what was proposed.) Unlike the 50-yard line solution, there is no cap on the number of plays/drives that could result.
Even nerdier analysis of the two choices: http://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/yc2271/files/2017/05/EV.pdf
With cut the cake, does the coin toss loser say "Own 40 yard line" as a starting point, or does it choose a specific 40 yard line, and it becomes the team's own 40 or opponent's 40 depending on what the coin toss winner picks?
The problem with college OT length is that it is currently too likely the teams will have matching scores at the end of a given period.
So the solution is a goal line spring game drill where the teams are far more likely to have the same outcome?
The title's close enough that I can embed this!
This is all stupid. Targeting is stupid. Honestly I'd rather have a 30 yard penalty than ejections.
To be clear, my stupidity comment is directed at how bad the NCAA is at getting the rules right, not player safety. The refs are so terrible that it all becomes a subjective mess.
I'd simply add a fifth quarter if tied at the end of regulation. If the game is tied at the end of the fifth quarter, it's counted as a tie and everyone goes home.
The rule I would love to see is a replay clock. The ref gets 45 seconds max to review a call. If they don't see evidence to overturn the call in that time, the call stands. It would be great for both football and basketball. While we would have a few more bad calls not having to endure endless replays would be more than worth it. Also, hire someone to work out the ball spot and time on clock while the review is underway so we don't have to wait another 5 minutes while they figure that out.
We could also install some type of electric shock device on the refs that goes off if they spend more than 60 seconds huddling up to figure things out.
I have to click every time the Norfleet vid comes up. That's one of my favorite things. My man is cutting a rug so hard then straightens up as soon as the play clock starts.
"If no one scores or turns the ball over after four plays, then the victor is determined by field position."
This is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever come across in football. Or on MGoBlog.
My favorite OT idea is do an auction for starting field position
If they're going to do "penalty kicks", why not do literal kicks?
Alternating 50 yd FGs until one team makes and the other misses.
Or maybe rock-scissors-paper.
Comments