Blue Texan

March 3rd, 2023 at 11:11 PM ^

I hate it. IIRC, when the NFL (the king of making money) wanted to get games closer to 3 hrs, they shortened timeouts (one 30 second timeout) and shortened halftime. They didn’t eliminate plays. 
I don’t like the impact to stats due to the loss of plays/game. We won’t be able to compare individual or game stats going forward. Season stats are already out the window due to the ever changing number of games. 

aMAIZEinBLUEinTX

March 4th, 2023 at 10:48 AM ^

The studies have estimated that this will eliminate 7-8 total plays per game. The game clock starts anyway (typically with 28-34 seconds on the play clock after the ball is spotted), so running an extra 6-12 seconds per 1st down for 56 game minutes equates to 7.x less plays per game, on a cumulative game average. 

They're saying they're doing it in the name of safety, pointing to the fact that two teams could theoretically play up to 17 games starting in '24, with both a conference championship game and without a playoff bye/advancing in the CFP.

I'm just concerned with not only diluting the product more (game ratio decreases in relation to constant commercial ratio), but to me more importantly is the increased variance of a game with 5-10% less plays. For a bruising running team (aka Michigan, especially vs nonconference cupcakes) there will be an even more pronounced game reduction with long run-driven drives producing more first downs. This equates to less possessions. Michigan could score on long time-consuming, first down gobbling drives, but 1 fluke turnover and we've got a coin flip Army situation...extreme case, but absolutely tips towards more variance in outcomes as opposed to a stronger team wearing down a more well-rested, less-battered opponent in the 4th quarter of games.

aMAIZEinBLUEinTX

March 4th, 2023 at 10:48 AM ^

The studies have estimated that this will eliminate 7-8 total plays per game. The game clock already starts anyway (typically with 28-34 seconds on the play clock after the ball is spotted), so running an extra 6-12 seconds per 1st down for 56 game minutes equates to 7.x less plays per game, on average. 

They're saying they're doing it in the name of safety, pointing to the fact that two teams theoretically could play up to 17 games starting in '24, with conference championship and without a playoff bye.

I'm just concerned with not only diluting the product more (game ratio decreases in relation to constant commercial ratio), but to me more importantly is the increased variance of a game with 5-10% less plays. For a bruising running team (aka Michigan, especially vs nonconference cupcakes) there will be an even more pronounced game reduction with long run-driven drives producing more first downs. This equates to less possessions. Michigan could score on long time-consuming, first down gobbling drives, but 1 fluke turnover and we've got a coin flip Army situation...extreme case, but absolutely tips towards more variance in outcomes as opposed to a stronger team wearing down a more well-rested, less-battered opponent in the 4th quarter.

Ronswanson13

March 4th, 2023 at 12:24 AM ^

Michigan will have drives that last an entire quarter plus if they do this.

Like many others have said, I’m not a fan of this either. It’s not the on field playing time that’s the problem. It’s not batters and pitchers getting an entire stretching workout in between each pitch. It’s the f’ing commercials.

detroit_fan

March 4th, 2023 at 12:25 AM ^

I’m amazed anybody watches live sports with the ridiculous amount of commercials. I have been using a DVR since 2001 to skip them. I can’t imagine sitting through that many commercials. 

ma5678tt

March 4th, 2023 at 12:25 AM ^

We will see this year if it works! NFL games on fox are usually around 3:05 - 3:15 hours. I'd guess college games may reduce down to about 3:20 hours, which would be an improvement.

I hope they don't approve the incomplete pass rule. They can make it as close to the NFL as they want, just don't go past those rules. 

rice4114

March 4th, 2023 at 4:04 AM ^

A lot of people make up slippery slope topics that dont exist. This is one that very well exists. They will keep picking away at plays per game and increase commercial minutes per game until you suddenly look up and the clock is running on an incompletion. To watch the game get ruined by commercials and see rules put in place to take away plays per game is just beyond infuriating. 

TeslaRedVictorBlue

March 4th, 2023 at 7:55 AM ^

Honestly I love college football as it is. I love the games. There are smaller things if change but... Football Saturday's in the fall are one of my greatest joys. I don't need it to go faster

Amazinblu

March 4th, 2023 at 8:43 AM ^

This won’t change anything significantly.  The media payouts will require commercials, and if there’s any thought about it - commercial time won’t be getting any shorter regardless of what they do.

And, who pays for this?  You, me, and regular consumers.  The costs for advertising find their way back into what we pay when we purchase the product - if it’s a refreshment, hotel, snack, insurance, etc…

GoBlueBill

March 4th, 2023 at 9:18 AM ^

I really hate any rules changes that arent for the entirety of the game . Either dont stop the clock for the whole game  or leave it alone .

Personally i like the clock stoppages after first down for the college game  . 

Blue in St Lou

March 4th, 2023 at 9:43 AM ^

According to the SI article reporting on this proposal, the NCAA committee found that FBS games were 11 minutes longer than NFL games in 2022 on average (3:21 vs. 3:10). The difference in halftime lengths accounted for 8 minutes (20 minutes vs. 12 minutes). So other than halftime, FBS games were only 3 minutes longer than NFL games.

Now here's something that's hard to believe: From 2018-2020, televised games were only 2 minutes longer than non-televised games. It's the equivalent of just one 30-minute commercial per quarter. It's not clear what the comparison group was. Aren't all FBS games televised?

Here's the article: https://www.si.com/college/2023/02/20/college-football-shorter-game-rules.

Spitfire

March 4th, 2023 at 10:09 AM ^

The commercials have gotten way out of hand. I used to watch all kinds of games every weekend. Now it's usually just Michigan because that's about all I can handle.

USMC 1371

March 4th, 2023 at 11:20 AM ^

Whatever, I hardly watch games live. I finish mowing my yard then turn on the game 45 minutes after it started. I usually catch up in the middle of the 4th quarter.  Basketball to. I can watch a college basketball game in 45 minutes.

LostPatrol14

March 4th, 2023 at 2:27 PM ^

NCAA is so concerned about the length of the game that they are doing everything they can to shorten it EXCEPT for the quite obvious observation: The amount of commercials airing.

I understand that they want Ad revenue, but it’s getting to the point where we’re no longer watching the game and, instead, more advertising.

The logistics are not making sense and you can’t tell me they’re not already making money/revenue from advertising and elsewhere. I wouldn’t be surprised if the game is, in total, two hours long and, with added commercials, 4 hours long. This is sickening has we’re getting deprived game time for Ads.
 

EJG

March 5th, 2023 at 7:36 AM ^

The best thing to happen to college FB is the BTN's "BIG Football in 60".  It gives me half of my Saturday back.  Other than the Michigan game and huge non-conference games that interest me, if there is a BIG game of interest, I just monitor the score on Saturday then wait to tape the 60 minute version and watch it during the week without the stupid commercial breaks.