NCAA Rule Change Proposals

Coloradojacket

Coloradojacket

Banned
Messages
2,034
gtg936g said:
Paul spoke about this at one of his coaching clinics. He said you would just need to use a larger AB and block the defender straight up.

The way teams line the Mike up several yards back makes me wonder why we don't let the Tackle take the Sam and the AB take the Mike. Similar to a corner/safety exchange when the corner blitzes.
Click to expand...
Go back and watch the Orange Bowl against Miss St. That is exactly what we did, the A-back took on the middle linebacker, very effectively.
 
MidtownJacket

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,862
Whiskey_Clear said:
Like I said in another thread. If you can’t hit below the waste to block you shouldn’t be able to hit below the waste to tackle.

This keeps up I may have to take up watching lacrosse.
Click to expand...

I agree with this (sans the lacrosse talk). I don’t have an issue with developing new rules and evolving old ones to protect the players, in fact for the game to survive I am fairly certain it has to happen.

Does anyone actually think a cut block is any worse than being tackled though? Or better yet, worse than a QB being blitzed and hit from his blind side? There are some elements of the game which seem to be cherry picked to benefit specific teams and this may well be an example of that. I hope it doesn’t pass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
TromboneJacket

TromboneJacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
859
Location
Seattle, WA
MidtownJacket said:
I agree with this (sans the lacrosse talk). I don’t have an issue with developing new rules and evolving old ones to protect the players, in fact for the game to survive I am fairly certain it has to happen.

Does anyone actually think a cut block is any worse than being tackled though? Or better yet, worse than a QB being blitzed and hit from his blind side? There are some elements of the game which seem to be cherry picked to benefit specific teams and this may well be an example of that. I hope it doesn’t pass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I agree. I can almost hear the salty georgie fans complaining that we must be cheating to beat their 5-star players with a roster of 3-stars. In this case, it almost seems like they’re saying “How dare a smaller player block a larger player via anything other than brute force?” I don’t know about anyone else, but if I just wanted to see a contest of strength, I’d watch sumo wrestling instead.
 
SolicitorJacket

SolicitorJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
296
Location
McDonough, GA
TromboneJacket said:
I agree. I can almost hear the salty georgie fans complaining that we must be cheating to beat their 5-star players with a roster of 3-stars. In this case, it almost seems like they’re saying “How dare a smaller player block a larger player via anything other than brute force?” I don’t know about anyone else, but if I just wanted to see a contest of strength, I’d watch sumo wrestling instead.
Click to expand...

I am surrounded by fans of SEC schools in my daily life. Almost universally they look at Tech's offense as illegitimate because it allows Tech, at times, to compete evenly with schools with much more talent. In their eyes it is less manly and chickens**t football and only succeeds because it is unique and hard to prepare for. In other words, it isnt real football.

Ironically, even though Tech has been more successful at times with this offense than with more typical styles, they take it as a sign that Tech has "given up" trying to compete for championships.

Apparently, in their eyes, the proper thing for Tech to do is to take the players we are able to attract with our institutuonal limitations, use the same systems that everyone else does and do the honorable thing and let raw athletic talent decide the winner.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,509
SolicitorJacket said:
they take it as a sign that Tech has "given up" trying to compete for championships.
Click to expand...
Aren't they correct? Are there any amongst us who think we can compete with Alabama and their ilk in the recruiting game with our academic restrictions and tendency to avoid under the table payments?

What's odd about all that is that because we don't cheat like they do, we are seen as "giving up".
 

bke1984

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,424
Whiskey_Clear said:
Like I said in another thread. If you can’t hit below the waste to block you shouldn’t be able to hit below the waste to tackle.

This keeps up I may have to take up watching lacrosse.
Click to expand...
I agree. Honestly, all of this changing the rules for the safety of the game crap needs to just stop. Just make everyone at every level sign a form that says they are aware of the possible injuries to their head, arms, knees, etc. and be done with it. That...or just get rid of football altogether.

I guess I'm just in the minority that just always understood playing football was dangerous...
 
CuseJacket

CuseJacket

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
19,529
Many rule changes approved.

Alteration to football kickoff rule approved
Return teams will be allowed to fair catch kicks inside the 25-yard line; ensuing drive will start at the 25
NCAA.com
Last Updated - Apr 13, 2018 15:38 EDT

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved altering football’s kickoff rules to allow the receiving team to fair catch the kick inside the 25-yard line and have it result in a touchback.

The Football Rules Committee made the proposal to continue efforts to increase the number of touchbacks during kickoffs since fewer injuries occur during kickoffs that result in touchbacks than on kickoffs that are returned. All other aspects of the kickoff play will remain the same.

The new rule is the latest in a series of changes the committee has made in recent years in hopes of making the play safer. Before the 2012 season, kickoffs were moved from the 30-yard line to the 35. The committee also changed the starting position on touchbacks that year so that the receiving team started its drive on the 25-yard line instead of the 20.

Blocks below the waist

The panel approved a package of rules with the goal of making it easier for players, coaches and officials to understand, execute and coach blocking below the waist.

The most noticeable change pertains to offensive blocks: The offense will not be allowed to block below the waist when the block occurs more than 5 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Additionally, other than the interior linemen, all blocks below the waist must be from the front.

Pace of play

The panel approved two proposals that further its efforts to keep the game moving. After a touchdown, the play clock will be set at 40 seconds to expedite the extra point or two-point conversion attempt. Additionally, following a kickoff, the play clock will be set to 40 seconds to restart play more quickly.

Other significant rules changes

  • The addition of a 10-second runoff was approved when instant replay overturns the ruling on the field inside of one minute in either half, and the correct ruling would not have stopped the game clock.
  • The panel approved the continuation of an experimental collaborative decision-making model for instant replay that is not limited to the press box in the stadium. For example, officials involved in the replay process could be located in a conference office.
  • Leaping rules on field goals and extra points were adjusted to mirror similar rules regarding leaping the shield on punting plays. It is illegal to leap over the frame of the body of an opponent.
  • On successful field goals, penalty enforcement will be the same as on made extra points. Namely, all personal fouls and unsportsmanlike conduct fouls by the defending team will have the option to be enforced on the ensuing kickoff.
 
bobongo

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,549
bke1984 said:
The kickoff thing is stupid. Fair catch at the 20 would give you the ball at the 25? Yeah, ok....might as well just get rid of kickoffs altogether at this point. The only time they will matter is at the end of halves and games when you have to try to return it to score. I think it’s just going to make everyone that much worse at kick coverage. I’m just speculating here, but the result could be less live kickoffs due to the rule, but more more dangerous scenarios when they do happen, since they will occur less often.
Click to expand...

Under the new rule it would be foolish to run back most any kickoff inside the 20 yard line.

But I was amazed at how often last year returners would run back kicks from the end zone, with maybe a 50% chance of making the 15 and a 10% chance of making it past the 25. True, there was a smidgen of a chance to break the run open (one in a hundred, maybe?), but a greater chance of a fumble or some other bad result.
 
Top