Potential Rule Changes

[CuseJacket]

Appeals process proposed for football players called for targeting in second half - NCAA.org

The NCAA Football Rules Committee on Friday approved measures intended to strengthen the accuracy of the targeting rule, limit blocking below the waist and address

www.ncaa.org

The NCAA Football Rules Committee on Friday approved measures intended to strengthen the accuracy of the targeting rule, limit blocking below the waist and address teams that appear to fake injuries to gain an advantage.

All rule proposals must be approved by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is scheduled to discuss football rules recommendations April 20. If approved, these changes would take effect in the 2022 season.

The committee, which began meeting Wednesday, proposed a change to the targeting rule after considering several adjustments. In games that have instant replay, when a targeting foul occurs in the second half, the carryover penalty (of sitting out the first half of that player's next game) will be eligible for further appeal.

The process would begin with a conference submitting a request to Steve Shaw, the NCAA national coordinator of officials, who would review video of the play. If it is clearly obvious that a player was incorrectly penalized for targeting, the call would be overturned, and the player would be cleared to play in the first half of the next game.

To address teams that are awarded an injury timeout through deceptive actions, the committee proposed a reporting and investigation process. Schools and conferences would be able to report questionable scenarios to the national coordinator of officials, who will review and provide feedback to the conference for further action. Any penalties levied would be up to the conference office or school involved.

A proposal to improve safety and simplify the rules governing blocking below the waist was also recommended. The proposal would only allow blocking below the waist by linemen and stationary backs inside the tackle box. Outside the tackle box on scrimmage plays, blocking below the waist would be prohibited.

 

[smokey_wasp]

I understand wanting to do something about fake injuries, but that's gonna be a mess and could have unintended consequences.

Blocking below the waist rule goes too far.

I like their idea about the targeting penalties.

 

[Root4GT]

I understand wanting to do something about fake injuries, but that's gonna be a mess and could have unintended consequences.

Blocking below the waist rule goes too far.

I like their idea about the targeting penalties.

Blocking below the waist lays waste to CPJ type offense for sure.

 

[Pointer]

Can we eliminate tackling below the waist too then? What a dump 3Ophobic proposed rule that is.

 

[herb]

Glorified 7 on 7

 

[g0lftime]

Two hand touch or flag football next?

 

[MWBATL]

Need to outlaw running to cut down an ACL injuries as well.

 

[MidtownJacket]

Need to outlaw running to cut down an ACL injuries as well.

Have you seen the speed walking football stuff?

What Is Walk Ball? The Hottest Trend in Football Locker Rooms

College players are obsessed with a new game that is a slow-motion version of football. The craze has a strict rule: no running.

www.wsj.com

 

[Oakland]

The fake / non-serious injury thing is getting out of hand. My opinion, if a player is injured and can't make it off the field on their own and the game is stopped, a five yard advantage would be awarded to the opposing team or a time out would be used to prevent the 5 yard advantage. Each team still gets 3 time outs per half and add 1 timeout for the whole game for injury issues. Laying on the ground with hurt fingers is silly and ruins the game for the fans.

 

[roadkill]

The fake / non-serious injury thing is getting out of hand. My opinion, if a player is injured and can't make it off the field on their own and the game is stopped, a five yard advantage would be awarded to the opposing team or a time out would be used to prevent the 5 yard advantage. Each team still gets 3 time outs per half and add 1 timeout for the whole game for injury issues. Laying on the ground with hurt fingers is silly and ruins the game for the fans.

While I agree there needs to be some kind of policy that disincentivizes teams from faking injuries, I don't think rewarding the opposing team is the way to properly incentivize behavior. You're essentially rewarding teams that injure their opponents. Wasn't an NFL team (Saints?) caught having a "bounty" system for injuring opposing team's players a few years ago?

 

[g0lftime]

Teams are using it to stop the up tempo teams like UCF (now at UT). I think if it is an injury that stops play then they cannot re-enter the game until a change of possession rather than one play and back in. Could also use a timeout and come back in.
Some coaches hate the up tempo teams and want no change in that rule.

 

[RyanS12]

Fake injury needs to sit more than one play. Minimum 2 plays for the “injured” player(s)
Hell, make it a full 4 down series. That all eliminate it quick!

 

[lv20gt]

The ability to completely control substitutions for both teams is a huge imbalance in favor of the offense, and the "fake" injuries are just a symptom of that. The vast majority of fake injuries would be cut down if a first down was treated like it currently is when the offense subs allowing subs for both teams.

 

[ibeattetris]

Teams are using it to stop the up tempo teams like UCF (now at UT). I think if it is an injury that stops play then they cannot re-enter the game until a change of possession rather than one play and back in. Could also use a timeout and come back in.
Some coaches hate the up tempo teams and want no change in that rule.

This has been my suggestion as well. Change of possession seems best to me.

 

[ibeattetris]

The ability to completely control substitutions for both teams is a huge imbalance in favor of the offense, and the "fake" injuries are just a symptom of that. The vast majority of fake injuries would be cut down if a first down was treated like it currently is when the offense subs allowing subs for both teams.

Would the clock stop to allow subs in? Otherwise, what is to stop defense from slowly subbing or subbing just to waste time? Both teams have the advantage of offense controlling substitutions, so I don’t see this as something that needs to be balanced.

 

[lv20gt]

Would the clock stop to allow subs in? Otherwise, what is to stop defense from slowly subbing or subbing just to waste time? Both teams have the advantage of offense controlling substitutions, so I don’t see this as something that needs to be balanced.

Same way it happens now after the offense subs. Ref stops play for a certain amount of time to allow for subs. You don't see teams slowly subbing to waste time now so I don't know why you would think it would be the case then. Obviously rules would be different towards the end of halves as they already are.

The second statement is just silly to me. You obviously need a level of balance between offense and defense. Otherwise you could use that same justification for just about any rule. Offense gets 13 players while defense gets 7. It's fine because both teams have that advantage on offense. Certain rules and aspects will inherently favor the offense vs defense. For instance nothing can really be done about the offense controlling when the ball is snapped. But I don't think one side of the ball should be able to almost completely dictate who is on the field for an entire drive.

 

[ibeattetris]

Same way it happens now after the offense subs. Ref stops play for a certain amount of time to allow for subs. You don't see teams slowly subbing to waste time now

That’s because they can’t, because the offense is allowed to snap the ball. What you are offering is the ability for the defense to sub whenever they want and force clock to run while the offense is forced to wait to snap.

The second statement is just silly to me. You obviously need a level of balance between offense and defense. Otherwise you could use that same justification for just about any rule.

There are numerous rules already in place that make offense stronger than defense, calling out substitutions when there are a myriad of other rules favoring the offense is what’s silly.

 

[lv20gt]

That’s because they can’t, because the offense is allowed to snap the ball. What you are offering is the ability for the defense to sub whenever they want and force clock to run while the offense is forced to wait to snap.

What? When the offense subs the ref stands over the ball and doesn't let the offense snap the ball until the defense gets a chance. And no, what I'm offering isn't that at all. Go read what I suggested again. I suggested that it happened after a first down, and just like now, the ref would mark the ball ready for play after a short time so no, the defense wouldn't be able to just use it to kill the clock.

There are numerous rules already in place that make offense stronger than defense, calling out substitutions when there are a myriad of other rules favoring the offense is what’s silly.

Except the imbalance with the substitution rule is different in kind compared to just about any of the other rules favoring the offense or defense. It's utterly stupid that if a defensive player gets a cramp they have to fall to the ground to be able to get off the field. That is what the current rules force. And the offense doesn't have same constraint. If an offensive player gets a cramp they just can walk off the field and sub. At any time.

The current dynamic would be as if in baseball the batting team could just say "no you can't switch out your pitcher". It's stupid.

 

[ThatGuy]

I don't think we should penalize a team for their players getting injured - that just leads to bad downstream consequences. Love the idea that an injured player - whether they're really injured or flopping - has to sit out for the remainder of the series. Here's hoping we don't incentivize the wrong thing.

Also, had to include this beauty for reference. Ah, memories.

 

[CEB]

I don't think we should penalize a team for their players getting injured - that just leads to bad downstream consequences. Love the idea that an injured player - whether they're really injured or flopping - has to sit out for the remainder of the series. Here's hoping we don't incentivize the wrong thing.

Also, had to include this beauty for reference. Ah, memories.

Agree here. I’m not sure how you can determine if an injury is legit, Even if you have replay. Besides, who wants to add more down time to games for injury replays? Article makes it sound like they are talking about leagues enforcing penalties after the fact... not sure how that works.
I agree that an injured player is eligible to return on the next first down or if the defense calls a time out.
No change to substitution rules needed; defenses are going to have to figure out how to play differently to address the hurry up. They will; it’s all cyclical. It has to be solved by scheme changes, not rule changes though.