Rule Changes

[Buzzbomb]

 

[g0lftime]

If they want to reduce the length of time the games take, then shorten and reduce the number of tv commercials. Have time limits on how long the refs can review a call.

 

[yeti92]

Continuing down the path of ruining college football. Profits over everything. Screw anyone who wants to watch actual football and not 85% commercials with an occasional break for football.

 

[iceeater1969]

So the time between commercials will be reduced and the time for commercials will be increased. Fine w me if beer price is reduced or sold in stands.

 

[Root4GT]

Good changes. 4 hour 30 minute games are both stupid and unnecessary.

The MLB pitch clock is also great.

 

[CEB]

The running clock is the only thing that will significantly shorten the game. @iceeater1969 is right...It also means less football. They’ll fill the time with ads and public interest stories I’m sure. Dumb.

The consecutive time out rule is the only good one. It only happens once a game if the opposing team has two timeouts left when there’s a game winning FG attempt pending. That’s just annoying anyway. Good news for Geoff Collins though... now no one needs to save time outs.

I actually hate the no untimed down at the end of 1st and 3rd. So they really think they need to create the one and only scenario in the game of football that blows a legal play dead before it’s over? Am I interpreting this correctly? This is just an asinine idea and it would save no more than 10 full seconds per game, (unless there is a a defensive penalty). Of all of them, this one seems the dumbest to me.

 

[Ibeeballin]

The running clock is the only thing that will significantly shorten the game. @iceeater1969 is right...It also means less football. They’ll fill the time with ads and public interest stories I’m sure. Dumb.

The consecutive time out rule is the only good one. It only happens once a game if the opposing team has two timeouts left when there’s a game winning FG attempt pending. That’s just annoying anyway. Good news for Geoff Collins though... now no one needs to save time outs.

I actually hate the no untimed down at the end of 1st and 3rd. So they really think they need to create the one and only scenario in the game of football that blows a legal play dead before it’s over? Am I interpreting this correctly? This is just an asinine idea and it would save no more than 10 full seconds per game, (unless there is a a defensive penalty). Of all of them, this one seems the dumbest to me.

You’re interpreting the rule incorrectly. Instead of the penalty, you just access the penalty and start the 2nd or 4th qtr.

 

[CEB]

You’re interpreting the rule incorrectly. Instead of the penalty, you just access the penalty and start the 2nd or 4th qtr.

But the intent is still that they will stop a legal play when clock ticks 0:00, right? That scenario doesn’t play out in any other situation... and it will save no time whatsoever in a game

ETA: my point in the penalty was that the only scenario where this rule would save real time (more than about 10 seconds per game) is if they had to replay the down for a penalty.

So to be totally clear on my question; does this rule mean that a legal play, snapped before the clock expires will be blown dead at 0:00?
Or does the rule mean that ONLY and untimed penalty down will not be allowed and the fourth quarter would start with said penalty down?

 

[AUFC]

But the intent is still that they will stop a legal play when clock ticks 0:00, right? That scenario doesn’t play out in any other situation... and it will save no time whatsoever in a game

No, you play out the final play of the quarter. If there’s a penalty, previously there was an untimed down. Now after the penalty, the clock would just move to 15:00 in the 2nd/4th quarter and the game would continue.

 

[CEB]

No, you play out the final play of the quarter. If there’s a penalty, previously there was an untimed down. Now after the penalty, the clock would just move to 15:00 in the 2nd/4th quarter and the game would continue.

Ok... that makes more sense.

Still stinks that all of these rules mean less actual football.....

 

[stech81]

So the time between commercials will be reduced and the time for commercials will be increased. Fine w me if beer price is reduced or sold in stands.

Less commercials means less time to pee. Less time to pee means less beer. Guess I could wear depends.

 

[iceeater1969]

Less commercials means less time to pee. Less time to pee means less beer. Guess I could wear depends.

Plan ahead! I have an end of row seat and am near the cross walk!
Years of trading up.

 

[Ibeeballin]

The constant replays have more affect on the game than the commercials

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

Just stupid changes. In baseball, the problem is the speed of the game so the changes are good. In college football the problem is the length of commercials so to fix that they take away 10 plays per team with the running clock after 1st downs. We get 12 to 14 games a year in college football so of course they need to make the actual game shorter. Next they will keep the clock running on incompletions to take away even more plays.

 

[Towaliga]

Less commercials means less time to pee. Less time to pee means less beer. Guess I could wear depends.

You could try drinking less beer!
(I crack myself up sometimes)

 

[UgaBlows]

So a first down won’t stop the clock in the last two minutes of the game anymore? That will limit comeback potential i would think?

 

[stech81]

You could try drinking less beer!
(I crack myself up sometimes)

I could cut back to 12 beers but than I would not have any for the second half.
But without you know who coaching I could watch the game.

 

[CEB]

So a first down won’t stop the clock in the last two minutes of the game anymore? That will limit comeback potential i would think?

The top blurb of the article is wrong. If you read further down it says the clock would stop at the last 2 minutes of “a half,” which I believe means “both halves” and that makes some sense.

There’s a fourth change lurking out there, though. They are also talking about a running clock on incomplete passes too. Talk about limiting comebacks... that’s a biggie. That said, it might be interesting to see how teams manage that. If there is no benefit to stopping the clock with a pass, defenses can’t rush three and play prevent because running could be a more attractive option late in the game.... they say this rule is the most controversial but it could actually change the late game approach in a way that might actually be interesting.

 

[Ibeeballin]

So a first down won’t stop the clock in the last two minutes of the game anymore? That will limit comeback potential i would think?

Only inside 2min it will stop at the end of the halves

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I actually like the rules changes. The running clock after 1st downs should have a great impact on shortening game length. The ban on consecutive timeouts is long overdue. The untimed penalties I don't think buys much, but I have no issue with the new rule.