NCAA CFB 2014 Proposed Rule Changes

[venture]

NCAA proposes rule changes for targeting, defensive substitutions - CBSSports.com

Ehhh, one I agree with the other I don't.

• Targetting penalty of 15-yards can be overturned if the ejection is negated. However if another personal foul happens on the play, it stays.
• Defenses will get 10-seconds at the start of every play to due any substitutions. If the offense snaps before the play clock progresses 10-seconds, they'll be called off sides and get a 5 yard penalty.

First one I'm good with, the second one is stupid and would kill any high tempo offenses. Something tell me Saban is lobbying hard for it since he has been openly against the play style.I wonder what will happen if it is the end of the game and you are rushing to stop the clock or get a play off. Now they may have to factor in the extra 5 yard penalty by rushing to start the play. I can just see this causing many issues in very close games that come down to the wire.

[Martin]

I wonder what will happen if it is the end of the game and you are rushing to stop the clock or get a play off.

The committee has recommended a change what will allow defenses to substitute players within the first 10 seconds of the 40-second play clock, though not in the final two minutes of a half. Should an offense snap the ball before the play clock reaches 29 seconds, the offense will be called for a 5-yard delay of game.

i'm with you... the first proposed change makes sense. if the ejection can be reviewed and overturned, it only makes sense that the penalty itself can be overturned. my only concern here would be if it opens the door to all penalties being reviewable... seems to me like that could slow down the game. the second proposed change is silly... i think the current rule is fair in that if the offense substitutes then the defense gets time for any substitutions. however, i think this proposal goes too far and unfairly impacts teams that use high tempo as a strategy. -M

[Just the facts]

I wonder what will happen if it is the end of the game and you are rushing to stop the clock or get a play off. Now they may have to factor in the extra 5 yard penalty by rushing to start the play. I can just see this causing many issues in very close games that come down to the wire.

It won't matter because the clock will start as soon as the ball is set back in play. Hail Marys and game winning field goals will have to occur with 11 seconds left on the clock. College football is following the same path NASCAR did by taking all the fun and excitement out of the sport.

[SoonerDave]

The second change - the 10-second rule - is widely being hailed as an ambush by numerous coaches. Rich Rodriguez (I think) was one of several coaches who echoed a similar sentiment that they had just attended conference athletic meetings where things like this are typically brought up, and no one was advised of it. Think the Rutgers head coach (name escapes) said the same thing, as did Hugh Freeze.

This is another NCAA rulemaking debacle under the name of "safety." WSU coach Mike Leach had a field day with this stupidity yesterday - one classic tweet went something like "Here's an idea, why don't we spend time coaching instead of begging for new rules?"

Here's hoping a wave of criticism from, well, everyone puts the kibosh on this rule. Otherwise, it seems the NCAA is bent on replacing/fixing one asinine rule with another that's actually more asinine. And for the NCAA, that's saying something.

[Lord Helmet]

Maybe next they'll try tackling the problem of fast break points in college basketball.

[Just the facts]

Maybe next they'll try tackling the problem of fast break points in college basketball.

That's easy - 3 defenders must be in the backcourt before the ball can cross the half court line. It would be called "excessive basketballing" and would be a technical foul OR we go to the old girls rule where the basketball cannot be dribbled over the half-court line.

[ljbab728]

Barry Tramel's take on this.

Slowing down hurryup offenses would impact Big 12 teams, including OU and OSU | News OK

[kevinpate]

I was going to write something witty that popped in my head, but by the time I counted to ten so the mods wouldn't have a reason to flag me for speed posting, the thought, she disappeared, or perhaps died of loneliness.

[ljbab728]

I was going to write something witty that popped in my head, but by the time I counted to ten so the mods wouldn't have a reason to flag me for speed posting, the thought, she disappeared, or perhaps died of loneliness.

Thanks for sharing anyway, kp.

[Stan Silliman]

Saban_Calls_for_Rules Change

[Stan Silliman]

Silliman on Sports
By Stan Silliman

SABAN CALLS FOR RULES TO SLOW UP-TEMPO OFFENSES


“It’s a safety issue,” says Alabama football coach Nick Saban, “How can you expect defenses to keep up If they run off plays before we have a chance to substitute.”

How can the speed of play harm the players?

“Well, didn’t you hear me? These fast break offenses will sometimes run fifteen plays in a row and my 325 pound defensive tackle is begging for air. I have to waste a time out to replace him.”

So, doesn’t the offense have players of equal weight? You don’t see them whining for blows. Where’s the safety issue?

“Heart attacks, man! Fans don’t want to see these pinball game scores. They want good-ol’ grind ‘em out, hard-hitting, smash mouth football.”

And, somehow, that’s safer for the players? I thought studies showed the more times players slam their helmets into other players, the more head and neck injuries and the more concussions.

“No, it’s the whales having heart attacks and the excessive number of plays which leads to injuries.”

So you contend the fans would like to see less plays? With possibly less collisions? Maybe you can enact rules that prevents tackling… like having the receivers or the running backs wear little flags on their belts.

“Now, you’re just being silly. Studies were made showing the more plays you run, the greater your chances for injury.”

What if you played less games? Wouldn’t that limit the amount of collisions players had during a year?

“That’s not going to happen. We recruit to stop the big S.E.C. running backs and I don’t feel I need to change just because Johnny Manziel or Missouri or some other punk school wants to no-huddle us off the field. We should be allowed a fifteen second pause to allow for substitutions after every first down,” says Saban. “That’s only fair. I’m not alone in this. Bret Bielema of Wisconsin agrees there should be rule changes.”

I guess your right about a few things, Nick. You and Bret only average about 65 plays a game. Teams like A & M, Texas Tech, Oregon, Oklahoma and La Tech are clipping out in the mid to high eighty plays a game. More hits, more fatigue, I can see that. What about safer uniforms and helmets with foam padding on the outside?

“Fans don’t want that. They want to hear the smack. And if we flak jacket the entire uniform the players will get so hot they couldn’t last ten plays. No, the answer is new rules to slow down the spread offenses. Outlaw the no huddle. Make everyone huddle up and allow us time to sub.”

Didn’t you just win three of the last four national titles? You must be doing something right. I guess then we’ll see these new rules. After all, we’re certain most coaches and most fans agree with you. Nick, don’t walk off. I just said how much everyone always agrees with you. Nick? Nick…. Don’t leave.

[traxx]

So many of the rule changes over the past 25 years or so have benefited the offense. It has been disproportionate and unfair. That being said, this rule is stupid. It doesn't come from a place of wanting to make things fair for the defense, it comes from the likes of Saban who can't figure out how to slow down or stop the fast tempo offense.

So I guess he's of the mindset that if you can't outscheme or out althlete 'em, change the rules. That'd be like Art Briles not being able to get his offense to avoid tackles so he advocates to make tackling illegal. The idea is to find ways to give your team an advantage (in a fair way) whether that's through better athletes, better schemes, better conditioning etc. And if someone outsmarts you, you play the game and figure out a way to outsmart them next time instead of changing the rules like a 5 year old.

[Laramie]

Naturally Saban would be for this rule after the ambush Bama took from OU's offense in the 2014 Sugar Bowl Classic. They kept that great Crimson Tide defense on their heels second guessing that hurry-up spread offense throughout; resulting in the Alabama fans being on the edge of their seats all night.

The great Nick Saban didn't have an answer for that maze of ground and aerial attacks the Sooners put on the Alabama Crimson Tide. His only hope was for a couple of miscues; which the fine tuned OU offense executed to timing and perfection. They used Bama's speed and overplaying the field and turned it against them.

You're right Stan Stillman! Saban was indeed correct; that 'tub-in-a-bucket' 325 pound tackle couldn't catch his breath.

"Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ...as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.

[jstaylor62]

If Nick Saban was truly concerned about "Player Safety", he would refuse to allow Alabama to schedule games against FCS schools. Alabama has a tremendous size and speed advantage over the FCS schools, so this puts the players on the FCS teams at an increased risk of injury.

[ljbab728]

This may not be a done deal.

NCAA Football Rules Committee's Troy Calhoun backtracks on slowdown proposal - ESPN

Troy Calhoun is willing to take measures to slow down college offenses, but only if he sees hard evidence that defending an up-tempo offense creates genuine health risks.

Six days after asserting a rule change would be made "to enhance student-athlete safety by guaranteeing a small window for both teams to substitute," the Air Force coach and NCAA Football Rules Committee chairman backtracked in a conference call with reporters, saying he has seen no such data.

"The key is this: I think the only way that it can or it should become a rule is if it is indeed a safety concern. And that can't be something that's a speculation or a possibility," Calhoun said Tuesday afternoon. "I think there's got to be something empirical there where you realize, 'Yep, this truly is a health matter' in terms of not being able to get a defensive player off the field."

[ou48A]

Finally, a study that examines pace of play and its relation to injuries

Since the word leaked of the defensive substitution rule (AKA the "ten second rule) proposal last week, we've extensively covered the reaction from coaches, the coaches who seem to be behind the push for the rule, and the fact that there is no hard data to support the claim that up tempo offenses are dangerous to players.

Thanks to some in depth research from the guys at College Football Matrix, no huddle coaches can breathe a little easier thanks to some definitive findings that favor an up tempo approach when it comes to its relation to injuries

Based on their data, which takes a look at the pace of play, and total starts loss due to injury from 2009-2012, the Big 12 averaged the most snaps per game (162.4) of any of the big five conferences, and lost a total of 595 starts during the four year cross section. On the other hand, the SEC ran about 13 less plays per game, and lost a total of 1,098 starts, which was the most starts lost among the power five leagues.

That's quite a statement favoring up tempo teams in regards to the proposed rule change. Personally, I've seen all I need to see on the proposal to formulate my own opinion, and continue to think it is as ludicrous as it was on day one. Now there's just solid scientific evidence to support it.

See the full study, and read some very in depth observations from the College Football Matrix guys here.
http://www.footballscoop.com/news/12...on-to-injuries

[ljbab728]

Not to worry, better sense prevailed for now.

NCAA committee tables planned vote on 10-second rule proposal - ESPN