Rule Changes

[BobbyBlueChip]

I knew from earlier reports that the clock rule was reversing, but didn't realize that the kickoffs were moving 5 yards back. That's huge with the speed
disparity in the college game.


Kickoff, change of posession rule changes made
Associated Press

Updated: April 12, 2007, 9:01 PM ET
Comment
Email
Print
INDIANAPOLIS -- Last season, the NCAA wanted to speed up football games. Next season, it wants more plays.

On Thursday, the rules oversight panel approved two major timing changes that would revert the rules to what they were in 2005 -- stopping the clock on possession changes and not starting it on kickoffs until the receiving team touches the ball.

Some coaches complained the 2006 changes, which resulted in about 14 fewer plays per game, had altered the game too much. Others said it prevented teams from rallying late in games.

In February, the football rules committee recommended going to back to the old system. After meeting with the American Football Coaches Association in March, the oversight panel agreed.

"The dramatic number of plays taken out of the game was a concern to everybody, including the rules committee," said Ty Halpin, a spokesman for the oversight panel. "These guys practice all week to play in the game and we found there were less opportunities for them. That was a big part of the rationale."

A message left at the office of Grant Teaff, executive director of the AFCA, was not immediately returned.

The impact of last year's rules were evident on and off the field.

Game times were reduced by an average of about 14 minutes, meeting a goal the committee had set.

On the field, though, there were problems. Trailing teams often sprinted onto the field after a punt, kickoff or turnover late in games to preserve precious time, while teams holding the lead delayed getting onto the field because they could use 25 seconds without running a play.

Another visible problem occurred on kickoffs. Since the clock started when the kicker touched the ball, some teams intentionally ran offsides to expend more time.

"I don't think that's what the committee really intended," Halpin said. "That's a rule the committee regretted making."

While this year's changes likely mean games will again be longer, the panel approved several other measures intended to help keep game times closer to 3 hours.

Kickoffs will be made from the 30-yard line, like in the NFL, instead of the 35. That, Halpin said, should ensure more returns and shorter stoppages.

"It should create more opportunities for what the committee feels is one of the most exciting plays in a game, and we're not really sure, but it may increase scoring, too," he said. :142smilie

After media timeouts during televised games, teams will have less time to run plays. Previously, teams had a 25-second play clock; now it will be 15 seconds. Halpin said it could prevent the long stoppages when teams are merely simply trying to save time.

One of the most time-consuming procedures, replay reviews, will not change. The football rules committee withdrew its proposal to impose a 2-minute limit, in part, because of the potential for technical difficulties.

The committee will also begin considering a play clock that alternates between 40 seconds and 25 seconds, depending on whether the clock has stopped. The NFL uses that system, and the committee thinks it could speed up games.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press

 

[IE]

College Football Land Rejoices!

Last year the NCAA implemented a new series of rules aimed at lowering times of games. Ostensibly this was done to help out the networks televising the games, as the 14 minutes the rules shaved off of the average game (from 3:21 to 3:07) last year was really useful so that...um...CBS could show 14 more commercials per broadcast? So the networks could fit one more episode of Malcom in the Middle into their early evening syndication lineups? To refresh your memory, the two major rule changes last year were that 1. The clock started when the kicking team kicked the ball (In the past the clock started when the receiving team touched the ball) and 2. On a change of possession the clock started when the official marked the ball (In the past the clock started on the snap). These rules changes did lower the times of games (as well as scoring, down five points a game last year), but they also led to a couple of unforeseen consequences. The change of possession rule made it even harder for a trailing team to get back in the game, as an extra 5-10 seconds lost when there are only 40 or so left in a game can crush a rally. (This also spawned one of my favorite Viewer Heckling moments in all of sports: Every time I watched a game last year I would look forward to seeing how many seconds a QB would waste after the official had started the clock. It was one of those rare moments in watching sports where you could honestly say without question "I could do better than that!" It was also super entertaining to see the deer in the headlights look on a QB when he realized the clock was running. Priceless.) The kickoff rules change was a terrible idea that spawned my favorite moment of all of last football season, when Bret Bielma of Wisconsin intentionally ran his kickoff team offsides near the end of the first half. Joe Pa was then left with two choices, take the ball at the 10 on the penalty, or let Wisconsin continue to use the ploy to run out the clock. Joe Pa chose the latter, and Bret Bielma became my Big 10 coach.

So in light of the obvious stupidity of the new rules the NCAA is poised to overturn them. Yay! say college football fans. Yay! say deer in the headlights QBs. Yay! says everyon..what? Wait. What is that you say? There are more new rules coming in with the repeals of last year's mistakes? Oi. Here is a look at the new rules proposed to come into effect next season:

-The play clock would be shortened from 25 to 15 seconds after a timeout
-Timeouts would be reduced from 65 to 30 seconds
-Instant replay reviews would be limited to two minutes
-Kickoffs would be moved back five yards, from the 30 instead of the 35

Now, at first, I really wanted to hate these new rules. I really did. I consider myself a bit of a traditionalist, and any change to the game sets off little alarms in my head. After thinking about the changes though, they just made too much sense for me to hate them. The first rule is rather benign, and I think it is a good one if only because it gives our friend deer in the headlights QB an opportunity to take a dumb delay of game penalty. The second rule also seems fairly simple, and considering that very few timeouts are actually taken for in depth skull sessions as opposed to clock management, I don't think it will detract anything from the game. The replay rule also seems like a fairly simple and easy one, as I know personally I saw way too many 5+ minute deliberations under the hood by college refs last season. Ah, but now onto the most tantalizing of the rule changes, kicking off from five yards further back. The thinking behind this rule is that more returns = more time run off the clock. That is a fair enough assumption, if saving time is your end goal. This rule has the potential however, to do exactly the opposite of what the two rule changes last year did: make the game more exciting and raise scoring. Yay! says everyone. I know that I saw a lot of kicks last year that were touchbacks, but certainly not by five yards. With the added number of returns caused by the rule we are going to see three things; 1. Better field position for the returning team, which inevitably over the course of a game will lead to more scoring opportunities. 2. More return TDs, as it is just common sense that more kicks will be returned all the way when the total number of returns rises and the distance required to score decreases. 3. More big hits on kick coverage, as the more kicks returned means the more licks dished out. Now this is the way to decrease the broadcast time of a game, while not taking anything away from the product on the field. Where were these guys last year when the rules committee was meeting?

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

IE - I was going to do a comparison of avg. NFL scores the year before and after they changed from the 35 to the 30.

Do you have that at your finger tips?

 

[IE]

will have to do some work, will see what i can come up with...

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

I'll take care of it - you take care of baseball forum

 

[IE]

lol, thanks man..........

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

Hard to get a real read as almost all of the 1994 rule changes were for the offense

____________________________________

1994:
There is now a 2 point conversion following touchdowns (teams now have the option of passing or running for two points or kicking for one after a TD).

The starting point of all kickoffs will be the kicking teams 30 yard line (moved back 5 yards).

Kickoff tees used can be no more than one inch in height (previously 3 inches).

A neutral zone infraction has been clarified (officials are to immediately blow their whistles whenever a defender enters the neutral zone causing the offensive player(s) directly opposite to move, this is considered a penalty on the defense. If there is no immediate reactional movement by the offensive player(s), there is no foul. (The neutral zone is defined as the space the length of the ball between the offense and defense line of scrimmage).

All field goals attempted and missed when the spot of the kick is beyond the 20 yard line, the defensive team taking possession will get the ball at the spot of the kick.

On any field goal attempted and missed with the spot of the kick is on or inside the 20, the ball will go to the defensive team taking possession at the 20.

The 11 players on the receiving team are prohibited from blocking below the waiste during a play in which there is a kickoff, safety kick, punt, field goal attempt or extra point kick with one exception, immediately at the snap on these plays those defenders on the line of scrimmage lined up on or inside the normal tight end position can block low.

 

[IE]

not directly related at all to your thread, but found this piece interesting...

http://www.footballcommentary.com/ncaaovertime.htm

 

[DeadPrez]

some interesting stats on how last year's rule changes affected outcomes (especially totals), and what to look for this year...

How did changes to college football rules affect bettors?
By: L. Kostroski

The 2006 college football rules changes that were implemented to shorten games are now history. The NCAA rules committee did what they set out to do; games were cut by an average of 14 minutes per game last season. There were also, on average, 14 fewer plays per game. We?ll get into how that did (or didn?t) affect games in regards to the pointspread a bit later.

While the NCAA rules committee may have had the betterment of the game in mind, they'll now ?turn back the clock? for next season. Two key rules have now been overturned by the NCAA committee for the 2007 season, something definitely for the better.

For those of you who may not remember what those rules actually were, let us refresh your memory.

1) The first one was actually starting the clock on a kickoff as soon as the kicker touched the ball rather than waiting until the returner touched it. The problem here was near the end of the half (or game), if the team leading was kicking off, they could milk the clock by intentionally running offsides and then re-kicking. They could run 10-15 seconds off the clock each play while taking just five-yard penalties each time. They could run the clock down and simply cause the half (or game) to end on a kickoff, keeping the opposing offense off the field. In 2007, the clock will now start when the returner touches the ball as it had before last season.

2) The second rule dealt with starting the clock after a change of possession rather than waiting until the ball was snapped. This took a lot of time off the clock throughout the game as teams changed possession, however it caused the most problems late in games (or halves). Rather than huddling up and calling a play, the offensive team would have to rush onto the field as the clock started. This was a definite disadvantage to a team that was trying to come from behind late in the game. This year the clock will start on a change of possession, after the ball is snapped.

How did those rules affect the college game last year and will it make a difference this year when it comes to the pointspread? We commonly heard two theories when it came to these changes. First, it would affect scoring negatively. Second, it would hurt favorites as they would have less time and fewer plays to cover the number.

Did the rules hurt scoring? Yes. It seemed obvious that shortening the game by what amounted to 14 plays would push scoring downward. That was the case last year. Of the 119 Division 1A teams, 69 squads scored fewer points in 2006 than they did in 2005. Just 48 teams had a higher PPG scoring average and two stayed the same. Almost 59 percent of the teams in college football last year had a lower PPG average than they did in 2005. Expect more scoring in 2007 as we revert back to the old rules.

Did the rules hinder favorites from covering the number in 2006? Not really. Last year the favorites posted an overall spread record of 336-350-16 (48.9 percent). The year before, favorites were 316-326-13 (49.2 percent). In 2004, the favorites were 316-339-2 (48.2 percent). In fact, college football favorites have been above 50 percent for the season just once in the last seven years (in 2003). Last year?s numbers fell right in line with where they have been historically.

How about big favorites? The rules must have hurt them? Maybe a little bit. Double-digit favorites last year came in at a 47.8 percent clip compare with an average of just over 50 percent over the last seven years. Since 1980, favorites of -10 or more have covered at exactly a 50 percent clip (measured over 6,716 games).

Even bigger favorites must have struggled? Not really. In fact, it was just the opposite. Favorites of three TD?s or more were 59-54-2 last year (52.2 percent). Since 2000, those same favorites (-21 or higher) hit at 51.3 percent and since 1990 came in a clip of 50.3 percent. Stepping it up a notch to four TD favorites or higher, we actually see they've covered at a much better rate last season than before. Last year, favorites of -28 or more were 31-21-1, or almost 60 percent. Historically, four-TD-or-higher favorites have come in at a 50.7 percent spot since 2000 and only 48.9 percent since 1990. The ?perceived? problem with the favorites covering at a reduced rate really never came to fruition.

Bottom line is, there might be some more scoring in 2007, but no real revelations when it comes to finding any pointspread golden nuggets.

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

Thanks for the articles.

I did some data mining on what happened to NFL totals from 93 to 94 and noted that the avg. points per game went from 37.4 to 40.5 points per game.

The linemakers did a pretty good job adapting though as the over was 27-31(47%) in the first four games of the season and 110-116(49%) for the season, so . . .

All that work and I've got nothin'