April 27, 2006
Rules changes for 2006 would shorten games
The NCAA Rules Committee, along with input from the AFCA, has proposed some rules changes for the 2006 season that are designed to shorten the length of games. The reasoning cited is that many games are pushing 3.5 hours and games featuring two passing teams are often lasting over 4 hours.
The rules changes expected to pass include lowering the kicking tee for kickoffs from two inches down to one inch to decrease touchbacks, starting the clock when the ball is kicked rather than when a member of the receiving team takes possesion, and starting the clock after changes of possession as soon as the ball is spotted instead of when the ball is snapped.
Another recommendation that's expected to fail would give home teams the option of cutting halftime down to 15 minutes from 20. Changes in the replay system have also been proposed. The changes would leave the current system in place but would also allow head coaches unlimited challenges (as long as calls are overturned.)
Comments:
Gene Henneman said:
posted on April 27, 2006 1:54 PM — 24.92.219.53 — link — abuse?
I agree that the time limits for games have gotten completely out of hand. I know we have to have the commercials so the conferences and teams can scrape in the dough but it has gotten ridiculuous. How in the world did they ever let it get to the point of taking 3.5 to 4 hours to play a game that is limited to 60 minutes. It has ruined the game because team know that when a time out is called that they will get 5 to 6 minutes to figure out the upcoming plays instead of the legal 1 minute time out. Some games I had just quit watching.
Richie said:
posted on April 27, 2006 3:59 PM — 207.191.97.6 — link — abuse?
I agree...try shortening the TV Timeouts or at least the number of TV timeouts and this would not happen. How come this wasn't a problem 5-10 yrs ago? I don't think anyone has changed the amount of time in each quarter... The problem just doesn't seem to be in the "game itself" so much. Besides, why would you want to ruin the chances of a last second (i.e. Bluegrass Miracle) come from behind TD!
jon said:
posted on April 27, 2006 7:26 PM — 71.105.69.158 — link — abuse?
The changes would leave the current system in place but would also allow head coaches unlimited challenges (as long as calls are overturned.)
Yeah, allowing coaches an unlimited number of challenges seems like the ticket to shortening the games...
I agree with the above comments. The commercial situation has gotten out of control. Some of the CBS broadcasts, they have one play (4 minutes of commercial) back, one play (3 minutes of commercial). I timed it once, there was 3 minutes of game (really 30 seconds of actual gameplay), and 10 minutes of commercial. Awesome.
Regan said:
posted on April 27, 2006 9:42 PM — 64.12.116.199 — link — abuse?
The length of the games doesn't bother me too much; I just wish the stations would anticipate the games' length when it comes time for the 3:30pm block.
I know Jefferson-Pilot enraged me four times last season by continuing to have the sideline reporters babble after a 12noon game after a 3:30pm game I wanted to see had begun. I was waiting to see the Tennessee-Notre Dame game, and missed all of the pre-game analysis, hype, etc. The 12noon was over just before 3:30pm, but they kept babbling, speaking w/players, etc. and didn't switch over until half of the first quarter was over.
All because JP Sports only allowed 3 hours when they knew better to begin with - the words that came out of my mouth scared me and all of my guests...
DoubleT said:
posted on April 28, 2006 1:28 AM — 68.98.249.63 — link — abuse?
Yes games have completely gotten out of control as far as time goes. Being a red raider fan, our games are lengthy. I don't think Leach will be changing his strategy to shorten the length of game though,lol. It's all about the money though in the end. As long as businesses and corporations are wanting to advertise, then there will be the 5 or 6 minute commercial timeouts. Thank goodness that the television corporations are kind enough not to run commercials at the same time; most of the time.
BrotherB said:
posted on April 28, 2006 7:52 AM — 70.61.125.99 — link — abuse?
Well as with most things associated with the NCAA, whatever the TV networks say, is what they will do. From the emergence of the maxim-esque sideline reporters to super long commercial timeouts, the networks dictate how long the games are for the most part. I just don't think that trying to engage the "casual" college football fan should be the main goal of the NCAA/Networks especially when they have begun to alienate the core base that pays the bills in the first place.
My two pesos.
LB said:
posted on April 28, 2006 8:43 AM — 65.96.69.89 — link — abuse?
The NCAA should adopt the NFL rules with respect to stopping the clock. The clock shouldn't stop after first downs at all and should also run on certain out of bounds plays not within 5 minutes of the halves (also an NFL rule). Changing the size of a kicking tee won't shorten games.
The Mayor said:
posted on April 29, 2006 2:18 PM — 24.23.202.200 — link — abuse?
I agree with Pete, although it's not realistic. When you are actually at a game while it is being televised the breaks for commercials are excrutiating and interupt the flow of the game.
My fear is that College Stadiums will start showing the commercials on the jumbotron like they do at some Pro games. That's enough to send me out to the parking lot to raid the cooler.
giambijr154 said:
posted on April 29, 2006 11:17 PM — 71.193.192.115 — link — abuse?
i think that the rule where once ball is kicked the clock will start. wah ti f theres only 2 sec. left? and the reciveing team is down. Now they could just let the ball go and down it but once the rule is changed it will ruin last second come-backs!
Brian said:
posted on April 30, 2006 10:12 AM — 72.48.20.51 — link — abuse?
Those are some of the absolute worst ideas I've ever freaking heard.
"...starting the clock after changes of possession as soon as the ball is spotted instead of when the ball is snapped."
Well we stopped them on 4th down with 5 seconds left in the game but we lost because we were out of timeouts and never got a play off? Terrible, terrible idea.
Chuck Rainey said:
posted on May 1, 2006 3:33 PM — 138.163.0.42 — link — abuse?
TV timeouts are causing the length of games to spiral out of control. Why do we need a timeout before & after every kickoff? That seems to be the biggest waste of time. I know I am not the only one erked by this! Cut all those and you have your half hour back. Let's worry less about endorsement funds and more about the play of the game.
Carmine Conti said:
posted on May 2, 2006 10:43 AM — 70.36.7.198 — link — abuse?
C'mon.....
The reason these games are the legnth they are, and this only applies to televised games, is nothing more than commercialism. (IE. why, after a touchdown, and try after, do we go to commercial, to come back for a kick-off, then go right back to another commercial. If the NCAA wants to shorten the games, then shorten the advertising flight times during a game..... We all know this won't happen, because the networks depend on the sponsors, as well as the NCAA does.... Stop pretending it's the rules committee's fault for 4 hour games, and why not make it a days event, to much fast food mentality here. "I want my game to be fast, and taste good, and i want it in two hours or less".
How can allowing coaches to have unlimited challenges make a game go faster....? This is a never ending saga....
BummerMike said:
posted on May 2, 2006 11:33 AM — 12.149.217.225 — link — abuse?
These changes will do nothing to have a serious impact. If they really want to shorten the game, they should consider the NFL's rule that the clock keeps running when a player goes out-of-bounds during most of the game (not the 4th quarter, I think)... I don't like the rule, but it does help make the game shorter.
Doug said:
posted on May 3, 2006 12:05 PM — 169.200.185.19 — link — abuse?
I go to at least 8 games a year. Several are not televised. The difference is incredible. A non-televised game has the appearance of a basketball game or tennis match as quickly as the ball moves up and down the field. A televised game- we normally end up back in the parking lot at half time with our buddies Jim,Jack, and George.
Tomcat said:
posted on May 3, 2006 11:09 PM — 66.142.91.46 — link — abuse?
Its all about T.V. and I have to admit its hard to watch anything on T.V. The Rose Bowl game on A.B.C. lasted over 4 1/2 hours at least thats what I recorded and I didn't get some of the post-game show.At least it was at the end of the season so we didn't have to listen to all that other crap from Jackson and Dan Foust both big U.S.C. fans.During the regular season they continually interupt games with other teams highlights, coaches interveiws and alot of junk we dont want to hear. We want to watch the game we are watching.During the 2004 Texas vs A&M game they werent even paying attention to the game they were brodcasting.Just show the game that we want to watch and quit all that stupid bias commentary and interuptions.If you watch an old game recorded on Raycom its pretty cool. They flash other scores across the bottom of the sceen occasionally not ruiing the game that I'm trying to watch.
Solution clean house and fire those guys hire some inpartial knowlegable commentators like Bubba.Reduce all commmercials to only broadcast during official time outs.
Dont mess with the game.
11-2 11-2 10-3 11-1 13-0 HOOKEM HORNSScarletbuck-i said:
posted on May 8, 2006 3:50 PM — 67.97.125.66 — link — abuse?
I think the commercials should be aired during the timeouts. I don't like anything about changing the rules to accommodate a shorter game time. Football is what I like and football is what I want and I DON'T want them to change the rules for an NCAA game to be more like the NFL. If I wanted to watch the NFL I would. Leave the college football rules the way they are and eliminate some of the needless commercials!
JoshyD said:
posted on May 25, 2006 10:30 AM — 63.168.138.15 — link — abuse?
I hate to sound like a broken record, but, commercials, commercials, commercials...
But besides that...the clock does not need to stop at then end of every first down to reset the ball. I like this rule as it makes come-from-behind wins more likely, BUT, it should only be done in the second and fourth quarters...eliminate it in the first and third...or only put it into effect the last 5 minutes of each half...that alone would save LOTS of time.
Also...get rid of all the extraneous commercials!!
sometomfool said:
posted on June 6, 2006 7:14 PM — 64.142.91.184 — link — abuse?
I hope the don't ruin the game by reducing the number of snaps and allowing a team to run out the clock with a two touch down lead and a handful of first downs the way it works in the NFL right now.
I was a huge NFL but the game rule changes turned away as a spectator. The long and frequent timeouts made me cancel my seats but the changes in the dead ball and move to the 45 second clock took the grit and savy out of the game, helping accentuate the specialist and huge sized players. Even with TIVO getting around the delays, the product is darn tepid, they games hardly get interesting.
There are just fewer plays too, little time for a scrappy, talented, and aerobically fit, mentally rough team to find a way to set their opponent off balance and regain a lead.
It iss the momentum and morale , being able to sense the human spirits rising and falling, that makes sports great fun to watch. Adverse circumstance like the fatigue or being behind (or in the lead?) seems to draw out more personality in the players.
Now, there was plenty of that in 3 hour games of the past and the idea of reducing the tendancy for 4 hour games insn't entirely wrong. Keeping the spirit while preventing time extension can be accomplished if rule changes were carefully planned to be "snap count neutral".
To the extent that tv and challenges stop the clock, time should be taken off the clock: take the startdard delay of game period off for each time the ball wouldn't otherwise been stopped.
Team called timeouts could be shorted, two short one standard. Certainly some cooperation with TV might be needed...
Speed up the Challenge Process, reduce penalties? Technology or minor rule changes might eliminate some frequent abiguities? Geting rid of JUMP balls didn't ruin basketball eventhough it was a major change! Certainly "chains" could be eliminated in those games burdened with "tv timeouts"...the ball position could be checked via something-gpslike and compared to the mark instaneously?
I don't think even the TV people want less play, more ads per hour. I don't think they want more time telivsing the players between plays. They can help figure away when commercials are not on there is a higher percentage of action.
randy mcinerney said:
posted on June 10, 2006 6:43 PM — 172.145.185.205 — link — abuse?
The fans pay the bills, and buy all the stuff, so you better take out the celebration penalty from college football and replace it with a "taunting" penalty. I don't like a guy putting his finger in the face of the other team, but if he wants to hold up his #1 finger on the way to the endzone i see nothing wrong with that. you are taking the fun out of the game for the players and fans. [who pay your salaries by the way.]let the kids celebrate together, make it a judgement call, but loosen up, please ! Or one day you'll regret it . i know some people who have quit watching because of this very rule. What"s the fun of being a player or fan if you can"t celebrate your accomplishments on the field?
Jeff said:
posted on June 12, 2006 12:49 PM — 66.6.146.60 — link — abuse?
Why are they always changing the rules, the game has worked the same way for how long? The games are longer now because of network TV timeouts and the change to the overtime rule. But is that figured into the equation? I say leave well enough alone and let's just play ball.
Rick said:
posted on June 25, 2006 12:00 PM — 68.94.203.143 — link — abuse?
I disagree with shortening college football games! Fans who leave early will leave early no matter how short the games become. The rest of us wait all week to see a game and enjoy the ride. We don't watch the clock and hope the game ends quickly. College football is one of the greatest sports on the planet with the most fervent fans. Question: Who wants college football games shortened? Answer: The media, NOT the fans. Most members of the media are only intrested in baseball, and those that are semi-fans of football usually aren't covering the teams of interest to them. So, their goal is to get out of the stadium as soon as possible, putting their interests at odds with the interests of the fans. Don't let the media intimidate you, NCAA, into reducing the time we get to enjoy watching our teams. If the media isn't interested, that's their problem. We want our games the way that they are today.
Ben said:
posted on July 4, 2006 2:26 PM — 80.43.21.166 — link — abuse?
Any changes introduced should be to do with the times when the game clock is stopped and restricting commercial interruption rather than attempting to change the fundamental rules of the game itself. TV should have to adapt itself to the sport, rather than vice versa.
Tomcat said:
posted on July 5, 2006 8:04 PM — 69.153.83.199 — link — abuse?
I agree with you Ben.We do not want the game changed.All the commercial crap ruins the momentam of the moment.Then at the end of the game they cut out the trophy presentation and coaches interveiws.
I dont like it when the networks go to other games highlights during the game I'm trying to watch, save that for halftime or between games.
Some networks leave the game that you are watching and switch to another, that should be illegal. Or having to watch the end of some other game and missing part of the one that we want to see.
ABC is the absolote worse broadcasting network. They have opioninated bias announcers who are always talking about crap that has nothing to do with the game they are broadcasting. Keith Jackson and Dan Fouts need to be fired and run off.I attended the 04 UT vs A&M game and recorded the game at home.We watched the game later and it was the worst job ever done broadcasting a game.They were all talking about BCS and interveiwing coaches during the game.They were not even focusing on the game they were broadcasting.Our team went 11-1 that year, and we had to listen to interveiws with Bob Stoops, Urban Meyer, and Tommie Tubberville during our game.
Raycom Sports, Fox SW, and TBS do a hell of alot better job.
Dont Mess With the Game-Eliminate commercial timeouts and interruptions
Hookem-Horns Sicem Bears OU-SuxStrongsville WR said:
posted on July 7, 2006 12:14 AM — 70.229.205.203 — link — abuse?
I say get the players opinions because im one myself at a high school level. Most of them will say that some of those changes are ruining the fun of football. If people were really interested in football they wouldn't mind how long a game goes. But commercials which has come up a lot lately is ruining everyones love for the game. Just when you get all hyped up you have to listen to those stupid commercials which don't change our minds on buying a product because we all hate them so much. It's the biggest waste of time during a game ever because it doesn't accomplish anything. And i speak for a lot of people when i say that. Some of you may be nodding your head while you read this because it's just what your thinking. To sum it up, if you change the rules of football to an extent that the gameplay is very different and noticable, you'll be losing a lot of fans. Players would no longer get that feeling that every football player lives for when theres a turnover with only time for 1 more play. Just think how much excitement of football will be lost if the rules were to change.
AUfan4life said:
posted on July 12, 2006 4:03 PM — 69.244.208.32 — link — abuse?
You know who the only person I know that complains about the length of a college football game? MY WIFE!!! Cause she doesnt give a crap about football like I and most of these die hard fans do. NCAA, LEAVE THE GAME ALONE, do not screw it up for the people who love every single second of College Football! Please, dont agree to those idiotic suggestions of lowering the tee and all that mess! The game is great as it is now. Dont mess w/ the game. Change the stuff surrounding the game. TV timeouts!! Dont even have commercials, I would rather hear a story about a players dieing dog then hear commercials. Anything to get closer to the game. Not a commercial about viagra or johnsonville brats.
adakbruin said:
posted on July 24, 2006 5:18 AM — 69.234.110.201 — link — abuse?
The longer the better...I am dying here for 8 months without college football....let it last longer.....ease our withdrawal pains....let it go on and on and on.....there is nothing but deep space, darkness...distant stars...total emptiness.. and angst for 8 long months..don't change a thing!!!...create more delays!!!!!
Husker Joe said:
posted on July 27, 2006 2:50 PM — 70.184.218.174 — link — abuse?
C'mon guys.....we're missing the REAL point here!!! If you are a die hard football fan (no matter what team) your wife/gf/significant other lets you watch these games for 3 1/2-4 hours on a sat afternoon or evening. Most of us drink during these games. If the time of a game gets shorter, then what happens after the game? mow the lawn? clean the gutters? anything else she has you doing around the house? I think Saturdays from late August to early January should be devoted to 2 things all day long....Football and Beer!!! There are 6 other days of the week and 8 other months to get things done. Football games should last 12 hrs.....
PS: This is one of the reasons why I'm glad Nebraska switched to a pass heavy offense...longer games!!!sunshinemittens said:
posted on July 28, 2006 4:16 PM — 64.66.67.161 — link — abuse?
Aside from cutting commercial breaks down (probably 25% or more of the game's televised length), starting the clock sooner is a good change (and I would add no clock stop for moving the chains). Also, reinstitute the TRUE intentional grounding rule -- No more spikes and outside-the-pocket passes to the sidelines.
G-ROCK said:
posted on August 9, 2006 2:47 PM — 71.79.183.234 — link — abuse?
I understand wanting to shorten the time it takes to complete a game but instead of changing the rules of the game itself why don't tv networks require the advertisers to shorten the length of theri commercials by 5 seconds?I'm sure this would lessen the time it takes to complete a game by 15-20 minutes. This wopuld only require one change and not have to affect the game play.
Brer Hog said:
posted on August 9, 2006 10:56 PM — 65.66.216.144 — link — abuse?
Leave the College Game just as it is!!!!!
I hate the changes to the NFL games. Some of the QB heroes of NFL would not be that in today's game because they would not have had the time with a running clock to orchestrate those miraculous comebacks. You high rollers are ruining a great game! Go sell some stock or something to ease your boredom. DON'T MESS WITH THE COLLEGE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Tim said:
posted on August 31, 2006 1:41 PM — 149.63.89.34 — link — abuse?
I went to the first BCS championship game in AZ. The first half was 2.5 hours. You talk about painful. I love football, but 4 min TV timeouts causing that 2.5 hour half is hard to watch.
I am all in favor of shortening the games. Just apply all the NFL timing rules and your problem is mostly solved. Not stopping the clock on every 1st down has got to shave a bunch of time off the clock. Or, in lieu of that, some hybrid form of NFL/NCAA timing rules. NFL rules until the last 5 min of each half, NCAA rules for the last 5 min of each half.
dm said:
posted on September 3, 2006 11:10 PM — 68.233.191.249 — link — abuse?
These rule changes absolutely suck.
I've attended many games in the past couple of decades, and yes they have gotten progressively longer due to television coverage. When a game was not televised, the pace was noticeably faster. However, the length of the game is not a problem for me. It could go for 5 hours and I wouldn't complain. Taking away a few commercial timeouts would solve the problem, but the networks obviously don't want that. I do know that when attending games, JP produced the longest event followed by CBS and ABC. ESPN was actually not as lengthy.
It really makes me wonder who really asked for the changes. For the networks, it means less commercials and less revenue generated which is bad for them.
Mike sparrow said:
posted on September 26, 2006 9:32 AM — 66.114.0.3 — link — abuse?
I think that a rule change is unneccecary and that it will reduce the amount of comebacks that a team will have like last year when Michigan came back. If that rule was in effect that they wouldn't of had enough time to come back and it changed the season for Penn State.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
FONToKNOW said:
posted on April 27, 2006 12:10 PM — 129.74.183.40 — link — abuse?Shortening the TV time outs on NBC's coverage of Notre Dame football would probably reduce the average college football broadcast by 30 minutes.
I kid, sort of.