New NCAA rules about the play clock

[jakldawg]

They're proposing a rule stating you can't snap the ball within the first ten seconds of the play clock, or it will result in a DELAY of game penalty.
So defenses can substitute in today's frantic football games. And for you know, player safety.

Anybody want to convince me this isn't the dumbest thing ever?

*Devil's advocate edit: how would this be any different than making up a rule in basketball saying "you can't shoot the ball until 7 seconds have come off the shot clock." Gotta give that defense time to adjust. Sorry if you saw a great fast break opportunity or mismatch, just dribble the ball up the court all nice and sportsman-like. This wouldn't help our basketball team, either, but it'd still be a dumb rule.

Where's that unruly "pussification of America continues!!!!1!!" crowd when you need them?

 

[Hump4Hoops]

It completely changes/ruins the 2 minute offense

Other than that, I could see it, I guess.

 

[uptowndawg]

Hasn't Saban been begging for something like this?

 

[DawgatAuburn]

I am going to suggest you click the link and read the first sentence under Defensive Substitutions.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

In that case, I don't really have an issue with it.

 

[Miss.Stake]

I don't have a problem with it. There are going to be grey areas and situations will arise that will question the rule, but the premise is good. Defenses should be allowed a fair chance to substitute. As far as player safety argument goes... Their would need to be comprehensive data laid out.

 

[Miss.Stake]

and still No proposed change with the dumbest rule in sports.

"an offensive fumble through the endzone is a touchback for the other team"... ridiculous.

 

[Dawghouse]

Anybody want to convince me this isn't the dumbest thing ever?

We don't use the hurry up so it has no effect on our offense. Other teams use the hurry up so it affects them negatively and therefore is good for us. Sounds good to me.

That enough convincing?

 

[Original48]

They should probably have extended it in the second half to the final 5 minutes. Would hate to be down 12 deep in my own end and have to wait til 2 minutes to hurry up.

 

[57stratdawg]

Yes.. Hes very publicly stated that the hurry up offenses aren't fair.

That's f*cking lame, IMO. Their entire bitchfest is that it doesn't give them time to get the ideal personnel on the field. Tough fvcking cookies Nick. If the offense can execute their entire playbook with the same personnel, you need to be able to do the same.

You could make this rule about safety without giving the D a chance to substitute.

 

[drt7891]

The only reason to me that is a dumb rule is because nowhere else on the field can you fumble the ball forward EXCEPT if it goes OOB in the endzone. If you can fumble the ball forward anywhere else, I have no problem with it.

 

[patdog]

Yes, dumbest thing ever. It won't stop the hurry-up offenses though. Officials almost never get the ball spotted within 10 seconds anyway. The old rule was fine. If the offense substitutes, they have to give the defense time to substitute. If not, play at the offense's pace. I doubt any defenses could consistently substitute within 10 seconds anyway.

 

[patdog]

Anywhere else on the field the offense fumbles forward and it goes out of bounds, the offense keeps the ball. Stupid that they should lose it if it goes out of bounds in the end zone. Just give the offense the ball at the spot of the fumble. And yes, that is the stupidest rule ever. This new one is 2nd.

 

[JungRebel]

How is that a dumb rule? If you fumble the damn ball you deserve to lose it. "We fumbled the ball at the most crucial moment of the game..."—well, tough ****. Don't fumble the ball. You shouldn't be given any favors for committing a cardinal sin on the goal line. Losing possession is a punishment that fits the "crime."

As for the topic, screw it. If you want to stop a HUNH offense, don't let them get a first down. Simple concept. There would need to be evidence that it puts offensive/defensive players at a much greater risk for injury for me to consider it, but I am (almost always) against any rule that limits strategic options.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

The ten seconds would be specifically to allow the defense to substitute. It's my understanding that, as the rules stand now, if the offense does not substitute, and is at the line of scrimmage, then the D cannot substitute. This gives the D the opportunity to substitute on every play. It will help traditional powerhouses that are loaded on D to constantly sub in and out. This rule hurts schools like Miss. State, but, not surprisingly, because it will hurt hurry up teams like OM, State fans are for it.

 

[goodknight]

Why not have the official just delay the start of the clock by 10 secs

nm

 

[drt7891]

It's a dumb rule because if I fumble the ball at my own 26 and it goes OOB at the 32, I get the ball at the 26. I can't fumble it forward there. If I fumble the ball at the 2 and it rolls around the pylon and goes OOB in the endzone, I lose the ball. Where's the consistency? If in example 1 I got the ball at the 32 instead of the 26, I'd have zero problem with the rule.

 

[JungRebel]

It's consistent in as much as the rules are unique at the goal line. You don't get two points for a sack unless it's in the endzone and you don't get six points for gaining yards until the endzone. Cf. you don't lose a fumble unless you fumble it into the endzone. However, I think you should get the ball where it goes OOB if you fumble, but can see why the rule exists (to discourage players from intentionally fumbling forward OOB, and to not put the onus on officials to have to decide if a fumble was intentional).

 

[messageboardsuperhero]

The ten seconds would be specifically to allow the defense to substitute. It's my understanding that, as the rules stand now, if the offense does not substitute, and is at the line of scrimmage, then the D cannot substitute. This gives the D the opportunity to substitute on every play. It will help traditional powerhouses that are loaded on D to constantly sub in and out. This rule hurts schools like Miss. State, but, not surprisingly, because it will hurt hurry up teams like OM, State fans are for it.

How exactly does this hurt State? Not trying to start anything, I'm just curious.

We never hurry-up unless we're in a two minute offense, so it's not like defenses are going to have to change the way they play us. Teams will still be able to substitute every play against us either way- so this changes nothing for us offensively.

Defensively, this helps us sub against schools like Auburn and UM. I just fail to see how this has a negative impact on State.

 

[57stratdawg]

Substituting wasn't a huge issue for us last year, because we play defense in groups. We'd let BBrown and RBrown have a drive at linebacker (in fact, i'm pretty sure they were on the field the final drive against Auburn).

But Bama isn't like that. They want to march people on/off the field after every play. 3rd and long? They want their speed OLB/DEs out there. 1st and goal? Different group. They want to be able to match up their defensive personnel with the play-by-play situation which is what this rule allows them to do. ******** IMO.

 

[The Usual Suspect]

This may affect basketball on turf however...Hugh probably not a fan.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

That's only part of it.

It's not just the speed of the game. The spread/option offense allows you to find a mismatch and exploit it over and over again until the defense adjusts or sends a guy over for help, then you just read the adjustment and pick on the open space/mismatch left by the help coming over. You can essentially run the same play or to the same spot/player over and over again. By keeping the same offense on the field and preventing the Defense from substituting, you are much more likely to continue to exploit the mismatch. If the D is allowed to hold-up the offense while the "cure" the mismatch by substituting, then you lose the ability to pick on a certain spot or player.

I think we can all agree that MSU's offense is going to look a lot less like 2011-2013 and a lot more like 2009-2010. I expect the MSU offense to run a shitload of read option plays out of a spread next year for the specific purpose of finding and exploiting mismatches and pounding them over and over again. This rule will not help that offense score points.

Messageboardsuperhero, that's why it's not good for MSU. Also, like 57stratdawg said, it favors defenses with depth. MSU and OM simply cannot compete with Bama/Auburn/LSU depth.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

I have less of a problem with that than I do with the defense being able to substitute even when the offense does not. That's horse ****.

 

[messageboardsuperhero]

It's not just the speed of the game. The spread/option offense allows you to find a mismatch and exploit it over and over again until the defense adjusts or sends a guy over for help, then you just read the adjustment and pick on the open space/mismatch left by the help coming over. You can essentially run the same play or to the same spot/player over and over again. By keeping the same offense on the field and preventing the Defense from substituting, you are much more likely to continue to exploit the mismatch. If the D is allowed to hold-up the offense while the "cure" the mismatch by substituting, then you lose the ability to pick on a certain spot or player.

I think we can all agree that MSU's offense is going to look a lot less like 2011-2013 and a lot more like 2009-2010. I expect the MSU offense to run a shitload of read option plays out of a spread next year for the specific purpose of finding and exploiting mismatches and pounding them over and over again. This rule will not help that offense score points.

Messageboardsuperhero, that's why it's not good for MSU. Also, like 57stratdawg said, it favors defenses with depth. MSU and OM simply cannot compete with Bama/Auburn/LSU depth.

Fair enough- that does make sense.

 

[121Josey]

A better rule would be to facilitate immediate substitutions after first downs. I don't know how many times I saw hurry-up teams snap the ball before the chains were set last year.

 

[tuku 2]

Add 10 seconds to the play clock.

 

[57stratdawg]

What pisses me off is that there is basically a single coach that can decide on a rule that impacts basically every team in college football. That's ********. I know Ellis Johnson has bitched about it in the past, but the NCAA isn't folding for Ellis Johnson.

 

[Dawgfan61]

For the last 30-40 years

Every new rule has benefitted the offense, why can't there be one rule benefitting the defense?

 

[seb304]

One of the national guys

What pisses me off is that there is basically a single coach that can decide on a rule that impacts basically every team in college football. That's ********. I know Ellis Johnson has bitched about it in the past, but the NCAA isn't folding for Ellis Johnson.

Some national guy tweeted earlier how pretty much every defensive coach he talked to last year said these the rules were unfairly slanted toward the offense. The HUNH is a gimmick. If your offense is predicated on not letting the defense substitute, it's BS. My opinion.

I still think the more severe problem is the seeming inability (or refusal) of officials to call illegal shift and illegal motion penalties.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

I would have been less shocked if the NCAA had ruled that field goals couldn't be returned anymore.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

Your opinion sucks

I guess every two minute offense is a gimmick? The spread/option offense MSU ran in 2009-2010 is a gimmick too in your opinion, right?

The word "gimmick offense" is used by shallow minded people to explain new things they don't understand and can't stop. The wishbone, pistol, and spread offenses were all called gimmicks at one time or another.

This isn't baseball. The defense should not be allowed to dictate the pace of the game. College football is about to become the only sport where you can substitute at any time between any play.

Allowing immediate snaps during the last two minute shows the mindset of the rule: Fast-paced offenses should only be played at the end of the game when my 3 yards and a cloud of dust offense is down 7 and needs to score. The goal here is to stifle innovation in the name of preserving the status quo.

I am absolutely shocked at the number of State fans, blinded by their own hatred for Freeze, that are suddenly for a rule that actually hurts the type of offense that they run because they are too stupid to see that this doesn't just hurt the HUNH.

 

[121Josey]

Some national guy tweeted earlier how pretty much every defensive coach he talked to last year said these the rules were unfairly slanted toward the offense. The HUNH is a gimmick. If your offense is predicated on not letting the defense substitute, it's BS. My opinion.

I agree with this. I've been running the HUNH since about 1993 on the SEGA Genesis. But I never took ran the play-clock down to single digits evaluating the defensive personnel and making checks at the line of scrimmage.

I don't understand why they stop the clock for first downs to benefit the offense, then won't let the defense substitute.

What pisses me off is that there is basically a single coach that can decide on a rule that impacts basically every team in college football. That's ********. I know Ellis Johnson has bitched about it in the past, but the NCAA isn't folding for Ellis Johnson.

If it were just "basically a single coach"... But the coach that you're referring to has a bigger microphone - rightfully so winning 4 NCs in a decade.

 

[patdog]

Looks to me like a lot of MSU fans think this new rule is ********. I still don't think it's going to wind up affecting anything though. If defenses try to substitute in 10 seconds, they're going to be getting a lot of 15-yard too many men on the field penalty when the offenses start snapping the ball at 29 seconds on the clock.

 

[seb304]

Well actually

.

I am absolutely shocked at the number of State fans, blinded by their own hatred for Freeze, that are suddenly for a rule that actually hurts the type of offense that they run because they are too stupid to see that this doesn't just hurt the HUNH.

You give Hugh Freeze way too much damn credit. We can handle Freeze's offense just fine with the rules as they are now (see: 3 offensive points in the Egg Bowl).

I've already said I don't like the current rule because I don't like the defense never being able to substitute unless the offense does first. Has nothing to do with Freeze. And you're mischaracterizing our 2009-2010 offense. We only ran the HUNH (and not well, mind you) in 2011; Mullen decided it wasn't for him after that. I just might be missing how this is a bad thing for State, since it doesn't really change how we've functioned the last couple of seasosn offensively.

 

[paindonthurt_]

If you go no huddle/hurry up, can an offense still substitute? For instance, could you line up in a formation (say 4 wide double slots) wait for the 10 seconds to be up and run 2 TEs out for 2 wideouts and go to an ACE formation? Still keeps the defense off balance and actually gives coaches some time to think and see what personnel the defense is bringing on the field.

Not sure if that is illegal substitution or not since you never broke the huddle.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

This isn't just about HUNH. This will affect all spread read option offenses which I am assuming we will see a lot of out of MSU next year. See my response above for a more detailed explanation.

 

[DancingRabbit]

Unrelated to defensive subs, I think it may improve officiating

The college replay rule calls for reviewing every play. The HUNH offense subverts that process. The offense can prevent the booth official and the defensive coach in the booth from having an opportunity to see a replay. If a replay may favor the offense, then they can take their own sweet time - if a replay may favor the defense then they snap the ball before there's time to review it.

Also, I'm tired of seeing the chain gang not being set, officials scrambling around and not in position, false starts and illegal motion not being called.

If it was just to allow defense to run in fresh bodies, that could have largely been accomplished by allowing substitutions on 1st downs, but that wouldn't solve all of the officiating implications.

And for me personally when watching on the TV, I just like seeing replays. You get the best camera angle(s) showing the gist of what just happened.

 

[NIC.sixpack]

I've already said I don't like the current rule because I don't like the defense never being able to substitute unless the offense does first. ... I just might be missing how this is a bad thing for State, since it doesn't really change how we've functioned the last couple of seasosn offensively.

It hurts any team that doesn't stockpile elite depth on defense. Right now, MSU can matchup fairly well when it comes to your best 11 on offense versus Alabama's best 11 on defense. If MSU's best 11 on offense are in better physical condition than Alabama's best 11 on defense, then MSU's offense can avoid substitutions and wear down the defense by forcing them to stay in the game (to some extent, at least. Alabama can still call time outs or sub when there is an injury, etc.) If the rule changes and the defense can substitute whenever it wants, then the game changes. Now it's more of a matter of MSU's three deep on offense versus Alabama's three deep on defense. Or you could look at it as MSU's best offensive linemen (however many that is) versus Alabama's best 12-15 defensive linemen, who will be frequently refreshed down after down regardless of what MSU's linemen do. As it stands right now, there are plenty of times the defense can substitute. They are guaranteed an opportunity to substitute when the offense does. The defense's only restriction is that they can't substitute if the offense doesn't substitute. That seems pretty fair.

In a substantial way, the rule change will benefit teams who already have other advantages. In the NFL, salary caps and draft priorities based inversely on final standings encourage parity. Obviously, those things don't apply to college teams. Alabama, LSU, and other teams can stockpile talent year after year. They can outspend other teams when it comes to facilities and other things. It's already an amazingly uphill battle to play in the SECW. The current rule gives MSU, Ole Miss, and Arkansas a relatively small means to even the playing field a little. The rule change will give Alabama, LSU, and others even more chances than they already have to use their superior depth to steamroll teams.

That's how the rule change hurts MSU.

 

[Rebels7]

This may affect basketball on turf however...Hugh probably not a fan.

This has nothing to do with Hugh Freeze. And everything to do with Gus Malzahn. We could play thirteen players on offense and Alabama wouldn't care. But when Auburn goes from 2-10 to National Championship game, Alabama is going to cry foul.

 

[patdog]

The offense could substitute after 10 seconds if it wanted to. But it would have to give the defense time to substitute if it did.