Proposed Rule Change

[ElvisLives]

The language of the proposed rule change to 8-3-2-a would be a bit...for lack of a better word...silly.  The current rule says that the Try is NOT to be attempted unless the points would affect the outcome of the game.   If the scoring team is behind by more than two points, the try is NOT to be attempted.  The new language still leaves that "as is," since a 1 or 2 point score on the Try by the team scoring the 6-point TD would not change the outcome of the game.  Got it.  Not at issue.

If the team that scores the 6-point TD is then ahead by more than 2 points, then the outcome of the game can't be changed by their opponent scoring a 2-point TD.  Game over.  The Try is not attempted.  Got it.  Not at issue.

However, the proposed language provides an "exception" to allow the scoring team to forego the Try , if they are ahead by 1 or 2 points.  Well, wouldn't that actually be "..if they are ahead in score" - period? The rationale is true, in that Team A will most likely just take a knee, if they are ahead in the score (whether that is 1 or 40 points).  If the Rules Committee recognizes that and wants that to be how the game is to be played, then let's don't give the scoring team an option.  Why make them even snap the ball?  Just change the second sentence of the rule to read, "If a touchdown is scored during a down in which time in the fourth period expires, and the scoring team, then, remains behind in score by more than two (2) points, or the scoring team is, then, ahead in score, the Try shall not be attempted.

Perhaps somebody with influence (like a certain retired Big 10 Referee) can make this point to the Sec-Ed.

Robert

 

[bossman72]

I think they want to give them the option because some leagues may use "points for" or "point differential" in tie breakers, so they leave teams the option to get 1 or 2 more points.

[ElvisLives]

I fully understand what you are saying, but, with the Extra Period(s), there is a winner to every game.  So, the only tie-breaking would be for teams with identical records, to determine the conference champ.  But the first tie-breaker would be head-to-head competition.  So, unless folks play each other twice during regular season, which I’ve never seen, that’s as far as anyone needs to go.
What other tie-breaking is there (at the NCAA level)?
Robert

[bossman72]

I fully understand what you are saying, but, with the Extra Period(s), there is a winner to every game.  So, the only tie-breaking would be for teams with identical records, to determine the conference champ.  But the first tie-breaker would be head-to-head competition.  So, unless folks play each other twice during regular season, which I’ve never seen, that’s as far as anyone needs to go.
What other tie-breaking is there (at the NCAA level)?
Robert

You're thinking about D1 conferences.  There are D2 and D3 conferences that are structured much differently.

For example, this past year the Presidents Conference (D3) finished with 2 teams 10-0 and by the way the schedule fell, they didn't play each other.

[ElvisLives]

You're thinking about D1 conferences.  There are D2 and D3 conferences that are structured much differently.

For example, this past year the Presidents Conference (D3) finished with 2 teams 10-0 and by the way the schedule fell, they didn't play each other.

Well, there you go.  I was not aware of such structure.  OK, then.  But the John Adams influence in me would prefer to see "Exception:  If the scoring team is ahead by fewer than three (3) points, they may elect to forgo the Try."  Yeah, I know.  Says the same thing.  It just says it with greater grammatical grace, a cornerstone of Mr. Adams' reign as Sec-Ed.

I wish I was in Hawaii. 

Robert 

[Johnponz]

Delete I made a stupid comment lol

[TampaSteve]

I think they want to give them the option because some leagues may use "points for" or "point differential" in tie breakers, so they leave teams the option to get 1 or 2 more points.

...or for vegas.