2020 Rule Changes - first look

[TXMike]

https://madison.com/wsj/sports/college/football/ncaa-football-rules-committee-warns-teams-to-stop-flopping/article_397be03f-f94a-5b87-944b-996020d617c7.html

[ElvisLives]

Geez.  To clean up the pre-game conflict issue, all it would take would be for the conferences to buck up and fine both involved teams something in the six figures each.  That will stop that garbage. 

Similarly, the fake injury thing can be fixed by the NCAA mandating having a third party physician in attendance at all games - cost split by the competing institutions - with a policy of having an automatic, non-challengeable fine of at least $50,000 per 'fake' incident.  When ANY medical issue occurs that requires the game officials to interrupt the game, the third party physician checks the player in question, and, if the medical issue is legitimate, end of story.  If the medical issue was nothing worthy of interrupting the game, or simply non-existent, then he reports the 'fake' injury to the conference office of that institution, and they issue the fine to the offending team.  And, if you want to make it especially effective, the fine proceeds go to the opponent!

That will clean up both problems pretty darn fast.

Leave the game officials out of those issues entirely.  Even the players are, officially, adults.  Adults need to behave themselves.

[AlUpstateNY]

Geez.  To clean up the pre-game conflict issue, all it would take would be for the conferences to buck up and fine both involved teams something in the six figures each.  That will stop that garbage.

Leave the game officials out of those issues entirely.  Even the players are, officially, adults.  Adults need to behave themselves.

Seems reasonable & practical.  It's not that we have more ridiculous (or dishonest) people, they've been around forever.  It seems however, we have a lot more, otherwise rational, logical people who for whatever reasons seem far more willing to consider whatever ideas ridiculous (or dishonest) people come up with.

[bossman72]

Geez.  To clean up the pre-game conflict issue, all it would take would be for the conferences to buck up and fine both involved teams something in the six figures each.  That will stop that garbage. 

Similarly, the fake injury thing can be fixed by the NCAA mandating having a third party physician in attendance at all games - cost split by the competing institutions - with a policy of having an automatic, non-challengeable fine of at least $50,000 per 'fake' incident.  When ANY medical issue occurs that requires the game officials to interrupt the game, the third party physician checks the player in question, and, if the medical issue is legitimate, end of story.  If the medical issue was nothing worthy of interrupting the game, or simply non-existent, then he reports the 'fake' injury to the conference office of that institution, and they issue the fine to the offending team.  And, if you want to make it especially effective, the fine proceeds go to the opponent!

That will clean up both problems pretty darn fast.

Leave the game officials out of those issues entirely.  Even the players are, officially, adults.  Adults need to behave themselves.

D3 and D2 are not going to want to pay for that...

[ElvisLives]

Their fines might be proportionally smaller, but the concept remains the same.  Of course they don’t want to pay.  That’s called deterrence, and that’s the point of any penalty.

[bossman72]

Their fines might be proportionally smaller, but the concept remains the same.  Of course they don’t want to pay.  That’s called deterrence, and that’s the point of any penalty.

Well, that too, but I mean paying for the 3rd party medical person to be at the game.  They barely pay for stick crews.

[Morningrise]

Hopefully we can go back to the old method of sending pairs of officials out to the field in shifts.

That 60-minute standaround... supervisors came up with justifications for it. You can look for tinted face shields. Knee pads. Chat with the kick returners. Chat with the left tackles. They came up with ideas for things to do.

But what are they gonna have us do for a half hour before THAT? When players are stretching around, not in their pads, not in their helmets, just doing leg lifts?

If you're like me, you would work any game for free. My game fee pays for my expenses and my travel time and my film and my rules study - basically everything that's not the game itself. Well, calf stretches at 10:30 in the morning are not the game itself. If they're going to make me watch that for 30 more minutes, then I would like to be paid for 30 more minutes.

[Magician]

Hopefully we can go back to the old method of sending pairs of officials out to the field in shifts.

That 60-minute standaround... supervisors came up with justifications for it. You can look for tinted face shields. Knee pads. Chat with the kick returners. Chat with the left tackles. They came up with ideas for things to do.

But what are they gonna have us do for a half hour before THAT? When players are stretching around, not in their pads, not in their helmets, just doing leg lifts?

If you're like me, you would work any game for free. My game fee pays for my expenses and my travel time and my film and my rules study - basically everything that's not the game itself. Well, calf stretches at 10:30 in the morning are not the game itself. If they're going to make me watch that for 30 more minutes, then I would like to be paid for 30 more minutes.

Since the release states only 3 officials need to be there I would expect that to be the case. I would propose those 3 don't need to be in full uniform either. Have some kind of conference shirt or pullover to distinguish and identify you. When the next group comes out at 60 minutes send them in to change and be ready for the state of the game. Most teams send their guys in around 20/25 so everyone is in the locker room during this time anyway.

I don't believe fines or hiring additional medical people are the way to handle it either. Sometimes a legitimate cramp is cleared up before they get off the field or you tweak your ankle and need 15-20 seconds to make sure it's OK. Neither of those would show anything to a third party medical official. Another proposal I heard was the player has to sit out 4 plays or until the next series. Those could be tricky for us to monitor. What if it's during a kick return or punt return or try? What if it was during a change of possession? Or would it revert to 1 play in those instances because you wouldn't be using a fake injury to stop the clock in those situations? 1 play and 10-second runoffs at the end of a half seem sufficient to me.

[Morningrise]

12-3-6

"If the clock expires at the end of a half, and replay determines that there was time remaining on the clock, and the clock would start on the Referee’s signal after review, there must be at least 3 seconds remaining when the ball should have been declared dead to restore time to the clock. With 2 seconds or 1 second remaining on the clock, the half is over. This change will not impact situations when the clock is stopped and will remain stopped until the snap such as incomplete passes and runners out of bounds."

First of all, teams should have the ability to use a timeout to keep the half alive - just like they can use a timeout to prevent a replay runoff. And they probably will - but as written, this doesn't make that clear.

Second of all, why does the new rule care whether "the clock expires at the end of a half"? Why shouldn't it also apply if the clock reads 0:01?

Situation 1: 3rd & 1 @ B-3. 4th quarter, 0:04 remaining. Team A trails by 6 points. A33 takes a handoff and runs up the middle. Replay shows his knee was down at the B-1 (0:02), but officials rule touchdown at a) 0:00, or b) 0:01.

In situation 1a, this new rule applies. Reverse to no touchdown, reset to 0:02, but since the clock would start on the RFP and 0:02 remains, the game is over. But in 1b, the rule as written does *not* apply. Reverse to no touchdown, no replay runoff since the LTG was reached, reset to 0:02, start on RFP, Team A gets one more play. But I feel the rule ought to apply equally to these two cases.

Third of all, this seems like a pretty rough-edged solution (not that I have any better ideas). This new rule is an attempt to counter the undue advantage of a replay delay compared to a correct-ruling scenario. But in doing so, it also confers an undue *disadvantage* compared to a correct-ruling scenario. Running one more play, after reaching the LTG with 0:02 on the clock, is within the realm of possibility for a well-coached and attentive team. So this new rule isn't removing an extra play that they *wouldn't* have had in a perfect world, it's removing an extra play that they *might* have had in a perfect world.

Situation 2: 3rd & 1 @ A-19. 2nd quarter, 0:05. Receiver A88 catches a screen pass and advances two yards. a) Officials rule his knee was down at the A-21 (0:02). b) Officials rule he escapes a tackle at the A-21 and continues another 80 yards for a touchdown (0:00), but replay shows his knee was down at the A-21 (0:02).

This is a case where, if the ruling was correct, the clock would stop and start on the RFP (no replay runoff). But it would definitely have been possible for Team A to run another play in that case. All eleven players would still be in the immediate vicinity of where they needed to line up.

The problem is, what if this happened at the B-19 instead of the A-19, and the replay delay allows Team A to bring out their FG unit, which is a lot harder to do in real time. This is presumably what the new rule is trying to prevent. And even outside field goal range, the replay delay allows the head coach to draw up a play instead of a desperate impromptu snap-and-everyone-just-go-deep-you-guys.

But then again, are we *sure* no team can bring a FG unit onto the field in the time it takes to spot the ball and wind the clock? Especially on a long play where the officials have to get in position as well?

Situation 3: 1st and 10 at the A-40. 2nd quarter, 0:10 remaining. QB A11 throws a long pass which is caught by A88 at the B-15. a) Officials rule his knee was down at the B-10 (0:02). b) Officials rule he escapes a tackle at the B-10 and continues for a touchdown (0:00), but replay shows his knee was down at the B-10 (0:02).

In situation 3a, I can definitely see eleven Team A players sprinting off and eleven including a kicker sprinting on, in the time it takes for eight officials to get downfield, take their positions at the B-10 and on the end line, and for the CJ to get the ball, get to the B-10, spot the ball, and retreat ten yards. It's not guaranteed to happen, but it could happen.

Maybe we can think about it this way: If the correct ruling had been made, Team A would have had... let's say an X% chance of running a mayday FG. Under the old rule, a replay delay bestowed upon them a 100% chance of running the play. Under the new rule, they have no chance whatsoever, 0%.  So as long as X is less than 50-50, the new rule is an improvement? Because X represents the perfect-world outcome and 0 is closer to that than 100 is? I can buy that logic. I just wish it wasn't such a rough-edged solution.

[Magician]

12-3-6
First of all, teams should have the ability to use a timeout to keep the half alive - just like they can use a timeout to prevent a replay runoff. And they probably will - but as written, this doesn't make that clear.

If they have a time out they can use it.

Second of all, why does the new rule care whether "the clock expires at the end of a half"? Why shouldn't it also apply if the clock reads 0:01?

Situation 1: 3rd & 1 @ B-3. 4th quarter, 0:04 remaining. Team A trails by 6 points. A33 takes a handoff and runs up the middle. Replay shows his knee was down at the B-1 (0:02), but officials rule touchdown at a) 0:00, or b) 0:01.

I'm not 100% certain these (and your other examples) apply. The play that caused all this was ruled correctly on the field. There was no replay change OTHER than the time on the clock. I don't remember the exact circumstance, but it was in the Iron Bowl last year. I think it was a runner ruled down in bounds beyond the LTG. The game clock expired, but replay showed there was 0:01 left. There was no way possible the offense would have been able to get the FG unit out there in time to snap the ball before the clock expired after it was wound. But because replay added the second, the offense was able to get the FG unit in place and ready to go during the review. That way when they came out of replay and the R started the game clock, they could snap immediately. This rule change will now prevent that (assuming A had no time outs).

The reason why they require the game clock to have expired is that's the only time replay can stop it to add more time. In the example I gave, if the runner had been down with 0:02 rather than 0:01, first the game would have ended once the clock was restarted. And second, replay couldn't look at it to add the 1 second.