Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman
Ever since the WLAF experimented with this type of play clock 30 years ago, it's insured consistency in one thing at the expense of consistency in another. When you base the time to put the ball in play while the period clock is running on period clock time (which is what the 40 second clock does), you achieve greater consistency in the amount of time team A can take off period time. However, when you base it on the time from the RFP, you achieve greater consistency in the interval during which team A is allowed to put the ball in play.
One of those things matters to a team that's just looking to consume time, and of course to their opponents. The other matters to a team that likes to go no-huddle and use a lot of shifts and motions, threatening to put the ball in play at any moment. When the 40-second clock is in effect, they can't start doing that anyway until the RFP. Depending on when the RFP comes, the 40 second clock provides either more opportunity to team A to do that or more relief to team B in limiting team A's opportunity to do that, compared to the 25-second clock.
|
That’s just plain wrong.
Assuming that (under the old rule) the RFP was blown within 12-15 seconds after the end of the previous play, that provided a 37-40 second window to snap. The problem was that some R’s weren’t consistent in their pace of game.
Whether the game clock is running or dead has no bearing on the time period between the end of the previous play and the next snap.