Clock Question After Timeout and Penalty on Subsequent Play

[Rich]

Originally Posted by youngump

This is absolutely correct by current rule; but if you can't see that the rule is insane then I don't think that you're thinking it through. As I see it, when the offense gets the ball back with more than about three minutes left in the game, they should not be allowed to run out the clock without the aid of a first down or a B penalty. But all they have to do under the current rules is to be called for a penalty that isn't declined and they've done it.
Hence the entirely obvious response, run to the outside and hold on the edges. The teams are presumably balanced enough that the holding is enough to get them a gain on the play. The goal isn't to draw the penalty; it's to get the first down, but they can very safely push the rules to achieve it.
This might not be so bad (what I'd anticipate you'd reply), but considering there's practically no downside to changing the rule, I don't see why we continue to live with this. My rule proposal would be on accepted penalties inside of 4 minutes left in the half, the offended team has the option of starting on the ready or the snap (if the clock could otherwise have started on the snap). The parenthesized part may need work.

Too much thought for something that just doesn't happen that often.

After a second live ball foul, I would probably hold the clock until the snap. I'm aware of the perception. No need to codify yet another rule, although they've done so in the NFL.

4 minutes is too much if there was such a rule. In NCAA football, altered timing rules start at 2 minutes -- and that would be perfectly fine for a rule if there was need for one.

I always find it funny that running the clock is considered more important at other parts of the game. Early in the game, a team (with the clock running) commits a DOG (while not in a scrimmage kick formation in NCAA rules). We wind the clock. The offense can run OVER A MINUTE without running a play. Nobody blinks.