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.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Rich

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.

I don't think it hardly ever happens. Though I'll admit coaches don't take as much advantage of this as they ought to (largely because I don't think they understand whether the clock will run or not).

2 minutes is not enough for the modified rule. But you don't need 4. The problem is that you have the time before 3 plays. And that's 40 seconds a pop. If you can get under 2 minutes with first down (and no timeouts) then the game is over. (Since you can easily burn 3-4 seconds per play, it's really more around 2:15). So somewhere around 2:45 is when it needs to kick in to keep things "fair".

I agree that clock management doesn't matter much earlier in the game.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by youngump

I don't think it hardly ever happens. Though I'll admit coaches don't take as much advantage of this as they ought to (largely because I don't think they understand whether the clock will run or not).

2 minutes is not enough for the modified rule. But you don't need 4. The problem is that you have the time before 3 plays. And that's 40 seconds a pop. If you can get under 2 minutes with first down (and no timeouts) then the game is over. (Since you can easily burn 3-4 seconds per play, it's really more around 2:15). So somewhere around 2:45 is when it needs to kick in to keep things "fair".

I agree that clock management doesn't matter much earlier in the game.

Under 2 minutes with a first down and no timeouts? Should be 3 knees and get on the bus at that point.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Rich

Under 2 minutes with a first down and no timeouts? Should be 3 knees and get on the bus at that point.

That's exactly his point.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

That's exactly his point.

Still don't see the problem. Quite frankly, I'm not sure why we alter time in the first place. 15 minute quarters, after all. Our games already take about 3 hours -- that's plenty of time for a team to win or lose a game.

[HLin NC]

That's exactly his point.

Score more, early and often. Maintain possession, obtain possession.

We in this business are prone to say one play or one call didn't win or lose a ball game. Well here you go.

I don't ever see the Fed modifying timing rules to that extent in the remainder of my career. But if we are going to adjust, can I throw in "why not run the clock during the try? Between that and the subsequent intermission between the score and kickoff, we probably lose two real time minutes. In a 7 or 8 touchdown game, there's 15 minutes down the hatch. Don't even get me started on incomplete passes!

[Rich]

That's one NCAA change I'd like to see. Outside of 2 minutes, run the game clock after an incomplete pass is spotted. We already do it with runs out of bounds.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Rich

Under 2 minutes with a first down and no timeouts? Should be 3 knees and get on the bus at that point.

Yep, 2 minutes with a first down and no timeouts. 3 knees and the bus.
But, 3 minutes with a first down and no timeouts get a first down, a defensive penalty, or punt the ball.
(Whereas currently, it's get a first down, a defensive penalty, or commit a penalty or punt.)