NCAA proposes changes to targeting, substitution rules in football

[MD Longhorn]

NCAA proposes rule to slow down offenses; coaches balk

WTF!?!?!?!

[HLin NC]

WTF!?!?!?!

Mike & Mike were all over this this morning. Apparently Saban and Bilema, proponents of old, power offense and stout defense, are some of the push behind it.

[zm1283]

The substitution rule is asinine. It's like telling a fast break team in basketball that they have to slow the ball down and wait until 10 seconds elapse on the shot clock before they can shoot.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

NCAA proposes rule to slow down offenses; coaches balk

Bah! The article has it wrong about Leach/WSU. Leach has nothing to worry about. He's slow enough. It's Oregon that's probably miffed the most.

Leach did comment and say it's stupid. But he won't be affected by it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Suudy

Bah! The article has it wrong about Leach/WSU. Leach has nothing to worry about. He's slow enough. It's Oregon that's probably miffed the most.

Leach did comment and say it's stupid. But he won't be affected by it.

Actually Oregon was like in the 40s of teams that ran the most plays.

I do not see many teams running plays within 10 seconds of the start of the 40 second clock.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually Oregon was like in the 40s of teams that ran the most plays.

I do not see many teams running plays within 10 seconds of the start of the 40 second clock.

Peace

I don't think I've ever seen it. Even fast teams aren't snapping with the clock still in the 30s.

[bwburke94]

Pointless change that won't actually affect anything.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not see many teams running plays within 10 seconds of the start of the 40 second clock.

I don't think the actual snapping of the ball is what concerns the advocates of this rule. Many of the HUNH teams call their plays while at the line and IN POSITION to snap. Obviously, the defense can't risk substituting with a snap "imminent".

If the defense knows there won't be a snap until :29, they can plan their substitutions accordingly.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by CT1

I don't think the actual snapping of the ball is what concerns the advocates of this rule. Many of the HUNH teams call their plays while at the line and IN POSITION to snap. Obviously, the defense can't risk substituting with a snap "imminent".

If the defense knows there won't be a snap until :29, they can plan their substitutions accordingly.

Exactly right.

[Ruletool]

Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum.
Nice discussion about the substitution rule. However, I notice a real philosophy change on Instant Replay. By changing the use of Replay for targeting, in effect the replay official can now throw a flag for another foul (e.g. unnecessary roughness) when it wasn't targeting. That is new, I belief. I'm curious how this will evolve next years.
Fortunately not something we'll have to deal with over here in Europe
Football Rules Committee slightly adjusts targeting rule, defensive substitutions | NCAA Public Home Page - NCAA.org

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Ruletool

Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum.
Nice discussion about the substitution rule. However, I notice a real philosophy change on Instant Replay. By changing the use of Replay for targeting, in effect the replay official can now throw a flag for another foul (e.g. unnecessary roughness) when it wasn't targeting. That is new, I belief. I'm curious how this will evolve next years.
Fortunately not something we'll have to deal with over here in Europe
Football Rules Committee slightly adjusts targeting rule, defensive substitutions | NCAA Public Home Page - NCAA.org

That's not correct at least for now. If the crew had UNR and targeting, they would announce both. If replay determined targeting did not exist, UNR would still apply so there would still be a 15-yard penalty. Same is true for other PFs like RTP and KCI. If they only rule targeting and replay feels it was not targeting but should have been UNR they are not able to rule that.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by CT1

I don't think the actual snapping of the ball is what concerns the advocates of this rule. Many of the HUNH teams call their plays while at the line and IN POSITION to snap. Obviously, the defense can't risk substituting with a snap "imminent".

If the defense knows there won't be a snap until :29, they can plan their substitutions accordingly.

I get the concern, but the clock starts right after the play ends. Just hard to get the ball back and ready in that time depending on the play and where the play ends. It sounds like much to do about nothing. Granted I am not in love with this rule, and defenses already were given an opportunity to match substitutions when the offense made a substitution first. This already took a little more than 10 seconds even in those hurry up offenses. I do not think it would make that much difference either way.

Peace

[eyezen]

I'm no football referee but couldn't this be dealt without a rule change already by having the umpire stand over the ball and allow the defense to make substitutions regardless of how fast the offense lines up?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by eyezen

I'm no football referee but couldn't this be dealt without a rule change already by having the umpire stand over the ball and allow the defense to make substitutions regardless of how fast the offense lines up?

I would not be surprised if that is the mechanic anyway if this rule passes.

Peace

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by eyezen

I'm no football referee but couldn't this be dealt without a rule change already by having the umpire stand over the ball and allow the defense to make substitutions regardless of how fast the offense lines up?

I think having the wing officials control it as in Canadian football would be better.