A report at CBSSports.com said that there should be a lively discussion at the annual meeting of the NCAA Football Rules Committee meeting starting next Monday in Indy. Supposedly, an item on the table is to allow the clock to continue running when a team makes a first down instead of stopping the clock until the linesman sets the chains and the ball for the next play. Letting the clock run has been the rule in the NFL all along; the college rule to stop the clock was instituted in 1968.
Based on some calculations, stopping the clock on first down plays could reduce the average number of plays in a game by 8-10 plays per game and one of the arguments for taking on that reduction is an appeal to “player safety”. Of course, the likelihood of serious injury to any player remains unchanged for any specific play that is run, but by running fewer plays per game over the thousands of college football games played in a season, the injury risk is lowered.
The fact is that limiting injuries – – or at least trying to minimize them with rule changes/improvements – – can also limit the liability of teams, conferences and the NCAA itself given the litigious nature of US society in 2023. I am sure that advocates for this rule change will wrap themselves in that cloak of righteousness during the upcoming “lively discussion”.
I was unaware that a similar rule change was considered by this Committee last year and it was rejected. On balance, I prefer the NFL way of keeping time and I would vote for the rule change not only in the hopes of limiting liability exposure but also to keep a lid on the length of games. Many critics of MLB complain that games are too long – – and indeed nine inning games that take 3 hours and 45 minutes or even 4 hours are in fact too long. However, major college football games always run 3 hours and 30 minutes and sometimes can run for more than 4 hours. Both sports can use a little more giddy-up.
Among the college football power brokers, there is a sense that college football should not always emulate the NFL in terms of rules and regulations; there are some who want to maintain this kind of distinction between the two games simply to maintain a distinction. Personally, I think that sort of reasoning is shallow; but I understand that it is an important position for some folks.
Kirby Smart is currently the only coach from a “Power 5 Conference” on the rules committee which seems awfully unbalanced to me. Here is what he has had to say about the issue of “shrinking the college game” in the past:
“Our big brother in this world of football is the NFL. So much of what we do is modeled off what they do. They spend a lot, a lot, a lot of money to get it right. They’ve shrunk their game into a time frame that is probably a little bit tighter window than ours.
“They’re also trying to limit exposures as well, although they have a longer season, and they have added games to that season. It’s a big decision. We are dealing with student-athletes. I think it starts with that. I wouldn’t sit up here and say I’m favor of shrinking the game. I do think our game has gotten long and there are a lot of plays.”
That sounds to me like a person who has not made up his mind on the issue before hearing the proponents present their case; and if I am correct in that assessment, then Kirby Smart is living up to his surname.
One other aspect of the college game needs to be considered if in fact the safety/liability issues are paramount here. Maybe someone needs to think about rules to limit hurry-up offenses in the college game at the Division 1-A level. Consider these data from the CBSSports.com report on this issue:
- Last year, the Tampa Bay Bucs led the NFL in average number of plays per game (68.8 plays per game).
- That average would have put the Bucs 85th on the list of 131 Division 1-A college football teams in terms of plays per game.
- Texas Tech had the highest number of plays per game last year in college football (89.2 plays per game).
If the rules committee can find a way to thread the needle here to reduce the number of plays in a game along with keeping the games in a reliable three-and-a-half hour time window for TV, they will have earned whatever stipend they get for serving on this body. I don’t pretend to have all the answers here, but I do appreciate that this is a thorny problem.
Finally, let me close today with one of my dwindling inventory of comments by Dwight Perry from his days with the Seattle Times:
“Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield have teamed up to form an unlikely cannabis partnership to sell ear-shaped edibles called ‘Holy Ears.’
“So what’s next, Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan teaming up to pitch billyclubs called ‘Knee Cappers’”?
But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………