- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Curious what you guys think about the proposed rule changes for football
Posted on 2/14/13 at 8:56 am
Posted on 2/14/13 at 8:56 am
I was just reading an article about proposed rule changes for 2013 and a couple really jumped out at me.
Full article here ESPN article
The ejection thing is going a little too far IMO, although I like that that portion of the penalty will be reviewed. We all saw hits last year called for the above the shoulders personal foul that were questionable to say the least, but imagine those calls resulting in an ejection of the offending player.
The ten second runoff in the result of a lot of whining, but I have to admit we've been guilty of quite a few last minute injuries. I'm not saying they all were questionable, but the number of them is. I personally still don't like this rule.
The three second spike rule is idiotic. If a team is coached up to where they get in formation faster than anybody else and can get it spiked in time, good for them. I think this should be a replay reviewable thing and if they can spike it in time, who cares how much time is left.
What are your thoughts? Sorry if germans, I searched.
quote:
The NCAA Football Rules Committee said it had unanimously approved strengthening of the penalty for intentional above-the-shoulder hits. The 15-yard penalty will now have an ejection tacked on, assuming the Playing Rules Oversight Panel approves the plan next month
quote:
Other proposed rules from the NCAA include: • Adding a 10-second runoff with less than a minute remaining in either half when the sole reason for the clock to stop is an injury. Calhoun said the intent is to prevent players from faking injuries to stop the clock. • Establishing 3 seconds as the minimum amount of time required to be on the game clock in order to spike the ball to stop the clock.
Full article here ESPN article
The ejection thing is going a little too far IMO, although I like that that portion of the penalty will be reviewed. We all saw hits last year called for the above the shoulders personal foul that were questionable to say the least, but imagine those calls resulting in an ejection of the offending player.
The ten second runoff in the result of a lot of whining, but I have to admit we've been guilty of quite a few last minute injuries. I'm not saying they all were questionable, but the number of them is. I personally still don't like this rule.
The three second spike rule is idiotic. If a team is coached up to where they get in formation faster than anybody else and can get it spiked in time, good for them. I think this should be a replay reviewable thing and if they can spike it in time, who cares how much time is left.
What are your thoughts? Sorry if germans, I searched.
15
Posted on 2/14/13 at 8:59 am to jlbasm
Like the 10 second run off but don't like the spike rule.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:01 am to jlbasm
I may be an old dude but they are trying to make football into a SISSY game!!! Bad mitten? Anyone? 
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:04 am to jlbasm
quote:
If a team is coached up to where they get in formation faster than anybody else and can get it spiked in time, good for them. I think this should be a replay reviewable thing and if they can spike it in time, who cares how much time is left.
I think it means that 3 seconds have to run from the snap to the time the ball is spiked. Doesn't necessarily apply to how fast they get lined up.
This post was edited on 2/14/13 at 9:06 am
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:04 am to jlbasm
Great! Let's give incompetent refs even more power to affect the outcome of a game!
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:06 am to jlbasm
The three rules in your post suck.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:06 am to jlbasm
quote:
Establishing 3 seconds as the minimum amount of time required to be on the game clock in order to spike the ball to stop the clock.
Stupid. It doesn't take 3 seconds.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:07 am to cajunjj
quote:
Bad mitten? Anyone?
LOL WUT ?
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:13 am to jlbasm
quote:
The NCAA Football Rules Committee said it had unanimously approved strengthening of the penalty for intentional above-the-shoulder hits. The 15-yard penalty will now have an ejection tacked on, assuming the Playing Rules Oversight Panel approves the plan next month. Note that this rule will not apply to the University of Alabama
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:18 am to CyrustheVirus
What the rule is saying is three seconds will run off regardless of how quickly the ball is snapped and spiked. If the clock is stopped (such as for chains to move for a first down) and the team gets lined up before the ref starts the clock, then if they can get it snapped and spiked in under three seconds then the clock shouldn't run just for the sake of the rule IMO.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:18 am to ForeLSU
Article VII of the NCAA Rules Code - Nor Nick Saban or any team located within 50 feet of him will be subjected to any NCAA rules that negatively affect the outcome of said contests.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:20 am to jlbasm
quote:
The 15-yard penalty will now have an ejection tacked on, assuming the Playing Rules Oversight Panel approves the plan next month
Only if there is a automatic replay review to determine if the hit was intentional or if it was the cause of a player dropping his head faster than the defender can react to the new trajectory.
quote:
Establishing 3 seconds as the minimum amount of time required to be on the game clock in order to spike the ball to stop the clock.
Stupid.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:24 am to ForeLSU
quote:
The NCAA Football Rules Committee said it had unanimously approved strengthening of the penalty for intentional above-the-shoulder hits. The 15-yard penalty will now have an ejection tacked on, assuming the Playing Rules Oversight Panel approves the plan next month. Note that this rule will not apply to the University of Alabama
This X 1000
Alabama spears Jordan Jefferson in the chest knocking him out of the game, no flag.
Alabama lays out a defenseless Aaron Murray after an interception, no flag.
Craig Loston from LSU "attempts" to hit a South Carolina receiver after an overthrow, and the ref rules that there was "intent" to hit the receiver so a 15 yard flag is thrown.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:29 am to Choupique19
as long as the ejectable hits are reviewable to determine if the offensive player ducked his head or to make sure if the hit really did hit the helmet and not just the chest I 'm fine with it.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:31 am to Choupique19
quote:
Alabama lays out a defenseless Aaron Murray after an interception, no flag.
Don't forget the play (against Ole Miss i think) where we blocked the QB legally on an interception and had a flag for Unnecessary Roughness or something.
This post was edited on 2/14/13 at 9:33 am
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:50 am to jlbasm
I don't like any of them, but I can say that I hate the ten second run off the least.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:51 am to jlbasm
quote:
The three second spike rule is idiotic. If a team is coached up to where they get in formation faster than anybody else and can get it spiked in time, good for them. I think this should be a replay reviewable thing and if they can spike it in time, who cares how much time is left.
Yeah, like CLM & JJ @ OM 09 game!
Posted on 2/14/13 at 9:52 am to jlbasm
The first two kind of fly in the face of one another don't you think?
Rule #1 - We're concerned about player safety so lets strengthen the penalty on hits (that occur in fractions of a second) above the shoulders of defenseless recievers in order to prevent head injuries.
Rule #2 - We don't want people faking injuries, so even if you're really hurt, you better drag your broken leg, torn-muscled self off the field or else were going to take away your last gasp at a comeback
Rule #1 - We're concerned about player safety so lets strengthen the penalty on hits (that occur in fractions of a second) above the shoulders of defenseless recievers in order to prevent head injuries.
Rule #2 - We don't want people faking injuries, so even if you're really hurt, you better drag your broken leg, torn-muscled self off the field or else were going to take away your last gasp at a comeback
Posted on 2/14/13 at 10:13 am to jlbasm
Pussification of college football and football in general.
Pretty soon there won't be any tackling or hitting allowed because it is too dangerous. It will essentially become touch football.
Pretty soon there won't be any tackling or hitting allowed because it is too dangerous. It will essentially become touch football.
Posted on 2/14/13 at 10:18 am to Alt26
I think the first two are ridiculous.
The ejection rule will never be fair IMO. I think the refs already screw up the penalties on these hits anyways. Very bad rule. It would be better IMO for players to be reviewed and suspended a game for habitual occurrences. This should be reviewed regardless of penalties called in the game.
The faking injuries rule is ridiculous. Do not run time off the clock. It also penalizes people who really are injured. It honestly is a necessary evil of the game because their solution is much worse.
I atleast understand the spike rule as it forces consistency as far as run off time for spike plays. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the offense as to why it takes longer.
The ejection rule will never be fair IMO. I think the refs already screw up the penalties on these hits anyways. Very bad rule. It would be better IMO for players to be reviewed and suspended a game for habitual occurrences. This should be reviewed regardless of penalties called in the game.
The faking injuries rule is ridiculous. Do not run time off the clock. It also penalizes people who really are injured. It honestly is a necessary evil of the game because their solution is much worse.
I atleast understand the spike rule as it forces consistency as far as run off time for spike plays. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the offense as to why it takes longer.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News