just saw this-

yes to all except for #4.

This is a phenomenal way to eliminate comebacks that make the sport great.

(02-20-2023 11:06 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This is a phenomenal way to eliminate comebacks that make the sport great.

not really. double timeouts do nothing for that. untimed downs at end of 1st/3rd do nothing for that. running it on 1st downs- does a smidge, but oh well.

More High Tempo Offense... Faster, Faster, Faster

It is basically the NFL Timing rules … which I’m fine with … the length of College Football games is ridiculously long.

(02-20-2023 11:12 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 11:06 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This is a phenomenal way to eliminate comebacks that make the sport great.

not really. double timeouts do nothing for that. untimed downs at end of 1st/3rd do nothing for that. running it on 1st downs- does a smidge, but oh well.

I agree with changes #1/#2. #3/#4 will take away a lot of the exciting comebacks we've had over the years.

(02-20-2023 11:22 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 11:12 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 11:06 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This is a phenomenal way to eliminate comebacks that make the sport great.

not really. double timeouts do nothing for that. untimed downs at end of 1st/3rd do nothing for that. running it on 1st downs- does a smidge, but oh well.

I agree with changes #1/#2. #3/#4 will take away a lot of the exciting comebacks we've had over the years.

maybe don't fall behind. #3 is very reasonable and still is stopping in last 2 minutes of the half. #4 is a joke and I really hope doesn't happen at all.

#2 seems pointless without any data backing it up. How often do the 1st and 3rd quarter end with an untimed down?

Then there's this part at the bottom of the article:
"Television commercials don’t impact game time significantly. From 2018-2020, games not televised finished only about two minutes sooner than those televised."

I know these aren't going anywhere but the absurd TV rights deals have allowed commercials to be spammed non-stop. It's more common to get 3 commercials in 4 or 5 plays than untimed downs at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

(02-20-2023 12:02 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  #2 seems pointless without any data backing it up. How often do the 1st and 3rd quarter end with an untimed down?

Then there's this part at the bottom of the article:
"Television commercials don’t impact game time significantly. From 2018-2020, games not televised finished only about two minutes sooner than those televised."

I know these aren't going anywhere but the absurd TV rights deals have allowed commercials to be spammed non-stop. It's more common to get 3 commercials in 4 or 5 plays than untimed downs at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

why should there be an untimed down though?

An untimed down adds maybe a minute to the game every 10 FBS games or so? I don't have numbers or data at my disposal so I'm just guesstimating. My point wasn't whether there should be untimed downs and I personally don't have a strong opinion but this specific proposal doesn't help solve the underlying issue of game length. I honestly don't know why it's included in the proposals given the infrequency of untimed downs occurring.

How about timeouts being just 1 minute long? Kickoff needs to start no more than 1 minute after the game start time. Cut 3 minutes out of halftime. Those things will probably shave 15 minutes off the game.

(02-20-2023 12:19 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  An untimed down adds maybe a minute to the game every 10 FBS games or so? I don't have numbers or data at my disposal so I'm just guesstimating. My point wasn't whether there should be untimed downs and I personally don't have a strong opinion but this specific proposal doesn't help solve the underlying issue of game length. I honestly don't know why it's included in the proposals given the infrequency of untimed downs occurring.

Why is it so important to you to keep like it sounds? It's an easy painless cut.

(02-20-2023 12:20 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  How about timeouts being just 1 minute long? Kickoff needs to start no more than 1 minute after the game start time. Cut 3 minutes out of halftime. Those things will probably shave 15 minutes off the game.

As far as the start times, they do start at game start time. The problem is with Fox now, the 1st game isn't scheduled to start at noon, but rather 12:10(though they sure as hell don't advertise that).

Stopping the clock on first downs (outside of under two minutes) should have been eliminated years ago.

(02-20-2023 12:02 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  #2 seems pointless without any data backing it up. How often do the 1st and 3rd quarter end with an untimed down?

Then there's this part at the bottom of the article:
"Television commercials don’t impact game time significantly. From 2018-2020, games not televised finished only about two minutes sooner than those televised."

I know these aren't going anywhere but the absurd TV rights deals have allowed commercials to be spammed non-stop. It's more common to get 3 commercials in 4 or 5 plays than untimed downs at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

I agree. #2 is stupid. No reason to change. I think I've seen it once in the last couple of seasons. Change just to change.

Don't really have a problem with #1, although there could be reasons to do two in a row other than icing a kicker. How many times after a time-out do you see teams have confused personnel or have a delay of game? Quite a few. And it doesn't affect the length of the game except for the end of the game icing the kicker. You could limit the 2nd to a 30 second time out.

#4 I don't like. Teams should have a way to stop the clock.

#3 I do favor. The games have gotten long, especially with the spread, hurry up offenses. The NFL does it without stopping the clock.

(02-20-2023 12:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:19 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  An untimed down adds maybe a minute to the game every 10 FBS games or so? I don't have numbers or data at my disposal so I'm just guesstimating. My point wasn't whether there should be untimed downs and I personally don't have a strong opinion but this specific proposal doesn't help solve the underlying issue of game length. I honestly don't know why it's included in the proposals given the infrequency of untimed downs occurring.

Why is it so important to you to keep like it sounds? It's an easy painless cut.

I'm not defending the untimed down and I made it clear I have no preference for whether it should stay or go. I'm saying this is the typical CFB leadership at work. It's easy so it gives the appearance that they're being proactive when it really doesn't get at the heart of the issue. CFB leaders ought to look at the way TV timeouts are structured but they aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them so they look for the small incremental changes as a way to claim progress.

(02-20-2023 12:36 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:19 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  An untimed down adds maybe a minute to the game every 10 FBS games or so? I don't have numbers or data at my disposal so I'm just guesstimating. My point wasn't whether there should be untimed downs and I personally don't have a strong opinion but this specific proposal doesn't help solve the underlying issue of game length. I honestly don't know why it's included in the proposals given the infrequency of untimed downs occurring.

Why is it so important to you to keep like it sounds? It's an easy painless cut.

I'm not defending the untimed down and I made it clear I have no preference for whether it should stay or go. I'm saying this is the typical CFB leadership at work. It's easy so it gives the appearance that they're being proactive when it really doesn't get at the heart of the issue. CFB leaders ought to look at the way TV timeouts are structured but they aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them so they look for the small incremental changes as a way to claim progress.

getting rid of the clock stopping after 1st downs is big. Georgia averaged like 39 1st downs in their games both for and against(non penalties). Figure 35 of them would be in bounds. At least 10 seconds per would be 6 minutes chopped off. Tennessee's games averaged 43. Say it's 40 in bounds. That's almost 7 minutes. That's real time there. Average game length is 3:27.

And the one I'm really glad of is the stupid multiple timeouts to ice the kicker.

(02-20-2023 12:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:36 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:19 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  An untimed down adds maybe a minute to the game every 10 FBS games or so? I don't have numbers or data at my disposal so I'm just guesstimating. My point wasn't whether there should be untimed downs and I personally don't have a strong opinion but this specific proposal doesn't help solve the underlying issue of game length. I honestly don't know why it's included in the proposals given the infrequency of untimed downs occurring.

Why is it so important to you to keep like it sounds? It's an easy painless cut.

I'm not defending the untimed down and I made it clear I have no preference for whether it should stay or go. I'm saying this is the typical CFB leadership at work. It's easy so it gives the appearance that they're being proactive when it really doesn't get at the heart of the issue. CFB leaders ought to look at the way TV timeouts are structured but they aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them so they look for the small incremental changes as a way to claim progress.

getting rid of the clock stopping after 1st downs is big. Georgia averaged like 39 1st downs in their games both for and against(non penalties). Figure 35 of them would be in bounds. At least 10 seconds per would be 6 minutes chopped off. Tennessee's games averaged 43. Say it's 40 in bounds. That's almost 7 minutes. That's real time there. Average game length is 3:27.

And the one I'm really glad of is the stupid multiple timeouts to ice the kicker.

Watch those 6-7 minutes get replaced by more commercials.

(02-20-2023 12:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:02 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  #2 seems pointless without any data backing it up. How often do the 1st and 3rd quarter end with an untimed down?

Then there's this part at the bottom of the article:
"Television commercials don’t impact game time significantly. From 2018-2020, games not televised finished only about two minutes sooner than those televised."

I know these aren't going anywhere but the absurd TV rights deals have allowed commercials to be spammed non-stop. It's more common to get 3 commercials in 4 or 5 plays than untimed downs at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters.

I agree. #2 is stupid. No reason to change. I think I've seen it once in the last couple of seasons. Change just to change.

Don't really have a problem with #1, although there could be reasons to do two in a row other than icing a kicker. How many times after a time-out do you see teams have confused personnel or have a delay of game? Quite a few. And it doesn't affect the length of the game except for the end of the game icing the kicker. You could limit the 2nd to a 30 second time out.

#4 I don't like. Teams should have a way to stop the clock.

#3 I do favor. The games have gotten long, especially with the spread, hurry up offenses. The NFL does it without stopping the clock.

I'll be honest, I did not like #3 at first. After thinking about it though, a running clock after first downs isn't a bad idea given how CFB is being played with the hurry up now.

For #4, I wonder if they'd make an exception for clocking the ball or maybe the clock stops for incompletions inside 2 minutes like with #3.

(02-20-2023 12:44 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:36 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-20-2023 12:19 PM)Keyser Soze Wrote:  An untimed down adds maybe a minute to the game every 10 FBS games or so? I don't have numbers or data at my disposal so I'm just guesstimating. My point wasn't whether there should be untimed downs and I personally don't have a strong opinion but this specific proposal doesn't help solve the underlying issue of game length. I honestly don't know why it's included in the proposals given the infrequency of untimed downs occurring.

Why is it so important to you to keep like it sounds? It's an easy painless cut.

I'm not defending the untimed down and I made it clear I have no preference for whether it should stay or go. I'm saying this is the typical CFB leadership at work. It's easy so it gives the appearance that they're being proactive when it really doesn't get at the heart of the issue. CFB leaders ought to look at the way TV timeouts are structured but they aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them so they look for the small incremental changes as a way to claim progress.

getting rid of the clock stopping after 1st downs is big. Georgia averaged like 39 1st downs in their games both for and against(non penalties). Figure 35 of them would be in bounds. At least 10 seconds per would be 6 minutes chopped off. Tennessee's games averaged 43. Say it's 40 in bounds. That's almost 7 minutes. That's real time there. Average game length is 3:27.

And the one I'm really glad of is the stupid multiple timeouts to ice the kicker.

Watch those 6-7 minutes get replaced by more commercials.

I doubt it. I think the networks are tired of the really long games and having prior games bleeding into the next games(which sometimes are the bigger games).