Please tell me they’ll get rid of these stupid rules after one year.


A 12 play drive that takes 6:30? WTH?

(08-26-2023 02:48 PM)Poster Wrote:  Please tell me they’ll get rid of these stupid rules after one year.


A 12 play drive that takes 6:30? WTF?

CFB games that regularly take 4+ hours? WTF?

(08-26-2023 02:48 PM)Poster Wrote:  Please tell me they’ll get rid of these stupid rules after one year.


A 12 play drive that takes 6:30? WTH?

Do you consider that to be a good thing or a bad thing?

Teams playing today are mostly in the 62-68 plays per game range, which is from the 71-72 range last season (although it's a small sample size). It's a great rule change -- games are going faster, it's paced more like an NFL game.

The TV timeouts aren’t decreasing or getting shorter. This just means less football. How is that a good thing?

(08-26-2023 10:08 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  The TV timeouts aren’t decreasing or getting shorter. This just means less football. How is that a good thing?

From the NCAA, it means with the advent of an expanded playoff there’s a decreased chance of a career-ending injury for student athletes. From the producers side, it means games should regularly end within its designated time slot.

My enjoyment of watching college football didn’t take a nosedive this season vs last season because of this rule, so it doesn’t bug me. Like most fans, I’ll only hate it when it causes something bad for my team.

(08-26-2023 08:57 PM)kurtrundell Wrote:  Teams playing today are mostly in the 62-68 plays per game range, which is from the 71-72 range last season (although it's a small sample size). It's a great rule change -- games are going faster, it's paced more like an NFL game.

Agreed. It’s a net positive to keep the games moving.

(08-26-2023 10:08 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  The TV timeouts aren’t decreasing or getting shorter. This just means less football. How is that a good thing?

Yeah. Its not a great thing at all. Don't really have a problem with the changes, but none of these delays changed your enjoyment of the game (except the multiple TOs to freeze the kicker). Its the long TV timeouts and long replay timeouts that are the problem.

(08-26-2023 08:57 PM)kurtrundell Wrote:  Teams playing today are mostly in the 62-68 plays per game range, which is from the 71-72 range last season (although it's a small sample size). It's a great rule change -- games are going faster, it's paced more like an NFL game.

I agree. I only wish they had fully adopted the NFL approach and keep the clock running on a first down inside the final two minutes of the halves as well. I don't see any reason to stop the clocks during those times, that IMO gives the offense an unfair advantage.

We get so little CFB - it's been 229 days since the last game - that I don't mind four-hour games like I did in baseball. But I've never liked the clock-stops-on-a-first-down rule in CFB, always thought the NFL approach was better, more justifiable conceptually.

(08-26-2023 11:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-26-2023 10:08 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  The TV timeouts aren’t decreasing or getting shorter. This just means less football. How is that a good thing?

Yeah. Its not a great thing at all. Don't really have a problem with the changes, but none of these delays changed your enjoyment of the game (except the multiple TOs to freeze the kicker). Its the long TV timeouts and long replay timeouts that are the problem.

Personally didn't find enjoyment in teams throwing 100 passes per game because they knew they clock would stop. Personally never liked teams coming back from 40 points because the clock stopped after every play. Personally didn't enjoy a 3 hour game turning into almost 5 hours. Why TV didn't respond faster is beyond me. ABC lists the game to go from 12-3pm and it ends at 430pm.with the subsequent bumped to ABC Family Channel.

The games will still last the same length of time. It’s just that there will be less actual playing time and more commercials. Which of course is the real intention of this rule change. It’s like conference moves- everything in CFB is about money nowadays.

I swear that every CFB fan that likes this rule change posts on this website. Unless your team is an underdog in every game and you want a smaller sample size of plays, I can’t think of why you’d like this rule change. It means there will be less football to watch.

What’s the bright side of this? That we’ll be able to see the wonderful face of Flo from Progressive 150 times a game, rather than 120 times a game like we did before?

(08-27-2023 03:32 AM)Poster Wrote:  The games will still last the same length of time. It’s just that there will be less actual playing time and more commercials. Which of course is the real intention of this rule change. It’s like conference moves- everything in CFB is about money nowadays.

I swear that every CFB fan that likes this rule change posts on this website. Unless your team is an underdog in every game and you want a smaller sample size of plays, I can’t think of why you’d like this rule change. It means there will be less football to watch.

What’s the bright side of this? That we’ll be able to see the wonderful face of Flo from Progressive 150 times a game, rather than 120 times a game like we did before?

That first sentence is an interesting theory - I guess we shall see.

(08-27-2023 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 03:32 AM)Poster Wrote:  The games will still last the same length of time. It’s just that there will be less actual playing time and more commercials. Which of course is the real intention of this rule change. It’s like conference moves- everything in CFB is about money nowadays.

I swear that every CFB fan that likes this rule change posts on this website. Unless your team is an underdog in every game and you want a smaller sample size of plays, I can’t think of why you’d like this rule change. It means there will be less football to watch.

What’s the bright side of this? That we’ll be able to see the wonderful face of Flo from Progressive 150 times a game, rather than 120 times a game like we did before?

That first sentence is an interesting theory - I guess we shall see.

They’re still going to use roughly 3 hour and 30 minute blocks of time for CFB games. It’s just that they’re going to have more commercials during that block of time and less of an actual football game. The idea that this will end games faster is just a stupid ruse. The intent of this rule change is just to increase commercials. Interesting how they don’t seem to be citing decreasing player injuries as an excuse for this rule change.


Until I created this thread, I thought that everybody outside the NCAA office abhorred this rule change. On every other website where I’ve seen it discussed, everybody hates the rule change. I’m flabbergasted that this rule change is popular on here. A college sports site where people want to see less football and more commercials-LOL.

Personally, I'd like to put a clock on video review of close calls. Once a decision is made to go to the video, allow no more than 60-90 seconds for review. If you can't decide to overturn a call within that much time it is by definition inconclusive and the call on the field should stand.

Add to that a limit of 2 unsuccessful challenges per team until the final 2 minutes of the game, and in the last 2 minutes review is determined by the officials only.

(08-27-2023 08:08 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 03:32 AM)Poster Wrote:  The games will still last the same length of time. It’s just that there will be less actual playing time and more commercials. Which of course is the real intention of this rule change. It’s like conference moves- everything in CFB is about money nowadays.

I swear that every CFB fan that likes this rule change posts on this website. Unless your team is an underdog in every game and you want a smaller sample size of plays, I can’t think of why you’d like this rule change. It means there will be less football to watch.

What’s the bright side of this? That we’ll be able to see the wonderful face of Flo from Progressive 150 times a game, rather than 120 times a game like we did before?

That first sentence is an interesting theory - I guess we shall see.

They’re still going to use roughly 3 hour and 30 minute blocks of time for CFB games. It’s just that they’re going to have more commercials during that block of time and less of an actual football game. The idea that this will end games faster is just a stupid ruse. The intent of this rule change is just to increase commercials. Interesting how they don’t seem to be citing decreasing player injuries as an excuse for this rule change.


Until I created this thread, I thought that everybody outside the NCAA office abhorred this rule change. On every other website where I’ve seen it discussed, everybody hates the rule change. I’m flabbergasted that this rule change is popular on here. A college sports site where people want to see less football and more commercials-LOL.

Commercial breaks are still the same length of time. You're not getting more commercial breaks because of this.

(08-27-2023 08:08 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 03:32 AM)Poster Wrote:  The games will still last the same length of time. It’s just that there will be less actual playing time and more commercials. Which of course is the real intention of this rule change. It’s like conference moves- everything in CFB is about money nowadays.

I swear that every CFB fan that likes this rule change posts on this website. Unless your team is an underdog in every game and you want a smaller sample size of plays, I can’t think of why you’d like this rule change. It means there will be less football to watch.

What’s the bright side of this? That we’ll be able to see the wonderful face of Flo from Progressive 150 times a game, rather than 120 times a game like we did before?

That first sentence is an interesting theory - I guess we shall see.

They’re still going to use roughly 3 hour and 30 minute blocks of time for CFB games. It’s just that they’re going to have more commercials during that block of time and less of an actual football game. The idea that this will end games faster is just a stupid ruse. The intent of this rule change is just to increase commercials. Interesting how they don’t seem to be citing decreasing player injuries as an excuse for this rule change.


Until I created this thread, I thought that everybody outside the NCAA office abhorred this rule change. On every other website where I’ve seen it discussed, everybody hates the rule change. I’m flabbergasted that this rule change is popular on here. A college sports site where people want to see less football and more commercials-LOL.

I thought the eliminating the zero clock play on penalties at the end of quarters was a rule change just for the sake of making a rule change. But it always was a little odd when it happened since it was so rare. Eliminating double timeouts will probably lead to some delay of game penalties. I've seen it necessary, but it was due to sloppy coaching. But icing the kicker with multiple timeouts was stupid and annoying. So neither of these bother me.

Getting rid of the clock stops after first downs just means less football. It doesn't bother me, but I don't know why anyone would think it is great. As for the passing offenses, they work. So they will continue.

(08-27-2023 08:20 AM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 08:08 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-27-2023 03:32 AM)Poster Wrote:  The games will still last the same length of time. It’s just that there will be less actual playing time and more commercials. Which of course is the real intention of this rule change. It’s like conference moves- everything in CFB is about money nowadays.

I swear that every CFB fan that likes this rule change posts on this website. Unless your team is an underdog in every game and you want a smaller sample size of plays, I can’t think of why you’d like this rule change. It means there will be less football to watch.

What’s the bright side of this? That we’ll be able to see the wonderful face of Flo from Progressive 150 times a game, rather than 120 times a game like we did before?

That first sentence is an interesting theory - I guess we shall see.

They’re still going to use roughly 3 hour and 30 minute blocks of time for CFB games. It’s just that they’re going to have more commercials during that block of time and less of an actual football game. The idea that this will end games faster is just a stupid ruse. The intent of this rule change is just to increase commercials. Interesting how they don’t seem to be citing decreasing player injuries as an excuse for this rule change.


Until I created this thread, I thought that everybody outside the NCAA office abhorred this rule change. On every other website where I’ve seen it discussed, everybody hates the rule change. I’m flabbergasted that this rule change is popular on here. A college sports site where people want to see less football and more commercials-LOL.

Commercial breaks are still the same length of time. You're not getting more commercial breaks because of this.

You're getting more talking heads and commercials between games and less football.

After Week 0, plays are down an average of 5 per game and game time is down 3 minutes. It's a small sample size of 7 games compared to all of 2022 and it'll be interesting to see how this changes as the season goes on.

(08-27-2023 12:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-26-2023 08:57 PM)kurtrundell Wrote:  Teams playing today are mostly in the 62-68 plays per game range, which is from the 71-72 range last season (although it's a small sample size). It's a great rule change -- games are going faster, it's paced more like an NFL game.

I agree. I only wish they had fully adopted the NFL approach and keep the clock running on a first down inside the final two minutes of the halves as well. I don't see any reason to stop the clocks during those times, that IMO gives the offense an unfair advantage.

We get so little CFB - it's been 229 days since the last game - that I don't mind four-hour games like I did in baseball. But I've never liked the clock-stops-on-a-first-down rule in CFB, always thought the NFL approach was better, more justifiable conceptually.

Agree with what I put in bold … but I hated the 4 Hour Games … one for safety reasons for the players and second the much slower pace as compared to the NFL.

The UIL in Texas mostly adopted the new NCAA rules. I went to a game on Thursday and hardly noticed the difference until my daughter asked me why they didn't stop the clock on an incomplete pass. I was happy at the faster pace b/c it was a Thursday road game in a city 2 1/2 hours away, daughter got home at 2 am and had to be at school the next day.