College Football Land Rejoices!

Last year the NCAA implemented a new series of rules aimed at lowering times of games. Ostensibly this was done to help out the networks televising the games, as the 14 minutes the rules shaved off of the average game (from 3:21 to 3:07) last year was really useful so that...um...CBS could show 14 more commercials per broadcast? So the networks could fit one more episode of Malcom in the Middle into their early evening syndication lineups? To refresh your memory, the two major rule changes last year were that 1. The clock started when the kicking team kicked the ball (In the past the clock started when the receiving team touched the ball) and 2. On a change of possession the clock started when the official marked the ball (In the past the clock started on the snap). These rules changes did lower the times of games (as well as scoring, down five points a game last year), but they also led to a couple of unforeseen consequences. The change of possession rule made it even harder for a trailing team to get back in the game, as an extra 5-10 seconds lost when there are only 40 or so left in a game can crush a rally. (This also spawned one of my favorite Viewer Heckling moments in all of sports: Every time I watched a game last year I would look forward to seeing how many seconds a QB would waste after the official had started the clock. It was one of those rare moments in watching sports where you could honestly say without question "I could do better than that!" It was also super entertaining to see the deer in the headlights look on a QB when he realized the clock was running. Priceless.) The kickoff rules change was a terrible idea that spawned my favorite moment of all of last football season, when Bret Bielma of Wisconsin intentionally ran his kickoff team offsides near the end of the first half. Joe Pa was then left with two choices, take the ball at the 10 on the penalty, or let Wisconsin continue to use the ploy to run out the clock. Joe Pa chose the latter, and Bret Bielma became my Big 10 coach.

So in light of the obvious stupidity of the new rules the NCAA is poised to overturn them. Yay! say college football fans. Yay! say deer in the headlights QBs. Yay! says everyon..what? Wait. What is that you say? There are more new rules coming in with the repeals of last year's mistakes? Oi. Here is a look at the new rules proposed to come into effect next season:

-The play clock would be shortened from 25 to 15 seconds after a timeout
-Timeouts would be reduced from 65 to 30 seconds
-Instant replay reviews would be limited to two minutes
-Kickoffs would be moved back five yards, from the 30 instead of the 35

Now, at first, I really wanted to hate these new rules. I really did. I consider myself a bit of a traditionalist, and any change to the game sets off little alarms in my head. After thinking about the changes though, they just made too much sense for me to hate them. The first rule is rather benign, and I think it is a good one if only because it gives our friend deer in the headlights QB an opportunity to take a dumb delay of game penalty. The second rule also seems fairly simple, and considering that very few timeouts are actually taken for in depth skull sessions as opposed to clock management, I don't think it will detract anything from the game. The replay rule also seems like a fairly simple and easy one, as I know personally I saw way too many 5+ minute deliberations under the hood by college refs last season. Ah, but now onto the most tantalizing of the rule changes, kicking off from five yards further back. The thinking behind this rule is that more returns = more time run off the clock. That is a fair enough assumption, if saving time is your end goal. This rule has the potential however, to do exactly the opposite of what the two rule changes last year did: make the game more exciting and raise scoring. Yay! says everyone. I know that I saw a lot of kicks last year that were touchbacks, but certainly not by five yards. With the added number of returns caused by the rule we are going to see three things; 1. Better field position for the returning team, which inevitably over the course of a game will lead to more scoring opportunities. 2. More return TDs, as it is just common sense that more kicks will be returned all the way when the total number of returns rises and the distance required to score decreases. 3. More big hits on kick coverage, as the more kicks returned means the more licks dished out. Now this is the way to decrease the broadcast time of a game, while not taking anything away from the product on the field. Where were these guys last year when the rules committee was meeting?