New College Football Clock Rules, Love Them Or Hate Them?

[Syrinx]

I hate them. I like games to last a long time.

[1gobluedem]

1. I am undecided...

I'm not sure I like the new clock thing but I do like that coaches have the one challenge option -- something that could've helped Michigan in, oh, four or five games last season.

[fishwax]

2. I hate the new clock rules

It sucks some of the thrill out of the end of a close game, imo, and lowers the potential for exciting comebacks and finishes. And in the games I've watched, I don't see that they've shortened the game at all. They probably just fill in the extra time with more commercials :grr:

I'm okay with the challenge rule, but I really hate the clock rules. I hope they get rid of them ASAP.

[Cush]

3. the clock rule is horrible

[Awsi Dooger]

4. They are idiotic

I checked the tape of the Miami/FSU game and the new rules eliminated more than 10% of the playing time, specifically 6:17. The average was 4-6 seconds with a kickoff in the air and 11-22 seconds before a play was run after a change of possession.

As fishway indicated, it impacts the end of the game most of all. In the 4th quarter of that Miami/FSU game, the 4th quarter had the biggest loss, 1:51. Plus Miami had to blow a timeout after a punt. When you have 3 timeouts now, it's really 2 when you are trailing since you have to use one to stop the clock after a punt or kickoff. Otherwise, obviously the team with the lead will leisurely let the clock drift down.

How does this rule change make any sense? You basically can't punt late in the game if you are trailing, because getting the ball back requires two changes of possession. I don't think teams have done the research or understand the probability yet. There should be more teams going for it on 4th down inside the last few minutes.

If they wanted to shorten the game, the clock running after a first down should have been looked into. This rule changed is forced and arbitrary and I hope it's one season and out.

[nickgutierrez]

7. Yeah, terrible rule

I could see it making slightly more sense if you stopped doing it with five minutes left in the 4th (and maybe 2nd) quarter. But, you know, just slightly, because it's still a dumb rule.

[Solar]

9. fishwax is right

"Shortening the games" means "more time for ads". Its utter crap.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. ...and LESS football.

:grr:

[Syrinx]

16. I agree with what you say

You've posted the bigger reason that I hate them. I posted the most superficial. :)

[fishwax]

17. hehe. I like the games to last a long time too

:)

[Syrinx]

18. I remember a game a few years ago

Alabama vs. Tennessee. Seems like it lasted nearly six hours. I didn't like the outcome, as Tennessee won in 5 overtimes. But it was an exciting rollercoaster of a game... really fun.

[Bill McBlueState]

5. What's going on?

I haven't had a chance to watch any college football yet since I was out of the country the past couple weeks. What are the new rules?

[Bill McBlueState]

6. ok, googled it

It sounds like a bad idea. What I don't understand is why they don't follow the shining example that's out there for anyone who wants their league's games to consistently clock in at three hours. It's not like the NFL clock rules are under copyright. Just keep the clock running after first downs.

[LisaM]

8. Well, then add the two-minute warning in

If you're going to get rid of the stopped clock after key first downs (they've never done it the whole game) then they should have a two-minute warning.

[Awsi Dooger]

10. Here's the online petition

http://www.wehatethenewclockrules.com/

When I "signed" it I was #83. Now there are more than 16,000. I hope the number gets huge and earns some publicity.

[trotsky]

11. Hate 'em, but especially one aspect in particular.

Starting the clock after CHANGE IN POSSESSION? Ridiculous.

I think they just should have made it like the NFL's clock rules, most importantly the clock doesn't stop after 1st downs. And add the 2-minute warning.

[RoyGBiv]

12. Hate, hate, hate ...

With a white hot passion I hate them.

[fishwax]

13. and how do you feel about the replay official in the OU-UO game?

:grr:

[RoyGBiv]

14. Flames ... flames on my face ...

The words I would use to express my feelings for that official should not be repeated in polite company.

When even those announcers, who I was dissing earlier, would call that a horrid call, well ...

I won't blame them because OU's defense never should have let it get to that point, but still.

[fishwax]

15. yeah, the defense was horrible at the end

and the offense should have punched it in for a 17 point lead instead of having to settle for another field goal. I figure there's plenty of blame to go around, but I won't spare the refs my wrath. Fouts is a UO alum, for goodness sake, and even he argued that it was a horrible call.

[Broken_Hero]

19. The new rules, suck...and thats me being nice about it...nt