As an unwashed American football fan there is nothing quite like Saturday afternoon's come fall time. The pageantry and emotion of college football is something to behold. It washes over this great nation of ours from Labor Day to New Year's, bringing memories of games won and lost, and stories which speak to the soul. The game, however, is not without flaw. I submit to you five rule changes that would remedy what I consider small residue on the nearly-spotless garment of college football. (EDITORS NOTE: THIS IS NOT ANOTHER LAME ANTI/PRO BCS ARTICLE. YOU ARE FREE TO CONTINUE READING)
1. EXCESSIVE CELEBRATION
The idea of implementing an excessive celebration penalty has its merits. The college game, more so than the professional variety, values sportsmanship and friendly competition. The NCAA certainly doesn't want players to be showing up their opponents after every completed five yard out or 14 yard run. I get it. But the idea that athletes should be forced to bridle every emotion which "calls attention to oneself" fights against what makes the game great. Especially when it comes to touchdown celebrations. Nothing, and I mean nothing, drives me crazy like an official getting directly in the face of a player just as he enters the endzone. "Don't you DARE show emotion. Walk back to the sideline. NOW!" Hey folks, it's a damn game. As long as the players are not taunting an opponent (see DeSean Jackson in the NFL Exhibit A, B, C, et al) the rules should allow for celebration. There is already a taunting penalty on the books, in addition to the excessive celebration statute. Impose the first; burn the latter.
Here are three famous examples of this ridiculous rule in action:
Down 12-7 with just over a minute left in 2009, Georgia's AJ Green makes a tremendous catch for the go-ahead touchdown. He then celebrates with his teammates. He just goes too far...I guess. Look at this referee seeking him out. Goodness. The 15-yard penalty was assessed on the kickoff and LSU, aided by terrific field position, won the football game 20-13.
In last year's Pinstripe Bowl Adrian Hilburn was flagged for excessive celebration after a small salute to the crowd. Trailing by two points, Kansas State was forced to try a potential game-tying conversion from the 18-yard line with just over a minute to play. It was unsuccessful and the Wildcats were defeated.
After a terrific last minute drive had his Washington Huskies inside the BYU ten yard line with under ten seconds remaining, Jake Locker made a terrific individual effort to score a touchdown to bring Washington within an extra point of tying the contest. Caught in the moment, Locker threw the ball in the air in exuberance. NO SOUP FOR YOU! The stripes throw the flag, the 35-yard PAT is blocked, and nationally-ranked BYU escapes.
On top of all this, now in 2011 the rule gets even worse! If an offending celebrator begins his celebration before entering the endzone, the touchdown is taken away and the penalty assessed from the spot of the jubilation's origin. Oy.
2. HORSE COLLAR
Another codified NCAA endeavor which meets the "good intention, bad execution" test is that of horse-collar tackling enforcement. This is a relatively new rule in college football, designed to keep players from being injured when brought down by a horse collar tackle. I have watched as much college football as humanly possible (Bring on the Hyperbole!) and I can never remember an injury transpiring from the horse collar maneuver. If I am wrong, by all means let me know. The rule punishes defensive players, whose only charge is to get the ball-carrier down by any means necessary. (Excluding face masking/tripping/you know what I mean) A defender simply doesn't premeditate a tackle using the horse collar. It happens when the angle is just right...and the play needs to be made.
3. OVERTIME SPOT
The idea of both squads receiving an overtime possession has its bedrock in the college game. Since its inception in the mid 1990's, college overtime has always been the fairest way to decide a hotly contested matchup which has stretched the bands of regulation time. The NFL has now done away with a complete sudden-death overtime format. (You now have to score at least a touchdown to be victorious) I argue that the overtime possession in college football should start on the 40-yard-line to begin the session. This is 15 yards further than what is currently implemented. There is simply too much emphasis on the coin toss. If you win the toss, elect to play defense, hold your opponent to zero, the game is in your hands. Simply kick the 42-yard field goal and ride off into the sunset.
If the ball were placed on the 40-yard-line, each team would be forced to gain at least a first down to enter field goal range. Unless of course...you have this guy on your team...
Dustin Hopkins. That would have been good from about 80 yards.
Suffice it to say, moving the overtime spot to 40-yards would put both sides on an even playing field. Each would need to gain yardage to get into scoring territory. In today's game, so long as you win the coin toss, you can sit on your hands, play it safe, and win the game. For a game so hotly contested, an overtime game should be won on both sides of the ball.
4. LET CORNERS DEFEND
One day I would like to be a United States Senator. It has always been a goal of mine. On my first day in Washington, I will introduce legislation classifying defensive backs as "protected citizens." No one is picked on more than cornerbacks and safeties. It is a shame how many pass interference calls are issued on defensive backs who are simply making a good play on the ball. With the game already favoring the offense, both explicitly in over-penalizing the defense and implicitly by the very nature of blindly defending receivers running designated routes, let's strike a battle for the subjected secondary men who work every Saturday at a stadium near you.
5. FIRE ALL PAC-12 REFEREES
Who can bring up horrible rules and spotty officiating without mentioning the Pac-10 (Now Pac-12)?
Enjoy these FOUR flaming turds:
AND.....
Listen to those Oregon fans!
AND
AND OF COURSE...
This one doesn't have anything to do with the Pac-12...and it really has nothing to do with a rule change. Unless we are outlawing soccer players. Trust me, it's worth your time.
College football is a small diagnosis and treatment away from perfection. Did I write the correct prescription? What rules, if any, would you change?
▼
Couldn't agree more, and love to see the Jake Locker/BYU penalty up there (we still shouldn't have missed the kick though).
ReplyDeleteFortunately amongst the other wonderful things Pac-12 commish Larry Scott is doing, addressing the reffing has allready happened: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/huskies/2014380815_officials03.html
Perhaps not enough, time will tell, but its a big start.
I personally would like to turn back the clock (pun intended) on some of the latest clock rules that they changed in recent years to "speed up" the game. Here's a hint, stop having so many damn TV time outs, that would REALLY speed up the game without taking away from playing it.
The worst excessive celebration I've seen was during the Ohio State vs. Michigan game. Guys making their hands into an "O" and getting flagged for it. Even worse? Nike designed the gloves so that when the players did that, their hands would display the Ohio State block O.
ReplyDelete@krizoltz - I have complete faith in your man Larry Scott. And that is certainly a start in the right in the direction. Pac-10 officiating has been horrible for far too long. You're right on the TV timeouts. Certainly slows down play. Especially if you are AT the game.
ReplyDelete@JDanielRollins - Just another example of officiating becoming the story, not the excitement and aura of the game.
One thing I would love to see is the ability to challenge a penalty. Pass Interference, leading with the head, etc. I hate that we can't make refs pay for horrible calls. Offsides, false start, illegal substitution, and the list goes on. We have great technology these days with recording equipment. Let's use it!
ReplyDeleteI think the bigger question is how do we as fans go about promoting these rule changes. Is there somewhere we can voice our opinion to the NCAA? Do we just suffer through this hoping it will eventually change? How do we influence the rule makers?
crimsonred98 said:
ReplyDelete[quote=crimsonred98]I would not allow for challenges on penalties, that just opens up a whole box of stuff we don't want to go through. Which penalties can you challenge? Are we really going to slow a game down so that we can see if the defense was really lined up in the neutral zone? Just leave it as it is with penalties.[/quote]
badutahboy said:
ReplyDelete[quote=badutahboy]I'm in the middle on that issue. I agree that we can't have challenges on every single play, and that it's ridiculous to think about challenging stupid penalties like offsides, but at the same time, those can be critical plays.
I'd be in favor of a rule that allows for a challenge of penalties that result in an automatic first down, and also the ability to challenge any play in the fourth quarter (when home cooking really comes into play).
That wouldn't extend the game by too much, especially since challenges are limited. It'd also give coaches a way to argue a bad call in a way that doesn't make the ref look like he bitched out if he backs down..[/quote]
I agree that we don't want every penalty challenged. But why not have it like reviews are done currently? The guys upstairs can place a penalty call under "further review" if they desire. And each team/head coach will still only be able to use one challenge per half, but now they can also challenge a penalty, not just the outcome of a play. Bad hit it right on the head, sometimes a trivial penalty like Offsides can stop a drive that might tie the game or allow you to win the game.
ReplyDeletecrimsonred98 said:
ReplyDelete[quote=crimsonred98]I think it will just have too much influence on the game. For instance, what is going to happen when there is a flag on the defense for offsides and the offense goes into "free play" mode and throws long, the pass gets intercepted, but the offense retains possession due to the offsides penalty. Then the defensive coach throws is challenge flag and the review shows that the defender got back before the snap. Does the offense still retain the ball? Does the defense takeover at the end of the play after the INT? The defense gets a benefit because of a bad flag?[/quote]