Blog Entry

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

Posted on: August 3, 2008 12:10 pm

I'm scared. I'm more than scared. I just watched an NCAA video explaining the new timing rules and I'm concerned, confused, hungry and tired. Among other things.

This video explains administration of the new 40/25 rule. It is essentially the same rule used in the NFL. The 40/25 keeps every NFL game within that three-hour window so more beer can be sold, more network shows can be promoted. It's called time certainty certainty. Our college game does not need time certainty. If you're like me, you don't want college football packaged into a three-hour window.

According to my math (always a dicey proposition but hang with me, it's only a blog), the average college team ran 72 plays per game last season. Fine, great. The average NFL team ran 62.76 plays per game. That's with the 40/25 rule. That's also a difference of 9.14 plays per game. Multiplied by two teams thats more than 18 plays per game difference.

See why I'm scared? We're talking about 18 less plays per game. Because NCAA teams averaged .397 points per play last season that means we could be losing more than a touchdown per game in scoring (7.26 points). The NFL averaged .345 points per play last season, 13 percent less than Division I-A. I don't want to see it. The college game's popularity is at an all-time high. Part of the reason is that offense is an all-time high.

It looks to me like the NCAA rules committee is about to bastardize the game like it did two years ago when its misguided timing rules slashed something like 13 plays per game. The rules were adjusted last season and once again we had reasonable college football.

There were code words used like "pace of play" in rationalizing the timing rule changes this time. The pace of play was fine with me and with the the fans who set another record attendance record last season. If the committee really wanted to shorten games it would cut out overtime and shorten halftime.

But that would hurt the feelings of band geeks all over the country and actually help keep players healthy.

Who needs that?

Category: NCAAF

Since: Aug 24, 2006
Posted on: August 17, 2008 2:44 pm

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

In defense of band geeks, halftime never feels to long at a college game; and if your college team...isn't that great, then they're often the best part.  Don't be hating on the band.  Let's see you dot the I.

Since: Sep 1, 2007
Posted on: August 10, 2008 9:19 pm

## Same old story

For whatever reason the NCAA thinks it is the best at what is right for college football.  Sure it is a organization that has no real power bu they are trying thier best.  Thier rules 2 years ago was to speed the game up but all it did was give time for CBS (I'm an SEC fan) was to sell more commercials..I hate having the games last 3 and 1/2 hours or close to 4.  The SEC screwed this up by allowing this rule implementation.  So going to the new play clock doesn't speed up the game, it allows the producers to have more commercials!!!

Since: Oct 22, 2007
Posted on: August 6, 2008 5:56 pm

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

Badgerpacker has it right. 40/25 is a good idea- How many times have we seen a ref take forever to put the ball down and start the 25 sec clock? This will make the process more consistent. Starting the clock on out of bounds play is a bad idea-I don't want less football. Less or condensed commercials is where they should be looking- It can be done- something Soccer does well.

Since: Aug 6, 2008
Posted on: August 6, 2008 3:51 pm

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

I agree with all the comments on tv timeouts and commercials.  I always wondered why we didn't do advertising like they do with European soccer--add the Geiko or Bud logo up in the corner with the clock/score graphics, change it periodically and let the game continue on.

Since: Feb 27, 2007
Posted on: August 5, 2008 2:15 am

## That's not the rule change that should bother you

Running the clock on ready-for-play after out of bounds calls is going to be annoying (though nowhere near as annoying as the old idiotic clock rules from two years ago). But switching to the 40/25 rule shouldn't make any difference. Most of the time, the ball is spotted at about 15 seconds after the previous play ended (average might be a little less, but I've definitely seen it take nearly 20 seconds occasionally)  - at which point the 25-second clock would start under the old rule. 15+25 = you guessed it, 40.

The reason a college game has more plays than the NFL is the first-down rule: the clock stops until the ready-for-play signal on a first down. At 15 seconds per first down, ~40 first downs per game, figure 1/3 of those were out of bounds (so the clock stops anyway), that's an extra 7 minutes per game - which converts to about 16-17 plays, very near the margin you found. Stopping the clock to move the chains accounts for nearly all of the difference between the NFL and NCAA in terms of plays per game; the variation in the play clock likely has minimal effect and is being changed for the purpose of consistency.

I agree that shortening games would be better done by cutting down on commercials (do we really need six commercials after a score, then come back for the kickoff, go to another commercial break, then go to another six commercials after they go three-and-out and punt?), but the 40/25 rule isn't going to shorten games. The new clock rules on out-of-bounds will (to what extent, who knows).

Since: Jan 15, 2007
Posted on: August 5, 2008 1:40 am

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

hey Dennis, do us a favor and write a productive article please. that was about the biggest waste of time I've endured in some time.  good thing im not your boss, because this article would have gotten you fired.

STFU and find a hole to crawl into and disappear.

Since: Nov 28, 2006
Posted on: August 5, 2008 1:00 am

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

I could watch two MAC teams battle it out for 4 hours if it were on TV.  The NFL did it right because it is an inferior product to college football.  However, I have very little to worry about since the Ducks hardly use any of the playbook anyways.

Since: Dec 8, 2006
Posted on: August 4, 2008 10:21 pm

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

Amen, brother.  How often as you are sitting at your favorite college teams home stadium in seats that you "contributed" too much money in order to be able to purchase \$50 seats only to be cheated out of any replays of any controversial plays and to sit and watch some dude stand and kill any mo that the home crowd is cooking up by holding up play for an eternity so that they can play free credit report.com commercials.

Since: Dec 18, 2007
Posted on: August 4, 2008 2:50 pm

## Someone please tell me my math is wrong...

I don' need that. I'am scared,confused , and hungry also, mostly from the econemy, now they want to take away my  entertainment and lessen my college football. Now i'am mortified.

mattfred
Since: Aug 22, 2006
Posted on: August 4, 2008 2:20 pm
This comment has been removed.