New FBS Overtime Rules Changes

Donate To GopherHole
nitramnaed

nitramnaed

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2012
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
1,917
Points
113

Dorking with OT is dumb ... OT isn't super common... and OT is tons of fun.

I feel like 'but there will be fewer plays' arguments are just just barely technically true ... but really have no impact on the overall number of plays in a season.

And then we want more playoffs....
 
Last edited:

I honestly don't see any problem with this, though. It should actually be more exciting, for the rare occasions when OT goes to more than one period.

If a game reaches the second overtime, teams would be required to attempt a two-point conversion after a touchdown. If the game reaches a third overtime period, instead of moving the ball back to the 25-yard line to start the next period, teams will be required to alternate two-point plays.
 

MplsGopher said:
I honestly don't see any problem with this, though. It should actually be more exciting, for the rare occasions when OT goes to more than one period.

If a game reaches the second overtime, teams would be required to attempt a two-point conversion after a touchdown. If the game reaches a third overtime period, instead of moving the ball back to the 25-yard line to start the next period, teams will be required to alternate two-point plays.
Click to expand...
Agreed, also want to draw attention to:

Unsportsmanlike tactics​

In an editorial change to the rules book, video board and lighting system operators cannot create any distraction that obstructs play.
Click to expand...
Would this mean no more dramatic gopher when there are FG attempts toward the big screen? Or does this only apply to thing like flashing videos?

Feigning injuries​

This topic has been thoroughly debated in recent years by the committee. Most of the discussion centers around teams using the tactic to feign an injury to slow down the opposition’s momentum.

The rules committee is proposing a framework to allow a school or conference to request a postgame video review about questionable actions through the NCAA secretary-rules editor/national coordinator of officials for football.
Click to expand...
I still hold that we lost the TCU game due to a player faking an injury. Clock was running down and we were ready on offense, but because there was a player down on the field for an injury we couldn't snap the ball for one last play, however it wasn't enough time for the refs to blow the whistle and stop the clock.

I don't know if this maybe became a rule, but I feel like if the clock runs out because the defense doesn't get set or what have you, the offense should get 1 play with 0:00 on the clock.
 

Taji34 said:
Agreed, also want to draw attention to:

Would this mean no more dramatic gopher when there are FG attempts toward the big screen? Or does this only apply to thing like flashing videos?


I still hold that we lost the TCU game due to a player faking an injury. Clock was running down and we were ready on offense, but because there was a player down on the field for an injury we couldn't snap the ball for one last play, however it wasn't enough time for the refs to blow the whistle and stop the clock.

I don't know if this maybe became a rule, but I feel like if the clock runs out because the defense doesn't get set or what have you, the offense should get 1 play with 0:00 on the clock.
Click to expand...

Don't remember the specific TCU situation but why wouldn't we have been able to snap the ball? If the player was hurt enough for the officials to notice they would have stopped the clock.

Not sure about the rules at the time but currently if you substitute the refs will delay to give the other team time to sub as well. But there is no rule now or in the past that I am aware of that says you can't snap the ball if the D isn't set.

Again, I don't remember the specifics from that game but would surprise me if an injured TCU player somehow made us run out of time to snap the ball.
 


Taji34 said:
Would this mean no more dramatic gopher when there are FG attempts toward the big screen? Or does this only apply to thing like flashing videos?
Click to expand...


I believe the event that caused this rule is this:

www.si.com

Oklahoma State Uses Video Board to Distract Texas Kicker

The Oklahoma State video board operator got creative when trying to distract visiting Texas on a field goal attempt.
www.si.com www.si.com

To me that was pretty unsportsmanlike ...


Dramatic Gopher just plays the video, and holds the pic (no flashing or motion) when they actually kick... to me that's all just fun / not really distracting.
 


weird rule change. don't really care either way but if it's in the argument of player safety and reducing plays, just move the ball to the 10, make 2pt conversions mandatory right away, and just alternate them going for 2 after the first score. Would imagine the percentage of games going to 1st versus 2nd versus 3rd OTs+ is rather miniscule. if you're going to make the reduction and claim that is what it's for, i don't exactly understand why you do it in this weird/confusing way
 

Am I the only one that wouldn't hate if there were ties? I hate the hockey/soccer shootout as a way to end games. Don't want football to go that direction.
 









Word said:
Am I the only one that wouldn't hate if there were ties? I hate the hockey/soccer shootout as a way to end games. Don't want football to go that direction.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind ties either. I would be totally cool with one full round of OT (both teams have the ball first once) and then it being a tie.

There won't be many ties.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Don't remember the specific TCU situation but why wouldn't we have been able to snap the ball? If the player was hurt enough for the officials to notice they would have stopped the clock.

Not sure about the rules at the time but currently if you substitute the refs will delay to give the other team time to sub as well. But there is no rule now or in the past that I am aware of that says you can't snap the ball if the D isn't set.

Again, I don't remember the specifics from that game but would surprise me if an injured TCU player somehow made us run out of time to snap the ball.
Click to expand...
Reviewing the game on youtube seems to contradict my recollection, my bad.
 


Taji34 said:
Reviewing the game on youtube seems to contradict my recollection, my bad.
Click to expand...
Just watched it as well. Ugly series but nothing out of the ordinary clock wise. If their D-Lineman had caught the pass thrown right to him on 2nd down the game would have been over right there :)

That and on 3rd down with 18 seconds left, probably not the best time to scramble and then dump off a short pass to the RB in the middle of the field.....
 


Why don't they just do a simple coin toss and be done with it.

It will be major bummer if your team loses key players in OT due to injury.

Or just play one series for each team, and if it ends up in a tie so be it.
 

For those of us who played the game sometimes the tie is as good as a win.
 







Word said:
Am I the only one that wouldn't hate if there were ties? I hate the hockey/soccer shootout as a way to end games. Don't want football to go that direction.
Click to expand...

I am ok with ties. From the new proposal, if it went beyond 2 OTs (which allows both teams to be on Defense first), I'd say call it a draw.

Gophers last Tie, October 29, 1988 vs Illinois (27 all).
 

What year did overtime in college football begin? We lived without it for 100 yrs.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom