2008-2009 Rule Changes

[beej67]

That's not a very well thought out comment.

I find the NFL boring because the systems are too similar, the players are too similar, and there is only one critical path to success, which is likely a result of free agency and frequent coaching changes. It's easier to have a generic system than a unique system in a league where all the players are essentially shared every few years.

beej67,
unlike RM, isn't an ex-player from the NFL, so wonders whether his comments are accurate, and inquires whether they pass the "Well thought out" test.

 

[gth816f]

The NFL is boring, straight-up.

You may think that, but that doesn't mean that the NFL doesn't have higher TV ratings and much higher profits, two things that the NCAA would of course be interested in.

And from a personal standpoint, if you think the NFL is boring than maybe you haven't given it enough of a chance. The football is much, much better than in college. The skill levels between the teams are much closer, so you have a higher percentage of good games. The race for playoff spots means that each one of those games is significant. And then of course there are the NFL playoffs, which are just absolutely great.

EDIT: In response to Beej, the systems are similar because that is what works. You can't have gimmick systems in the NFL because the defenses are too good and have too much time to work together and get disciplined. When the Falcons started trying to run the QB option with Vick a couple years ago, it worked well for a couple games...then the rest of the league got game film of it and it was rendered completely ineffective. That's not to say there is no variation though...look at this season's Patriots, for example, who passed almost exclusively until the weather got too cold.

Not to say anyone is wrong for liking college football more of course. Just my opinion.

 

[GTCrew]

It is hard to balance with the player's right to earn what they are worth, but if they could find a way to reduce trades it would be more fun to follow a team and the players.

And I have a hard time thinking of any NFL rules not better. The 5 yd face mask is probably a good rule however.

I love the 2 minute warning myself. A free timout for the team coming from behind. Two feet in could be a HUGE bonus for CPJ and our beloved Jackets because it will certainly hurt passing teams more than running teams.

 

[ramblinwise1]

I don't like the NFL anymore.

The scheduling rules to ensure parity were the first death knell.

Then they outlawed so many different things that games became a flag fest. Almost every kick return rained laundry.

Players move from team to team way too often, no team loyalty. Salary caps, player arrests, etc. No heroes anymore, just villains.

And finally, its gotten too slick. WWE, NBA, slick. The SuperBowl is in February for chrissakes after a 2 week layoff. And the NCAA is headed down the same path.

 

[gth816f]

The scheduling rules to ensure parity were the first death knell.

Matching up teams who finished the previous season well in the final two games of the season is a bad thing to you(only the final two games of the season are scheduled with those rules)? Why don't you like that? I mean, those are the teams who are likely to be playing for a playoff spot, and this means they will either meet on the field or both meet good opponents as opposed to both playing random teams and the playoff spot being decided based on scheduling luck. Isn't that one of the things we all think is wrong in college football?

 

[Ish]

You may think that, but that doesn't mean that the NFL doesn't have higher TV ratings and much higher profits, two things that the NCAA would of course be interested in.

Let's not confuse ratings with quality. American Idol gets monstrous ratings. Titanic is the highest grossing movie of all time; doesn't mean it's the best movie ever made. In the same vein the NFL having great ratings doesn't mean it is the best product.

And from a personal standpoint, if you think the NFL is boring than maybe you haven't given it enough of a chance. The football is much, much better than in college. The skill levels between the teams are much closer, so you have a higher percentage of good games. The race for playoff spots means that each one of those games is significant.

The higher skill level makes it boring to me. It's almost like the players are so good that it's not exciting. Same thing with the NBA to me.

And then of course there are the NFL playoffs, which are just absolutely great.

The NCAA Football regular season is better than the NFL playoffs.

 

[ramblinwise1]

Matching up teams who finished the previous season well in the final two games of the season is a bad thing to you(only the final two games of the season are scheduled with those rules)? ?

That may be the way it is now, but thats not my recollection of how it worked when first introduced.

 

[gth816f]

Let's not confuse ratings with quality. American Idol gets monstrous ratings. Titanic is the highest grossing movie of all time; doesn't mean it's the best movie ever made. In the same vein the NFL having great ratings doesn't mean it is the best product.

I didn't say anything about quality(though I think the NFL is of a higher quality). You said that the NCAA had a better product...and to a business, the better product is the one that sells more. The NCAA would sell its soul to get the type of ratings and interest that the NFL gets.

 

[Ish]

I didn't say anything about quality(though I think the NFL is of a higher quality). You said that the NCAA had a better product...and to a business, the better product is the one that sells more. The NCAA would sell its soul to get the type of ratings and interest that the NFL gets.

You're right. Changing the playclock will get the NCAA more ratings. How could I have been so blind?

 

[gth816f]

You're right. Changing the playclock will get the NCAA more ratings. How could I have been so blind?

Haha. I don't think these changes will really affect the ratings. However, you wondered why the NCAA would ever change their rules when they have a much better product than the NFL, and I was pointing out that the NCAA doesn't have a much better product than the NFL.

 

[ASimPerson]

I love the 2 minute warning myself. A free timout for the team coming from behind.

The 2 minute warning is insipid and serves only to show more commercials at the end of each half.

Teams get enough free timeouts after punts and changes of possession.

As for two-feet in, I think that's just a reflect of the higher skill level NFL players are expected to have more than anything else. Since I've started following NCAA rule-changes I don't think this has ever been proposed or discussed.

 

[GTJosh]

I'm not a football player, but I'm reasonably positive that requiring receivers to get both feet in bounds will lead to more injuries. That was always my understanding as to why the rule is in place.

 

[BuzzMD]

I'm not a football player, but I'm reasonably positive that requiring receivers to get both feet in bounds will lead to more injuries. That was always my understanding as to why the rule is in place.

Actually, I would argue that the NCAA allowing DB's to knock people out of bounds for an incomplete pass would cause more injuries than both feet down. (Not sure I am explaining the rule -- but given this scenario. A WR makes a leaping catch straight up near the sideline. In college, the DB can knock the WR out of bounds before he puts one foot down--and it is an incompletion. NFL states if the player was knocked out by the defense, it is a completion -- if he would have probably had both feet down without the DB hitting him) So I would argue that allowing DB's to have free hits on sideline catches leads to more injuries than 2 feet down.

 

[gth816f]

That is a correct interpretation of the rule. It's called the force out rule.

 

[BuzzMD]

Thanks. Knew the rule, just did not know the terminology for it. Okay, then my argument is that the force out rule would conceivably cause more injuries than both feet down rule.

 

[ncjacket]

Because the NFL is a much better product, according to most of the country. Maybe the next thing they will do is look at the NFL's immensely popular method for determining a champion.

Why do you say that? NCAA football is immensely popular. Ratings are up in total, attendance is up, etc. You can't compare simple ratings for example because there are so few NFL games in comparison to the NCAA, but I don't know what your rational for saying the NFL is more popular is.

 

[gth816f]

Why do you say that? NCAA football is immensely popular. Ratings are up in total, attendance is up, etc. You can't compare simple ratings for example because there are so few NFL games in comparison to the NCAA, but I don't know what your rational for saying the NFL is more popular is.

Well, do a comparison of the biggest game in each sport: the Super Bowl and the BCS championship game. The popularity of something isn't determined by how many alumni follow it; it's determined by how many casual fans tune in, because there are much more of them. Looking at the ratings for the BCS championship game:

2006 Rose Bowl(USC vs Texas): 21.7
2007 BCSCG(Ohio State vs Florida): 17.4
2008 BCSCG(Ohio State vs LSU): 14.4

Now look at the ratings for the Super Bowl:

Super Bowl XL(Steelers vs Seahawks): 41.6
Super Bowl XLI(Colts vs Bears): 42.6
Super Bowl XLII(Patriots vs Giants): 43.1

This is a massive difference...over twice the amount of viewers. Even the AFC and NFC championship games garner higher ratings than the biggest game in college football. The 2006 Rose Bowl was the most hyped college football game in recent memory, was considered by many to be the greatest college football game ever played, and it still only got half the viewers of any of the past three Super Bowls.

 

[a5ehren]

Why do you say that? NCAA football is immensely popular. Ratings are up in total, attendance is up, etc. You can't compare simple ratings for example because there are so few NFL games in comparison to the NCAA, but I don't know what your rational for saying the NFL is more popular is.

NCAA football is only popular among non-alumni in places with no NFL team (midwest, deep south, Los Angeles) or a consistently poor one (Georgia, Louisiana). In places with any kind of decent NFL team (anything north of DC, Chicago, etc), they dominate the football market.

The NFL definitely has superior clock rules - almost all games finish in under 3 hours, which is pretty much the stated goal of the committee. Now if only they would change the PI rule...

 

[ASimPerson]

I do not trust college officials to call pass interference as a spot foul. Period.

 

[WracerX]

EDIT: In response to Beej, the systems are similar because that is what works. You can't have gimmick systems in the NFL because the defenses are too good and have too much time to work together and get disciplined. When the Falcons started trying to run the QB option with Vick a couple years ago, it worked well for a couple games...then the rest of the league got game film of it and it was rendered completely ineffective. That's not to say there is no variation though...look at this season's Patriots, for example, who passed almost exclusively until the weather got too cold.

There is a wider variety in NFL offenses than they get credit for. And it does incorporate portions of college systems (or entire systems).

The 49ers incorporated Stanford's "west coast offense" and became a power for 20 years. Houston's "run and shoot" was, in large part, a spread offense. Tennessee is using Young as a mobile QB.

And the Vick QB option was slowed down more by Vick getting hurt than defenses catching on. After the first few games, the refs started letting Vick get hit on every play (because it could be a fake). Neither Vick, nor Blank, wanted to risk a career ending injury and the offense was scaled back.