Changes to Overtime Rules in 2021

Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
3,794

This link has some more info on rules changes.

"The panel supported the Football Rules Committee proposal to provide 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."

OK so what happens if the review finds a player did fake an injury?

"Coaches should not enter the field of play or leave the team area to debate officiating decisions. Those who do so will have committed an automatic unsportsmanlike conduct foul."

Is this really necessary? There is already sideline warnings.
 

The Jacket

The Coat
Joined
Jun 17, 2002
Messages
26,193
That's my point......one game!? Okay, there may have been a few others. But come on, that's not a huge problem. Want to do something for football? How about work on officiating!
I think the NCAA and the conferences have made pretty clear they're getting exactly what they want from their laughably incompetent officials.

I don't really have any issue with making the switch from 3OT to 2OT, but it does strike me as a pretty unnecessary change. I don't understand or like this recent trend of leagues trying desperately to shorten game length, even at the cost of diminishing the game. The MLB changes, from the extra innings rules to the 7-inning double headers, are ööööing outrageous and Manfred deserves to be in prison, along with his owner overlords.
 

gtfan088

Dodd-Like
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
17,821
I just wish they'd start the regular overtime outside of FG range. Starting within FG range makes it especially unfair to whichever team loses the toss. The team that wins the toss wins the game much more than 50% of the time.
Or just eliminate the kicking game from overtime entirely, that way there's no strategic edge to winning the coin toss.
 
Last edited:

vapspwi

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
5,381
I think the NCAA and the conferences have made pretty clear they're getting exactly what they want from their laughably incompetent officials.

I don't really have any issue with making the switch from 3OT to 2OT, but it does strike me as a pretty unnecessary change. I don't understand or like this recent trend of leagues trying desperately to shorten game length, even at the cost of diminishing the game. The MLB changes, from the extra innings rules to the 7-inning double headers, are ööööing outrageous and Manfred deserves to be in prison, along with his owner overlords.
This. If they wanna shorten the games, sell fewer ads. Charge more for them if you can, so you’re not losing as much revenue. I don’t want less of the thing I actually came to watch.

JRjr
 

ee8384

Cynic At-Large
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
10,269
It is stupid when teams kick an extra point late in a game to take it to OT instead of going for 2 and the win. Too much forgiveness for an OT loss.
 

andrew

Bobby Bonilla's Financial Planner
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
23,227
That's my point......one game!? Okay, there may have been a few others. But come on, that's not a huge problem. Want to do something for football? How about work on officiating!
I believe it's essentially virtue signaling for safety -- reducing the number of plays to prevent injury. I agree that given the small number of OT games, and even smaller number of 3+ OT games, this is essentially a meaningless change.

Unless there is some evidence that starting in the third OT injury risk shoots up compared to end of game/first two OTs (unlikely), but in that case continuing to even allow for the possibility of a third OT is extremely irresponsible.
 

JJacket

1st to pass for 2500 and rush for 1000
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
56,720
It is stupid when teams kick an extra point late in a game to take it to OT instead of going for 2 and the win. Too much forgiveness for an OT loss.
Ban all XP's after halftime?
 
Top