Rule changes

BuzzMD

BuzzMD

Dodd-Like
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Messages
6,828
Saw this on HD's blog:
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/acc/0-6-53/Update-on-ACC-rules-changes--Home-and-home-jerseys-.html

AMELIA ISLAND, Fla. -- Here's a fun note for you from Doug Rhoads, the ACC's coordinator of officials.
Teams no longer have to wear their white uniforms in games, as long as both teams agree to it, in writing, before the game.
So if Maryland wants to wear red uniforms at North Carolina, and the Tar Heels want to wear navy blue, it's OK, as long as they both agree to it. This took off after both Southern Cal and UCLA decided to wear their colored jerseys against each other.
The whole reason teams had to wear white and colored uniforms was because of the old black and white TVs.

Another rule change for 2009 will be the definition of the tackle box. It's now 5 yards from the center of the offensive line formation. This will help both the referee and the quarterback determine whether it's OK for the quarterback to throw the ball away or if it's intentional grounding.

They've also added that it's a 15-yard penalty if a player is tackled by his chinstrap. (I've seen the facemask tackle, but never the chinstrap. Neither has Rhoads.) Basically, defenders can't tackle opponents by grabbing the inside of their helmet opening.

One other tweak to the rules is that it's not an illegal formation to have less than seven players on the line. The thinking is, why penalize a team for being at a disadvantage? As long as there are five players with jersey numbers 50-70 (you know, the offensive linemen), it's acceptable. They'd like to see seven on the line of scrimmage and four in the backfield.
Click to expand...

I am thinking the illegal formation penalty elimination may help us some, iirc.
 
I love all those changes except for the number of men on the line one, which I am basically indifferent to.

The USC-UCLA game with both colored jerseys looked awesome, I hope we see more of stuff like that.
 
Reading down further in her blog I came across this:

  • FBS vs. FCS: There appears to be some interest on the part of the NCAA's football issues committee to revert back to the old rule that only one FBS win will count every four years. It could impact future scheduling, at earliest 2010. More than just an "easy win" goes into scheduling the nonconference games, though, and they are decisions that affect the athletic directors and their budgets. Virginia Tech athletic director Jim Weaver told me he's asked his coaches to try to schedule nonconference competition no farther than one state removed. "We don't want anybody going west of the Mississippi River," he said.
Click to expand...
Assuming she actually means FCS there, this could be a pretty big deal. Anyone heard anything else about it?
 
My first thought was that the line of scrimmage rule might make it easier for defenses to figure out who is eligible or who isn't because many of our formations require for the A back or WR to come up to the line or off the line depending on the defense's formation. Now they could all back off the line and all still be eligible.

After thinking about it more, this means that the defense would probably have to be more astute because before you had to have 7 on the line, and their job was to cover whoever was wide on the line and anyone in the backfield. Now the backfield can be a lot more complicated, and could actually help us confuse defenders who might be used to just looking for whoever is wide out on the line.
 
the line of scrimmage rule will hurt teams that like to play press coverage because it is more difficult to press a wr that is off the line than on
 
BHP12345 said:
Reading down further in her blog I came across this:

Assuming she actually means FCS there, this could be a pretty big deal. Anyone heard anything else about it?
Click to expand...

That would be HUGE!! I'm not sure whether I'm for or against it though. I say if we're going to limit it, just do away with it completely.
 
GTWannaBee said:
That would be HUGE!! I'm not sure whether I'm for or against it though. I say if we're going to limit it, just do away with it completely.
Click to expand...

I think it is mainly for the benefit of the FCS teams rather than the FBS, so I'm not sure they'd want to do away with it completely. I think it is a big tool in terms of revenue and exposure for FCS schools.
 
gth816f said:
I think it is mainly for the benefit of the FCS teams rather than the FBS, so I'm not sure they'd want to do away with it completely. I think it is a big tool in terms of revenue and exposure for FCS schools.
Click to expand...

My concern is not everyone will have their FCS game in the same year giving some schools an unfair advantage over others. Given the current system, a win over an FBS school isn't weighted any stronger than an FCS school.
 
But that's how it was until recently. This is going back to the old rule isn't it?
 
Guys, on the 7 on the line rule, i had some of the same concerns at first. But, it only covers the situation where you only have 10 players on the field. Here's how, you can still only have 4 players in the "backfield". So if you have 11 players on the field, and you line up both your WR's off the line, that would be 5 players in the backfield if you ran I formation. So now, presumably, the call will be "Too many men in the backfield" as opposed to "Not enough men on the line of scrimmage".
 
BerryGT said:
Guys, on the 7 on the line rule, i had some of the same concerns at first. But, it only covers the situation where you only have 10 players on the field. Here's how, you can still only have 4 players in the "backfield". So if you have 11 players on the field, and you line up both your WR's off the line, that would be 5 players in the backfield if you ran I formation. So now, presumably, the call will be "Too many men in the backfield" as opposed to "Not enough men on the line of scrimmage".
Click to expand...

You are right!

The point of the rule is to not punish an offense for only having 10 men on the field. There will not be a schematic advantage/disadvantage with this new rule.
 
It's anti Tech bias I tell ya... buncha dam cheaters!
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/acc/0-6-...e-change-could-have-big-impact.html?post=true

simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top