NCAA Winter meeting Rules changes

[IBleedYellow]

Saw these on Reddit thread.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/43qnjy/ncaa_winter_meeting_rule_change_list_that_will_be/


This is from the summary of the Div I Coordinator Winter Meeting from a few days ago. These are rules to be considered in the spring. This means that they are not rules, but will be looked at for approval to become rules. This is not a full list, new considerations can be added, and some on this list could be removed before the rules meeting.

The coordinators discussed potential rules changes to come before the rules committee. The editorial subcommittee will take the counsel of the coordinators in making its recommendations. Among the items discussed:


Technology. Sideline tablets generate considerable interest among the coaches, and issues to be resolved include whether video should be allowed. Coach-toplayer communication is also an emerging issue. Cost and implementation are of major concern to the institutions.
Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”
Defenseless Player. Add “sliding ball carrier” to the list of defenseless players.
Charged Team Timeouts. All timeouts are recommended to be one minute (plus the 25-second count) unless the head coach requests a 30-second timeout, which would restore the previous rule. Another option is to allow a coach one full timeout with the other two being for 30 seconds. (Media timeouts accompanying team timeouts supersede this rule.)
Game Clock. Rule 3-4-3 (Referee’s broad clock authority) would be enhanced by mandating that, at the option of the offended team, the game clock start on the snap after a foul by the team ahead in the score. The 10-second-runoff rule would not be affected by such a change.
Ineligible receiver downfield The committee last year changed the rule to allow ineligible receivers to roam only one yard downfield rather than three, but this was reversed at a higher level. The coordinators recommend that the committee again approve this change.
Tripping. The coordinators recommend that tripping be made illegal for all players—that is, the exception for ball carrier needs to be eliminated.
Targeting. See below in the Instant Replay report.
Blocking Below the Waist. Coordinators recommend that it be disallowed except in close line play immediately after the snap.
Low Hits on the Passer. The exception to allow for a wrap-up tackle should include language that prohibits forcible contact with the head or shoulder.
Unsportsmanlike Conduct. Two UNS fouls by the coach should result in disqualification, which is the rule for players.
Medical Observer. The experiment has been successful and should be made a rule change.

And here's a bit about instant replay:

Committee chair led the discussion of issues with instant replay. He observed that instant replay had been part of college football for about ten years, and this is a good time to reflect and review. The discussion focused on two main issues: catching a pass and targeting. The rules about catch/no catch make a distinction about “the process of the catch” that is sometimes lost: “going to the ground” as a part of catching the ball versus after the catch has been completed. Several videos were viewed and analyzed, the point being made that the idea of a second act after a receiver has completed the catch needs emphasis.
In the area of targeting, the coordinators support giving the replay official more latitude and flexibility to examine the entire targeting call, as distinct from only ruling on where the forcible contact occurs, which is the current rule. There is also support for the replay official to “create” a targeting foul, but only in the rare case where the officials on the field miss a blatantly clear and obvious instance of targeting. The replay officials would be admonished to take such action only if they are presented with an undoubtedly egregious targeting play that was not so ruled by the officials.

[clenz]

2 UNS disqualification for HC is really going to screw YSU

[IBleedYellow]

I really don't like the fact that the Replay Officials could buzz down to get a kid ejected.

[Professor Chaos]

Adding a sliding ball carrier to the list of defenseless players would create some uproar if passed. It's hard enough for defenders to stay within the strike zone moving at full speed to a target moving at full speed. Then if that player decides to slide at the last instance and that strike zone shrinks completely or is moved considerably in an instance the defensive player is going to be left out to dry and potentially flagged and ejected.


2 UNS disqualification for HC is really going to screw YSU
Might as well just call it "The Pelini Rule".

[CFBfan]

I really don't like the fact that the Replay Officials could buzz down to get a kid ejected.

the opposite is also true though and imo a good thing

[Professor Chaos]

the opposite is also true though and imo a good thing
I believe all targeting calls have always been automatically reviewed and the replay official is given the authority to rescind the ejection but not the penalty. Honestly, I'd like them to be able to rescind the penalty as well if the video backs it up.

[IBleedYellow]

I believe all targeting calls have always been automatically reviewed and the replay official is given the authority to rescind the ejection but not the penalty. Honestly, I'd like them to be able to rescind the penalty as well if the video backs it up.

They have not always been the case. The first year of the targeting call they were gone, no if ands or buts. The second year they added the current rules about replay overturning the ejection.

The NCAA really doesn't want to give the replay officials the ability to make calls other than what they have done so far, it seems.

[BisonFan02]

Blocking Below the Waist. Coordinators recommend that it be disallowed except in close line play immediately after the snap.

Anyone in the SoCoN care to comment? :D

[walliver]

Blocking Below the Waist. Coordinators recommend that it be disallowed except in close line play immediately after the snap.

Anyone in the SoCoN care to comment? :D

Most of the blocking below the waist occurs in "close line play" and probably wouldn't have a great effect on triple option teams

[jmufan999]

yes, targeting can be rescinded by the booth. but how often does that happen? it's EXTREMELY rare, at least from what I've seen. that goes for FCS and FBS. usually, if you get a targeting call, you're gone.

and like IBY, i hate that the booth can disqualify a player. if the refs miss it, the refs miss it. coach the refs on how not to miss something so "egregious".

[Bisonator]

Low Hits on the Passer. The exception to allow for a wrap-up tackle should include language that prohibits forcible contact with the head or shoulder.




WTF? How do you contact the head or shoulder on a low hit anyway?xeyebrowx

I wonder when they are simply going to go to 2 hand touch on the QB's.xsmhx

[JayJ79]

Tripping. The coordinators recommend that tripping be made illegal for all players—that is, the exception for ball carrier needs to be eliminated.

so no more shoestring tackles? or are they only talking about sticking out the leg to trip the ballcarrier?

[Go...gate]

So PATs and FGs will now be placed back ten yards from the line of scrimmage?

[gsf23nd]

so no more shoestring tackles? or are they only talking about sticking out the leg to trip the ballcarrier?

This is the current rule: "Tripping is defined in Rule 2-28 as "Intentionally using the lower leg or foot to obstruct an opponent below the knees." But 9-1-2-c says: "There shall be no tripping. (Exception: Tripping the runner is not a foul.)".

So yes..they are only talking about sticking your leg out to trip the ballcarrier. Currently, in NCAA it is legal to trip a ball carrier in that way. The proposed rule change is to make it illegal to do that to a ball carrier as well.

[taper]

So PATs and FGs will now be placed back ten yards from the line of scrimmage?

Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”

Kicker and holder at 7 yards is still fine.

[JayJ79]

Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”

Kicker and holder at 7 yards is still fine.

I don't understand the point of it. are they trying to do away with fake punts/kicks or something? kinda takes away some of the fun of the game (not that such fakes are attempted all that often).

[taper]

I don't understand the point of it. are they trying to do away with fake punts/kicks or something? kinda takes away some of the fun of the game (not that such fakes are attempted all that often).

I think it's more to prevent roughing the kicker. Make sure the defense knows that player is protected unless they do something sneaky.

[F'N Hawks]

Blocking Below the Waist. Coordinators recommend that it be disallowed except in close line play immediately after the snap.

Anything about below the waist, in back of the knee? That still legal?

[Bisonoline]

Anything about below the waist, in back of the knee? That still legal?

When has blocking behind the knee been legal? Lets see if you go where I think you will with this.

[PAllen]

so no more shoestring tackles? or are they only talking about sticking out the leg to trip the ballcarrier?

LOL, my first read of it was that the ball carrier couldn't trip anybody, and I thought "why the heck would he want to do that?" Your thought makes a lot more sense.

- - - Updated - - -


I don't understand the point of it. are they trying to do away with fake punts/kicks or something? kinda takes away some of the fun of the game (not that such fakes are attempted all that often).

They are eliminating the quick kick.

[JSUSoutherner]

Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”

Kicker and holder at 7 yards is still fine.
I feel like that Alabama NC on-side kick has some influence on this rule. xnodx

[OleGriz]

Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”

Kicker and holder at 7 yards is still fine.


I remember reading a couple years ago about a high-school offense that used a loophole in the Scrimmage Kick Formation rules (something to do with which receivers were eligible, I think). They'd line up every down in what counted as a kicking formation, and then run "fakes" on every play. I would bet that this rule is to negate that or similar plays. Traditional fakes should still be legal under the proposed rule changes.

(After typing that up, I looked on Wikipedia and found the A-11 offense (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-11_offense) article, which is what I was thinking of.)

[JayJ79]

I feel like that Alabama NC on-side kick has some influence on this rule. xnodx

kickoffs are not scrimmage kicks. They are free kicks, so this rule change would not apply to them.

[UAalum72]

They are eliminating the quick kick.
No, on a quick kick the kicker is not alone in the backfield, and it's not a "scrimmage kick formation"

"Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”

[PAllen]

No, on a quick kick the kicker is not alone in the backfield, and it's not a "scrimmage kick formation"

"Scrimmage Kick Formation. This should require that if a potential kicker is alone deep in the backfield, he must be at least 10 yards deep rather than seven, and that a kicker and holder at seven yards would be the requirement for more than one player. The rule should reflect the requirement be that “it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be attempted.”

By definition a quick kick is a scrimmage kick and must be made from a scrimmage kick formation. This rule change eliminates the possibility of a QB in a deep shotgun from punting the ball. He would have to be 10 yds back (which is a lot deeper than a deep shotgun) and it must be obvious that a scrimmage kick is imminent. It's pretty clear what they're targeting here.

Speaking of targeting, can we just get rid of the ejection for the first offense already. I like that they're modifying the review as the current review rule states that if there is any doubt at all, it is targeting. That means you'll never see it overturned on review. I also agree that it is a horrible idea for the guy in the booth to be able to buzz down to eject someone.

[UAalum72]

By definition a quick kick is a scrimmage kick and must be made from a scrimmage kick formation. This rule change eliminates the possibility of a QB in a deep shotgun from punting the ball. He would have to be 10 yds back (which is a lot deeper than a deep shotgun) and it must be obvious that a scrimmage kick is imminent. It's pretty clear what they're targeting here.
You can still line up with they QB under center, then toss to a RB who punts it, which is the way Bob Ford's Albany teams always did it, and is a lot more deceptive.

Or drop one of the flankers back a couple of yards so the QB isn't "alone in the backfield".

[PAllen]

You can still line up with they QB under center, then toss to a RB who punts it, which is the way Bob Ford's Albany teams always did it, and is a lot more deceptive.

Or drop one of the flankers back a couple of yards so the QB isn't "alone in the backfield".

Again, both would be outlawed by the new rule as in neither case is it obvious that a scrimmage kick is imminent.

[walliver]

By definition a quick kick is a scrimmage kick and must be made from a scrimmage kick formation. This rule change eliminates the possibility of a QB in a deep shotgun from punting the ball. He would have to be 10 yds back (which is a lot deeper than a deep shotgun) and it must be obvious that a scrimmage kick is imminent. It's pretty clear what they're targeting here.

Speaking of targeting, can we just get rid of the ejection for the first offense already. I like that they're modifying the review as the current review rule states that if there is any doubt at all, it is targeting. That means you'll never see it overturned on review. I also agree that it is a horrible idea for the guy in the booth to be able to buzz down to eject someone.

The key phrase is that the rule applies with the kicker is "alone in the backfield". Most quick kicks I have seen have two or more men in the backfield. I still don't understand the purpose of the new rule, unless it has something to do with rugby style punters. Even then, I am not aware of any issues requiring a rule change.

[UAalum72]

Scrimmage Kick ARTICLE 7.


a. A scrimmage kick is a punt, drop kick, or field goal place kick. It is a legal kick if it is made by Team A in or behind the neutral zone during a scrimmage down before team possession changes.

ARTICLE 10.


a. A scrimmage kick formation is a formation with at least one player seven yards or more behind the neutral zone, no player in position to receive a hand-to-hand snap from between the snapper’s legs, and it is obvious that a kick may be attempted (A.R. 7-1-3-VII and A.R. 9-1-14-I-III).



No rule requires that a scrimmage kick be made from a scrimmage kick formation. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF A QUICK KICK.

[Sycamore62]

I think the scrimmage kick issue is that A11 which makes it legal for the guys on the LOS to not have ineligible numbers. The A11 worked by basically have 10 eligible receivers until they take their place on the LOS at which time only the 2 outside players would be eligible which is kind of hard to decide who could possibly be going out for a pass and who cant.

you will still be able to quick kick or have your QB kick when its 4th and 2 from the opposing 30yd line.

[clenz]

I think the scrimmage kick issue is that A11 which makes it legal for the guys on the LOS to not have ineligible numbers. The A11 worked by basically have 10 eligible receivers until they take their place on the LOS at which time only the 2 outside players would be eligible which is kind of hard to decide who could possibly be going out for a pass and who cant.

you will still be able to quick kick or have your QB kick when its 4th and 2 from the opposing 30yd line.
Or, get a kicker that doesn't suck and can kick a 47 yard FG...or get a better offense that can pick up 2 yards

Punting from the 30 is for schmucks, and losers

[clenz]

http://www.sbnation.com/2015/9/8/9272303/puntagrams-punting-is-evil-hisssssssss

[BisonFan02]

Punt.

[clenz]

Punt.
http://www.anygivensaturday.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22169&stc=1

[IBleedYellow]

Punt.

Twice.

[Sycamore62]

Or, get a kicker that doesn't suck and can kick a 47 yard FG...or get a better offense that can pick up 2 yards

Punting from the 30 is for schmucks, and losers

ok how about into the wind from the 35. Or we could just get Jesus Christ to play QB and you would never get into 3rd down situations

[clenz]

ok how about into the wind from the 35. Or we could just get Jesus Christ to play QB and you would never get into 3rd down situations
Into the wind from the 35 with 2 yards to go?

Go for it.

Read the link I posted. There's a 95% chance at the NFL level you're net is going to be less than 20. At the FCS level I'd bet the odds are 98% chance of a touch back and a net of 15.

2 yards...

Show me a team punting from the 30-35 on a consistent basis and I'll show you a team that's not winning anything of significance

[PAllen]

you quick kick on 3rd and 30 when 10-15 yds won't get you into field goal range, but will put you in the other team's territory. A punt from your own 40 or even 30 with a decent roll and no return can pin the other team back. Now, this all assumes that you have a QB with Doug Flutie's kicking ability.

[clenz]

you quick kick on 3rd and 30 when 10-15 yds won't get you into field goal range, but will put you in the other team's territory. A punt from your own 40 or even 30 with a decent roll and no return can pin the other team back. Now, this all assumes that you have a QB with Doug Flutie's kicking ability.
You punt when you're outside the other teams 40 and/or it's longer than 2 yards for a first down.

To punt from the plus 35 yard line if you have no chance of making a FG or >3 yards to go is literally giving up and a **** precedent to use.

[JayJ79]

bring back the drop kick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_kick#American_and_Canadian_.28gridiron.29_foo tball)!

[uni88]

I read this that they're making it more difficult to use what has technically been a scrimmage kick formation to protect the snapper. I'm not sure if it's still true but it used to be that the defense could not make contact with the snapper in a scrimmage kick situation until 1 second after the snap. They were protecting a snapper who is looking between his legs and focusing on the long snap and is not ready for immediate contact immediately. With today's offenses, a lot more teams are using what could technically be interpreted as scrimmage kick formations just running their offense. Should the snapper should be protected in those situations?

[PAllen]

bring back the drop kick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_kick#American_and_Canadian_.28gridiron.29_foo tball)!

Still legal, for now. The last one in the NFL was by Doug Flutie at the end of his playing career.

[PAllen]

I read this that they're making it more difficult to use what has technically been a scrimmage kick formation to protect the snapper. I'm not sure if it's still true but it used to be that the defense could not make contact with the snapper in a scrimmage kick situation until 1 second after the snap. They were protecting a snapper who is looking between his legs and focusing on the long snap and is not ready for immediate contact immediately. With today's offenses, a lot more teams are using what could technically be interpreted as scrimmage kick formations just running their offense. Should the snapper should be protected in those situations?

Correct, in college you can't hit the long snapper until he brings his head up. Thus, most are taught to keep their heads down until line play breaks up.

[The Yo Show]

2 UNS disqualification for HC is really going to screw YSU You really think so? I'm assuming you're referring to the fact that if this rule was in place, we would have had a head coach disqualified one game?

[uni88]

Correct, in college you can't hit the long snapper until he brings his head up. Thus, most are taught to keep their heads down until line play breaks up.

And makes it dangerous/difficult for the defense to penetrate the 1 or 2 gap if the offense is running something that is technically a scrimmage kick formation. Offenses have enough advantages, they don't need to be able to gain the system for another one in this case.