T1B

Recently the NCAA went to a two year rules cycle which was intended to keep the playing rules the same for two seasons. They left themselves room to changes rules in off years under the "player safety" heading. This being an off year we weren't expecting much in the way of changes, boy were we wrong.

Kickoffs and Touchbacks - Currently NCAA teams kickoff from the 30 yard line. The NFL is at the 35 and the HS level is at the 40. In an effort to reduce returns and the injuries that happen on kickoffs the committee has made two recommendations for kicking teams. The first will be to move the kickoffs to the 35 yard line, same as the NFL. Second they have suggested that all kicking team members must be between the 30 yard line and the 35 yard line from the time the ball is made ready until it is kicked. The thought is moving the kickoffs up will result in more touch backs and keeping the kicking team players within 5 yards of the restraining line will limit their ability to get down field as quickly. Instead of a 15 yard run up to get to the restraining line at full speed they will now likely cross the restraining line at something less than full speed.

Also in order to entice the receiving team to take more touch backs, the committee has recommended that the ball be placed on the 25 after any touch backs.

Lefty's opinion. Either move the line up or move the placement of the ball to the 25 after a touch back but why do both? If you want more touch backs, why move the ball to the 25 after one? Doesn't this encourage more high short kicks which will then result in more returns? Many teams already do the high, medium distance kick and I only see that going up with the restraining line being moved to the 35. Head scratcher for me. First look - FAIL.


Loss of helmet during play by any player - As the rules are currently if the ball carriers helmet comes off the play becomes dead at that spot. If anyone else loses a helmet there is no action by the officials. The committee has suggested adding rules to players not carrying the ball. So no change to the ball carrier, but if anyone else loses their helmet during the play they then must come out for one play, much like an injured player. Also, if a player loses their helmet and the play is still live, they must remove themselves from any further action. An exception will be made for any foul that causes the helmet to come off, ie a face mask.

Lefty's opinion. Great move. Far too many helmets come off during games, and this will encourage players to strap all straps and to keep them tight. Lots of defensive players are wearing their helmets way to loose hoping it comes off on a hit so they can look like the ultimate hitter. This will end that crap and hurt the player more than the team. First look - A+.


Blocking below the waist - Committee suggests that only those players in the box and not in motion at the snap be permitted to block below the waist while still in the box (often called the legal clipping zone.) This makes it much easier to call and officials don't have to know exactly where a back was at the snap to determine the legality of the block. There are some situations where blocking below the waist is still legal by those outside the box or in motion, such as straight ahead blocks.

Lefty's opinion. This is certainly easier to officiate, but why allow the exceptions? Why not just remove all blocks below the waist by those outside of the box or those in motion? We will see this happen anyway at some point, so why not now? Plus for the change, minus for not going all the way. First look - B-.


Shield Blocking on Punts - This involves receiving team players that attempt to leap or jump over the two or three deep blockers just in front of the punter. Many times these players become airborne in an attempt to block the punt and are then contacted by the kicking team players and end up landing on their head and or shoulders. Receiving team players would be prohibited from trying to go over defending blockers in such situations. They can still go thru or around, just not over, similar to FG or extra points.

Lefty's opinion. This is a good change. We don't see this too often anyway and it makes the punts more in line with FGs and Extra points. This will be called in fewer than 100 games this season across all NCAA levels so it is a non issue. First look - A.


Additional protection for kick returners - The committee suggested an additional approved ruling to protect kick returners, both punts and kick offs. This isn't a rule change but will change some situations in how officials interpret the rule currently on the books. This change will give the kick returner an additional moment to brace for a hit. No opinion on this from me yet as I haven't seen the approved ruling.

those rules suck, especially the kick off rule. This is football, not soccer, so what if a guy is moving full speed when he hits another guy, thats what makes football great.

Get rid of ALL blocking below the waist, why make any exceptions? Hell get rid of all tackling below the waist too, way fewer knee injuries.

stupid, let them leave their feet, it was a stupid rule on the FG and XP tries and it is stupid on the punt blocks too.


helmet rules is ok, the other 3 suck

Pretty soon, they will enforce a 2 handed touch rule. And if you touch too hard, your penalized 15 yards.

How about the NCAA bring in refs who are competent at officiating.

NCAA officiating might be the worst of any sports org

I dislike moving the kickoff up, but I do like having everyone within 5 yards of the ball before the kick.

The helmet rule is fine.

Agree with the blocking rule 100%

Adelpiero wrote:How about the NCAA bring in refs who are competent at officiating.

NCAA officiating might be the worst of any sports org

Any specific instances come to mind?


I love hearing guys say that. How about I set you up with your local association and you give it a shot. I will pay your dues for the first year and I will also pay for your first uniform. You put in the work and then see if your perception changes.

Don't forget that NCAA football officials aren't full time employees. Hell, even NCAA baseball and basketball officials can make a ton of coin over the course of a season what with games every day. The B1G and Big XII pay the most to their football officials and they make $1500 per game. That $16500 isn't paying a mortgage or rent.

Come on Adel, put my money where your mouth is.

Lefty, that wasn't exactly an effective rebuttal of Adel's point. If anything, you merely provided him with supporting evidence.

Good point Van.

To clarify, I was trying to point out that NCAA officials are damn good for what they are paid. Rules clinics starting in March, working spring practice in April, rules tests in May, conference meetings in June or July, and practices starting in Aug. Not to mention the in season film review and tests and officials make less than minimum wage.

But to restate, I will put my money where Adel's mouth is. I have put this challenge up for years going all the way back to the Rome days. Still haven't had anyone be man enough to try it. Just happier to continue to talk out of their ass.

NCAA and NBA officiating are far worse than NCAA football. The rules are applied differently to star players in basketball. How many times was Jordan called for traveling, despite him taking 3 or 4 steps? How often was AI called for carrying the basketball, despite wrapping his palm and forearm around the ball? I would also argue that baseball is far worse than NCAA football, the damn strike zone changes from inning to inning.

Lefty, the problem with your challenge is that it doesn't prove anything. If someone's contention is that the officiating sucks in the NCAA, how will taking him off the street and watching him fail miserably at it accomplish anything other than to produce yet another shitty NCAA ref...further validating his point.

Unless you run into a guy who's telling you that he could do a better job than you or the refs he sees on TV, your challenge is irrelevant to the original complaint.

Going to disagree with you Van. The overall point isn't to get Adel or anyone else to actually officiate an NCAA game as that would be a decade or so away at best. Rather anyone that accepted the challenge would actually learn the rules, know some of the ARs, and see plenty of film on how the committee wants them called.

Officials are right far more than Adel or The Seer want to admit. You can't point to replay overturns either and say we are missing things, because we changed the way we call things based on replay. For example, if there is a close call on a fumble or runner being down we are told to go with it as a fumble rather than calling the runner down, because replay can overturn the fumble if the player was actually down, but the can't overturn a whistle if we blow him down and it is in fact a fumble.

The list of media members who have complained about officiating and then trained with officials is long. All of them sing a different tune after said training. And there is the point I was making, come out and learn at my expense and I guarantee Adel will change his tune.

Lefty makes some valid points. Idiots who do most of the complaining don't know the rules and have never officiated. It's not as easy as it looks from your recliner after downing a 12 pack.

I haven't officiated a football game since 2005 but I know how much time our crew put in during the off season to make ourselves better....reviewing game tapes from the previous seasons, studying rule changes and our mechanics...but I know that college officials have to devote much more time than we did. I did umpire college baseball for a number of years and know how much time was involved in attending association meetings in Kansas City, studying rule changes and mechanics, and being able to apply the rules to any situation that might occur on the field. I don't always agree with the calls made on the field but I'm the first to admit that I don't know the rules of the college game well enough to question their application.

Maybe I should bring back the old "you make the call" threads we did over on the Rome board. I used to put up a situation and then give multiple choice answers. After a week I would come in and give the correct answer and an explanation. Frozen used to pretty much nail them, so everyone would just go with him regardless.

Hmmmm...

Lefty, if your point is simply that by accepting the challenge they would gain a greater appreciation for the difficulty of the job, as well as a greater knowledge base, then okay.

Van wrote:Lefty, if your point is simply that by accepting the challenge they would gain a greater appreciation for the difficulty of the job, as well as a greater knowledge base, which would then lead them to understand their earlier criticism was misguided, then okay.

Fixed it for you.

Not necessarily. They may still think that NCAA football officiating is the worst of the bunch, and they would hardly be alone in such thinking.

Do you feel the same way Van?

I don't really have a strong opinion on it either way. I no longer watch enough of the other major sports to make an informed comparison. I will say that I feel the NFL's officials do a better job than the NCAA's, but not by any earth-shattering margin.

Van wrote:Not necessarily. They may still think that NCAA football officiating is the worst of the bunch, and they would hardly be alone in such thinking.

The Pac 12 refs are the worst I have ever seen, especially Jay Stricherz crew. Someone did stats on games his crew has worked and there was over a 60% increase in penalties on USC in their games compared to all the other crews in the conference. I hate that fucker, I wish he would get AIDS and die

Van wrote:Not necessarily. They may still think that NCAA football officiating is the worst of the bunch

Then they have not watched NBA basketball. The. Absolute. Worst. It's not even close.