NCAA Rules Survey

[IndyBison]

The NCAA rules committee is seeking input from coaches, administrators, and officials prior to the rules committee meeting. This usually is an indication of the types of things they are going to discuss. Most of these will not pass, but they are least discussing them. Here's something good to chew on during the offseason.

What is your opinion about the previous rules changes below?

It is a foul if a defensive player runs forward from beyond the neutral zone and leaps or hurdles in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or try.
The Horse Collar tackle now includes grabbing the nameplate area.

What is your opinion about the points of emphasis below?

Halftime intermission is 20 minutes and is not extended beyond that time.
Coaches may not leave the coaching box to protest officiating decisions.


NEW RULES TOPICS/EMPHASIS
Share your opinion on the following:

After an official signals a Touchdown, the 40 second play clock will start for the Try.
After a punt or free kick where there is no subsequent media time-out, the 40 second play clock will start for the next snap.
The clock will continue to run after a first down is gained in the field of play, except in the last two minutes of each half when the clock would stop when the ball is dead and start on the referee’s signal.
After an incomplete pass, the clock stops. When the ball is ready for play, the clock will start on the referee’s signal, except in the last two minutes of each half when the clock would start on the snap. (Note: This rule would mirror the out-of-bounds rules.)
The committee should allow, for Conference Games only, the experimental use of technology for Coach to Player communications.
Under current rules, hurdling is illegal EXCEPT by the ball carrier. It should also be illegal for the ball carrier to hurdle an opponent.
Under current rules, blindside blocks are legal unless the action is targeting. Blindside blocks would remain legal only if forcible contact was delivered with open hands and extended arms or if the block was a screen type block without delivering forcible contact.
Based on AFCA feedback, blocking below the waist in the open field on scrimmage downs should be illegal, just as blocking below the waist currently is during kick downs and after a change of possession. Should the committee consider making blocking below the waist illegal when the block occurs 10 yards or more beyond the line of scrimmage on scrimmage plays?
The committee should consider not allowing symbols, words, numbers or logos on the mouthpiece with the exception of a single school, manufacturer’s or distributor’s normal label or trademark.
The committee should change the Instant Replay rules to allow the IR Official to review this foul only if the call was made on the field. This would be paired with a modification to the officiating mechanics that would state that “when in question” it is a foul for Ineligible Receiver downfield.
The committee should consider making the penalty enforcement for Defensive Pass Interference a Spot Foul even if the foul occurs more than 15 yards from the previous spot.
The committee should consider making the penalty enforcement for Offensive Pass Interference a 10 yard penalty from the previous spot.
Under current rules, it is illegal for the receiving team to form a three man wedge. Should the committee consider making a two man wedge illegal?
Under current rules, the replay official shall review every play of the game to determine if a stop is warranted. In order to potentially reduce the number of replay stops, the committee should allow replay to review all scoring plays and plays involving a change of possession, and every play inside the last two minutes of each half and during overtime. The head coach may initiate a challenge at any time within the game by utilizing a team timeout. If the challenge is successful, the head coach retains the challenge.

[Gully]

OMG, I hope most of these are not changed.

My strongest opinion would be on the clock stopping after an incomplete pass and (momentarily) for a first down.
Coach to player communications - NOOOOOOO!
Leave blindside and below the waist blocks alone.
No spot foul on DPI! I hate that in the NFL. 15 yards is plenty.

[Bison"FANatic"]

How in the heck do you make a 2 man wedge and then officiate that? Well those two players ran kind of close to each other so I guess its a wedge. WTF

Ball carrier can't hurdle...... WTF. I love watching guys wiff

Start the clock after an incompletion? Isn't that an integral part of the clock management portion of the game?

[BattleBorn]

I don't like any of them. Perhaps I have become a cranky old man. I especially don't like the D pass interference penalty, the changes to clock stoppages, and the play clock changes.

[ZHerd]

Same as last year. Get a group of people with power to pass rules and they'll feel obligated to do it just because they can no matter how horrible the rule is. Two worst ones imo are the hurdling and wedge rules. What's next, receivers and db's can't jump for the ball because someone might end up with owee?

[IndyBison]

How in the heck do you make a 2 man wedge and then officiate that? Well those two players ran kind of close to each other so I guess its a wedge. WTF

Ball carrier can't hurdle...... WTF. I love watching guys wiff

Start the clock after an incompletion? Isn't that an integral part of the clock management portion of the game?

They would still keep the clock stopped for incomplete passes in the last 2 minutes. It would be similar to the runner going out of bounds.

The reason for the clock considerations is D1 TV games are now taking 3:30+ and they want to shorten. These clock changes won't impact that much. Our D3 games have the same number of incompletions, scores, and turnovers, and our average game time is 2:40-2:45. It's rare we go over 3:00. Two primary reasons - TV time outs and replay stoppages. I'm fine with the clock rules the way they are today.

Hurdling is actually very dangerous for the guy doing the hurdle. He can get flipped and hit his head/neck on the ground. I think there is some issue with the leg/knee into the defender, but that seems like a secondary issue. The hurdle that's successful looks awesome, but the ones that aren't successful are very dangerous. I'm fine either way because you don't actually see them that often.

I don't get the 2-man wedge. They passed the 3-man wedge a few years ago, and I didn't know it was a problem. I have never seen one on the field.

Good or bad the NCAA rules committee is all coaches. There is a rules editor who is a former official so he gets input, but these all come from coaches. Don't like the rules blame them.

[Bison"FANatic"]

I understand where it could be dangerous for the hurdler but no risk no reward ;)
Plus how do we get sweet highlights like this if it illegal to even try. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPxkrWKG3W8

[HerdBot]

Everyone of those changes are ridiculous except for the horse collar

Hurdling illegal? OK I guess it's better to get your knee taken out . And what's a hurdle? Do they step on a guy laying on the ground?

Start the clock after a TD immediately? Good luck with reviews

Spot foul PI calls.. Never trust a ref

[IndyBison]

Everyone of those changes are ridiculous except for the horse collar

Hurdling illegal? OK I guess it's better to get your knee taken out . And what's a hurdle? Do they step on a guy laying on the ground?

Start the clock after a TD immediately? Good luck with reviews

Spot foul PI calls.. Never trust a refA hurdle is defined as jumping over an opponent with your foot or knee first and the opponent is not touching the ground with anything other than their feet. So if the opponent is on the ground or has his hand on the ground it's not a hurdle. If you dive over a pile head first it's not a hurdle.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[EC8CH]

If Bonnet wasn't allowed to hurdle there would have been at least three players who could have wound up dead. Do you want that blood on your hands committee? Do you?!

[HerdBot]

A hurdle is defined as jumping over an opponent with your foot or knee first and the opponent is not touching the ground with anything other than their feet. So if the opponent is on the ground or has his hand on the ground it's not a hurdle. If you dive over a pile head first it's not a hurdle.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


If Bonnet wasn't allowed to hurdle there would have been at least three players who could have wound up dead. Do you want that blood on your hands committee? Do you?!

Or you will see more of this happen.

I think players know instinctively when hurdles aren't safe and avoid them. You probably see more injuries when a player goes up high for a pass and someone tackles them in mid air or when they land. That's how Adam Thielan got hurt. It's football. I mean what are they going to kill hurdling over the goal line on 4th and inches? Walter Paytons legacy would be gone in modern days. Dude used to literally jump over the entire pile.
https://offthemonstersports.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Screen-Shot-2016-10-17-at-10.46.51-AM.png

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site21/2017/1105/20171105__06DCSbroncosmainw~1.jpg

[IndyBison]

Walter Payton DOVE over the goal line. He didn't hurdle.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[SDbison]

Leave the fricken game alone. Looks like a bunch of lawyers writing all that crap.

[bisonaudit]

Leave the fricken game alone. Looks like a bunch of lawyers writing all that crap.

Just obsessive micro managers that’s football and football coaches for you.

[HerdBot]

Walter Payton DOVE over the goal line. He didn't hurdle.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Either way he's leaving his feet and flying in the air and it's probably more dangerous since he had a zero percent chance of landing on his feet. Better chance he landed on his head or into a linebacker.


Completely safe

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_H_rVDlsennM/Su3im52-e0I/AAAAAAAAR2E/0_DTB5WVwoE/s400/walter-payton-endzone-dive.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f4/91/d0/f491d07eaaa9ba7d627eaa628d53721e.jpg
http://s1.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/cam-newton-touchdown-flip.jpg

But this is dangerous?

https://usatftw.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/usp_ncaa_football__louisville_at_syracuse_85056414 .jpg?w=1000&h=712

https://memegenerator.net/img/images/600x600/15670916/football-hurdle.jpg
(both feet are on the ground, even more a few seconds before the picture)

This is a stupid rule just like most on the list. Wish football was more like baseball. Quit fucking with the rules or it's going to look like this

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/6c/d3/3a/6cd33ae7fb09cf4d0e77f92b198398f7.jpg

[DCinOK]

I'm really against that Rule that JMU fans are trying to get added to the game...the Rule that says if a receiver drops a pass that they usually catch, then it still counts as a catch.

[CalBison97]

Just obsessive micro managers that’s football and football coaches for you.

It’s today’s world...every business/job/profession has micro managers that oversee micro managers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

Every sport at every level has tweaked their rules every year since the sport was invented. Forward passes used to be illegal. Sports evolve. They aren't changing rules just to change them.

As for hurdling vs. diving, hurdling is a foul at every level except NCAA and even then only the runner is allowed to do it. An offensive player diving over an opponent is legal at every level. I thinks that's a clear distinction of the safety of one act over the other. Just because there are examples of players being able to do it without contacting an opponent, it is extremely dangerous. I have no idea if there is support for passing this change but it is clearly a safety issue and very different from diving.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[westnodak93bison]

If a receiver is considered wide open by the color commentator and drops a pass the offense shall be granted a do over. Just for JMU

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ZHerd]

The sport as a whole is too hands on and bullyish and creates a culture of harassment. Tackling should eventually be replaced with some form of lazer tag or proximity indication.

[KilldeerBison]

Leave the fricken game alone. Looks like a bunch of lawyers writing all that crap.

Make football great again!

[HerdBot]

Every sport at every level has tweaked their rules every year since the sport was invented. Forward passes used to be illegal. Sports evolve. They aren't changing rules just to change them.

As for hurdling vs. diving, hurdling is a foul at every level except NCAA and even then only the runner is allowed to do it. An offensive player diving over an opponent is legal at every level. I thinks that's a clear distinction of the safety of one act over the other. Just because there are examples of players being able to do it without contacting an opponent, it is extremely dangerous. I have no idea if there is support for passing this change but it is clearly a safety issue and very different from diving.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I doubt there is any data to support the change. It's a solution looking for a problem. How many hurdles did we see this year in 15 games? Zero. I can't even remember the last time i saw one post Andrew Bonnet and he never hurt himself or someone while doing it. It's no more dangerous than a receiver going up for a jump ball with 2 dbacks and landing on the ground. It's no more dangerous than a QB getting blindsided and crushed in the back. I agree it's viewed as a safety issue but there is zero evidence it's dangerous or a problem.

[Bisonator98]

A hurdle is defined as jumping over an opponent with your foot or knee first and the opponent is not touching the ground with anything other than their feet. So if the opponent is on the ground or has his hand on the ground it's not a hurdle. If you dive over a pile head first it's not a hurdle.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

So you think diving head first is safer then hurdling?

[ZHerd]

So you think diving head first is safer then hurdling?

Not that you are saying he is but I don’t think he is saying that. He is just listing rules and defining terms

[Bisonator98]

Every sport at every level has tweaked their rules every year since the sport was invented. Forward passes used to be illegal. Sports evolve. They aren't changing rules just to change them.

As for hurdling vs. diving, hurdling is a foul at every level except NCAA and even then only the runner is allowed to do it. An offensive player diving over an opponent is legal at every level. I thinks that's a clear distinction of the safety of one act over the other. Just because there are examples of players being able to do it without contacting an opponent, it is extremely dangerous. I have no idea if there is support for passing this change but it is clearly a safety issue and very different from diving.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Guess I should have quoted this post instead.

[IndyBison]

So you think diving head first is safer then hurdling?I would say generally yes. The head first is usually a dive on to a pile so it's much lower while a hurdle could result in either kicking an opponent or getting flipped head over heels. The latter is much less likely on a head first dive.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[SDbison]

I would say generally yes. The head first is usually a dive on to a pile so it's much lower while a hurdle could result in either kicking an opponent or getting flipped head over heels. The latter is much less likely on a head first dive.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk Why do the stripes continually want to screw with the game of football? There were plenty of rules 30, 40 or 50 years ago. Just call the game. Is it about the players or justifying more time for the refs to stand around delaying play? Do fans want the refs to decide the outcome or the players? As for rules shortening the game, maybe the greedy sponsors need to give up their choke hold on extending and changing the flow of the game?

[56BISON73]

Why do the stripes continually want to screw with the game of football? There were plenty of rules 30, 40 or 50 years ago. Just call the game. Is it about the players or justifying more time for the refs to stand around delaying play? Do fans want the refs to decide the outcome or the players? As for rules shortening the game, maybe the greedy sponsors need to give up their choke hold on extending and changing the flow of the game?

I dont think the stripes are the driving force on rule changes. I think The NCAA rules committee could be the culprit. But I also think they field suggestions from schools , coaches ADs or even players and fans.The committee looks for valid concerns and puts them forward like they are doing now looking for input.

[IndyBison]

I dont think the stripes are the driving force on rule changes. I think The NCAA rules committee could be the culprit. But I also think they field suggestions from schools , coaches ADs or even players and fans.The committee looks for valid concerns and puts them forward like they are doing now looking for input.

Correct. The rules committee is all coaches. The rules editor is a former official who participates in the conversation but it's ultimately the coaches that propose and pass the rule changes. There is an oversight committee that ultimately approves those changes, but I'm not sure who is on that committee. I know it's not officials. Officials are invited to participate in the survey above, but they don't submit changes or vote on them.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[56BISON73]

Correct. The rules committee is all coaches. The rules editor is a former official who participates in the conversation but it's ultimately the coaches that propose and pass the rule changes. There is an oversight committee that ultimately approves those changes, but I'm not sure who is on that committee. I know it's not officials. Officials are invited to participate in the survey above, but they don't submit changes or vote on them.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Yeah its not like you guys need or want to learn more rules.

[IndyBison]

Yeah its not like you guys need or want to learn more rules.The rule changes aren't hard to learn. And they usually aren't new rules, they are just changes to existing rules. They are discussed at several clinics and study groups and applied at scrimmages on both the Spring and Fall. By the time the season starts they are usually well understood.

Like anything officiating is harder than you think but once you start and put in the time it's easier than you realize. I've watched people farm my entire life and it doesn't look that hard, but if I tried it, it would be harder than expected. But for those who have done it for years it's not that hard. And as farming methods and equipment change, they adapt easily. You could apply the same thing to any other career, avocation, or hobby.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[HerdBot]

A hurdle is defined as jumping over an opponent with your foot or knee first and the opponent is not touching the ground with anything other than their feet. So if the opponent is on the ground or has his hand on the ground it's not a hurdle. If you dive over a pile head first it's not a hurdle.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

So this is a penalty by those rules. If he doesn't hurdle him there is a collision or a tackle by his knees and the refs call back a great offensive play. Sounds like a lose lose.
https://memegenerator.net/img/images/600x600/15670916/football-hurdle.jpg

[ZHerd]

So this is a penalty by those rules. If he doesn't hurdle him there is a collision or a tackle by his knees and the refs call back a great offensive play. Sounds like a lose lose.
https://memegenerator.net/img/images/600x600/15670916/football-hurdle.jpg

It’s a definite lose lose caused by snowflake control freaks who are making a rough tough all in game lose some of the elements that make the game special. Maybe that “coaches committee” should go coach soccer or baseball if they so desperately want a safe sport.

[Bisonator98]

I would say generally yes. The head first is usually a dive on to a pile so it's much lower while a hurdle could result in either kicking an opponent or getting flipped head over heels. The latter is much less likely on a head first dive.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I can't say I've ever seen a player seriously injured by hurdling but I've seen guys paralyzed by diving head first. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

[IndyBison]

I can't say I've ever seen a player seriously injured by hurdling but I've seen guys paralyzed by diving head first. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

There is a difference between targeting and diving over a pile. I've seen examples of players hurt and/or flipped seriously when trying to hurdle an opponent. NCAA did ban something similar to diving headfirst over the protectors on a punt a couple years ago for the same reason. The similarity there to hurdling is the opponents are upright. Players trying to hurdle or leap over the protectors were often flipped like a hurdling runner. There is a reason hurdling (other than the runner) has been illegal for many years at both the NCAA and NFHS level. It's a very dangerous act. I'm not sure if the NFL has rules about hurdling. This isn't a new thing being considered by rules makers because they are snowflakes. Ever since I started officiating there has been discussion about why NCAA allowed runners to hurdle. I'm sure this isn't the first time the rules committee has discussed it. I have no idea if it will pass and really don't care either way, but to say it isn't extremely dangerous is not logical. It should definitely be a legitimate discussion.

[bisonp]

There is a difference between targeting and diving over a pile. I've seen examples of players hurt and/or flipped seriously when trying to hurdle an opponent. NCAA did ban something similar to diving headfirst over the protectors on a punt a couple years ago for the same reason. The similarity there to hurdling is the opponents are upright. Players trying to hurdle or leap over the protectors were often flipped like a hurdling runner. There is a reason hurdling (other than the runner) has been illegal for many years at both the NCAA and NFHS level. It's a very dangerous act. I'm not sure if the NFL has rules about hurdling. This isn't a new thing being considered by rules makers because they are snowflakes. Ever since I started officiating there has been discussion about why NCAA allowed runners to hurdle. I'm sure this isn't the first time the rules committee has discussed it. I have no idea if it will pass and really don't care either way, but to say it isn't extremely dangerous is not logical. It should definitely be a legitimate discussion.

Pretty sure they do not. Here was a failed attempt:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2018-02-04/Reuters/2018-02-05T002201Z_414226365_NOCID_RTRMADP_3_NFL-SUPER-BOWL-LII-PHILADELPHIA-EAGLES-VS-NEW-ENGLAND-PATRIOTS.jpg&w=480

Easy to see how that could have ended badly, though.

[ZHerd]

Pretty sure they do not. Here was a failed attempt:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/Wires/Images/2018-02-04/Reuters/2018-02-05T002201Z_414226365_NOCID_RTRMADP_3_NFL-SUPER-BOWL-LII-PHILADELPHIA-EAGLES-VS-NEW-ENGLAND-PATRIOTS.jpg&w=480

Easy to see how that could have ended badly, though.

I’ve seen many hurdles/hurdle attempts and never seen anyone injured though the potential was difinitely there on some of them. Players going airborne know this, let them make their own call. If we really want to preemptively get injuries out of football then time to go 2 hand touch

[bisonp]

I’ve seen many hurdles/hurdle attempts and never seen anyone injured though the potential was difinitely there on some of them. Players going airborne know this, let them make their own call. If we really want to preemptively get injuries out of football then time to go 2 hand touch

Evidently they kept the rule in place in high school by giving examples of serious injuries, though I can't find those examples.

http://www.ecfo.org/schedules/2012_Interps.pdf


Recently, national and local media have identified some of these plays at the collegiate and professional levels as “spectacular feats” and glorified the individual’s athletic ability instead of pointing out the heightened potential for harm. Little regard has been given to the fact that attempting to “hurdle” a defender increases the risk of injury to both the hurdler and tackler! The NFHS SMAC requested that this rule not be changed and backed up its request by showing several incidences where players were severely injured while attempting this act! The NFHS Football Rules Committee concurred with the SMAC and did not change the hurdling rule.

[HerdBot]

Evidently they kept the rule in place in high school by giving examples of serious injuries, though I can't find those examples.

http://www.ecfo.org/schedules/2012_Interps.pdf

They could come up with an example of injury for every possible scenario in football and they do it to pretend like they are making the game totally safe. It's not a totally safe game. Due to medical privacy laws, that may be the reason no examples were given. And what's severely injured? Torn ACL? Paralyzed? MCL? Separated shoulder? Skinned elbow?

If I wanted to make a case, I could give several examples of QBs who got severely injured doing some routine things like diving in to the end zone. (both Carson Wentz and Cole Davis)

[bisonp]

They could come up with an example of injury for every possible scenario in football and they do it to pretend like they are making the game totally safe. It's not a totally safe game. Due to medical privacy laws, that may be the reason no examples were given. And what's severely injured? Torn ACL? Paralyzed? MCL? Separated shoulder? Skinned elbow?

If I wanted to make a case, I could give several examples of QBs who got severely injured doing some routine things like diving in to the end zone. (both Carson Wentz and Cole Davis)

I don't disagree with that. The bottom line I guess is that they had examples and we have nothing but speculation to work with. We don't really know how dangerous it is or is not. I think everybody can agree it's a fairly rare play though, which means removing it isn't going to affect much. So while I don't want to see that rule put in place, it's not going to bother me either.

[HerdBot]

I don't disagree with that. The bottom line I guess is that they had examples and we have nothing but speculation to work with. We don't really know how dangerous it is or is not. I think everybody can agree it's a fairly rare play though, which means removing it isn't going to affect much. So while I don't want to see that rule put in place, it's not going to bother me either.


It won't bother me until the refs fuck it up like they always do and decide a game by calling a penalty... And of course it's not going to be reviewable

[IndyBison]

I don't disagree with that. The bottom line I guess is that they had examples and we have nothing but speculation to work with. We don't really know how dangerous it is or is not. I think everybody can agree it's a fairly rare play though, which means removing it isn't going to affect much. So while I don't want to see that rule put in place, it's not going to bother me either.

And just because it's on the survey doesn't mean it will pass. There are several potential changes there and I doubt more than half will pass. Another similar one I've heard discussed for a few years but isn't on the survey is the receiver who leaps high into the air and then gets taken out from behind. This is similarly dangerous to hurdling with the same potential results. The tricky part there is the foul is likely on the defender and not the receiver and that would be very difficult to create a rule preventing them from contacting the receiver in such a way they don't fall on their head. I know one of the considerations of any rules committee is ease of coaching and ease of officiating. The hurdling rule is easy to coach and easy to officiate if they pass it.

The new rule last year that had to do with hurdling has a related history. There used to be a foul for a player on the defense who ran forward form more than a yard behind their line of scrimmage to leap to block the kick and then contact any player (teammate or opponent) on the way down. Enterprising linemen then took advantage of this and would move under said player after they leaped. The rule quickly changed to add an exception to not have it be a foul if that happened. That was the rule for several years until last year when team started leaping over the offensive line or jumping between players without making contact (thus not violating the previous rule) to get into the backfield to block the kick. The new leaping rule was made to prevent that, but they want so far to say the player more than a yard back can't run up and jump AT ALL. If you are going to jump you have to do it without running forward. By philosophy you allow a step to get some momentum, but that is it. I personally thought that went too far so I'm curious to see if they address it this year. As long as you don't land on anyone or jump over the pile there is no risk of injury. I had it happen a couple times last year so I just reminded the player of the new rule. Nobody complained about it.

[HerdBot]

And just because it's on the survey doesn't mean it will pass. There are several potential changes there and I doubt more than half will pass. Another similar one I've heard discussed for a few years but isn't on the survey is the receiver who leaps high into the air and then gets taken out from behind. This is similarly dangerous to hurdling with the same potential results. The tricky part there is the foul is likely on the defender and not the receiver and that would be very difficult to create a rule preventing them from contacting the receiver in such a way they don't fall on their head. I know one of the considerations of any rules committee is ease of coaching and ease of officiating. The hurdling rule is easy to coach and easy to officiate if they pass it.

The new rule last year that had to do with hurdling has a related history. There used to be a foul for a player on the defense who ran forward form more than a yard behind their line of scrimmage to leap to block the kick and then contact any player (teammate or opponent) on the way down. Enterprising linemen then took advantage of this and would move under said player after they leaped. The rule quickly changed to add an exception to not have it be a foul if that happened. That was the rule for several years until last year when team started leaping over the offensive line or jumping between players without making contact (thus not violating the previous rule) to get into the backfield to block the kick. The new leaping rule was made to prevent that, but they want so far to say the player more than a yard back can't run up and jump AT ALL. If you are going to jump you have to do it without running forward. By philosophy you allow a step to get some momentum, but that is it. I personally thought that went too far so I'm curious to see if they address it this year. As long as you don't land on anyone or jump over the pile there is no risk of injury. I had it happen a couple times last year so I just reminded the player of the new rule. Nobody complained about it.

That kind of makes sense. I just think these committees are like out government. They just do stuff for the sake of doing stuff so they can justify their existence

[IndyBison]

That kind of makes sense. I just think these committees are like out government. They just do stuff for the sake of doing stuff so they can justify their existenceI suppose. There are dozens of things that coaches, administrators, and officials (and probably fans) want to change, and this committee vets them and determines which will improve the game in some way. Not unlike our legislature.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[tony]

Every sport at every level has tweaked their rules every year since the sport was invented. Forward passes used to be illegal. Sports evolve. They aren't changing rules just to change them.

As for hurdling vs. diving, hurdling is a foul at every level except NCAA and even then only the runner is allowed to do it. An offensive player diving over an opponent is legal at every level. I thinks that's a clear distinction of the safety of one act over the other. Just because there are examples of players being able to do it without contacting an opponent, it is extremely dangerous. I have no idea if there is support for passing this change but it is clearly a safety issue and very different from diving.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I thought a runner hurdling a tackler was legal in the NFL - in fact, I thought it was legal at every level of football except for the youngest levels (HS and younger.)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7dCDb_3_bg

IMO, making hurdling a tackler illegal would be a horrendously bad rule. I can just see it being called on a back like Anderson who is simply jumping over a defender who has fallen in his gap.

[IndyBison]

I thought a runner hurdling a tackler was legal in the NFL - in fact, I thought it was legal at every level of football except for the youngest levels (HS and younger.)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7dCDb_3_bg

IMO, making hurdling a tackler illegal would be a horrendously bad rule. I can just see it being called on a back like Anderson who is simply jumping over a defender who has fallen in his gap.

Based on other posts I've seen and the video above hurdling is legal in the NFL.

The definition of hurdling says the player leads with his foot or knee (to distinguish from jumping head first over a pile) over an opponent who has nothing but his feet touching the ground. Jumping over a player on the ground or touching the ground with their hand is not hurdling by definition. All players at all levels may not hurdle an opponent. The exceptions as of now are runners in the NFL and NCAA. So 95% of the players are not allowed to hurdle because it's very dangerous for both the hurdler and and the player they are hurdling. You see videos of the players who complete a hurdle but don't get hurt. You don't see the ones where players do get hurt. Neither happens very often. I checked out the video above and I counted 11 possible hurdles and most of those were runners over defenders that went low but didn't appear to be touching the ground. The bulk of them were either head first dives, jumps to the side of the defender, or jumps over players with at least a knee on the ground. Those would all still be legal.

[barnwintersportsengelstad]

I thought a runner hurdling a tackler was legal in the NFL - in fact, I thought it was legal at every level of football except for the youngest levels (HS and younger.)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7dCDb_3_bg

IMO, making hurdling a tackler illegal would be a horrendously bad rule. I can just see it being called on a back like Anderson who is simply jumping over a defender who has fallen in his gap.

And, this could be a challenge for referees.

[IndyBison]

And, this could be a challenge for referees.

Hurdling is pretty easy to see and rule. What do you feel would be challenging?

[Mr Meaty]

Hurdling is pretty easy to see and rule. What do you feel would be challenging?

Did Carson hurdle the defender in the Iowa State game or did he just "jump" over a downed players?

[IndyBison]

Did Carson hurdle the defender in the Iowa State game or did he just "jump" over a downed players?

Definitions are critical in any rule book. Rule 2 is all definitions. The definition of hurdling is jumping over an opponent leading with your foot or knee (as opposed to diving over head first) and the opponent has nothing but his feet contacting the ground. I re-watched the play from the Iowa State game and the defender had a hand and knee on the ground so that's clearly not a hurdle.

[Christopher Moen]

Definitions are critical in any rule book. Rule 2 is all definitions. The definition of hurdling is jumping over an opponent leading with your foot or knee (as opposed to diving over head first) and the opponent has nothing but his feet contacting the ground. I re-watched the play from the Iowa State game and the defender had a hand and knee on the ground so that's clearly not a hurdle.

Carson sure can get some airtime.

http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/sites/default/files/styles/16x9_620/public/field/image/0831%20Wentz.JPG?itok=37HkoVi7

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/35/8d/cb358d6a9a95144be7714a607a31e76b.jpg

[EC8CH]

Carson sure can get some airtime.

http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/sites/default/files/styles/16x9_620/public/field/image/0831%20Wentz.JPG?itok=37HkoVi7

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/35/8d/cb358d6a9a95144be7714a607a31e76b.jpg

His vert was by far his worse combine category.

[scottietohottie]

His vert was by far his worse combine category.

Which is exactly why he jumped forward instead of upwards.

[IzzyFlexion]

Which is exactly why he jumped forward instead of upwards.

Let's flip the script on some of these labels.

As in:

"Dude, what's your horizontal?"

or,

"Wow! You can really get up in the air. What's your high jump?"

or better yet,

"Jeez. That guy is fast. I wonder what his .022727 mile time is".

[Christopher Moen]

Let's flip the script on some of these labels.

As in:

"Dude, what's your horizontal?"

or,

"Wow! You can really get up in the air. What's your high jump?"

or better yet,

"Jeez. That guy is fast. I wonder what his .022727 mile time is".


.022727 is pretty close to my vertical.

[yopaulie]

.022727 is pretty close to my vertical.

I went to the pre-Superbowl activities at the Minneapolis Convention Center with my kids, where we got to do all the combine tests (vertical, 3 cone, 40, etc.). The people running the vertical told me I did 29". I laughed - there is no way my vertical is even close to that. I think they were either just making up answers to folks, or were off for everybody. It was young adults (or even teens?) doing the measurements, and they were going through about 150+ people every hour.

[southcliffbison]

I went to the pre-Superbowl activities at the Minneapolis Convention Center with my kids, where we got to do all the combine tests (vertical, 3 cone, 40, etc.). The people running the vertical told me I did 29". I laughed - there is no way my vertical is even close to that. I think they were either just making up answers to folks, or were off for everybody. It was young adults (or even teens?) doing the measurements, and they were going through about 150+ people every hour.

Maybe the kids just misplaced a decimal point.....

[yopaulie]

Maybe the kids just misplaced a decimal point.....

Pretty sure my feet left the ground....well maybe...

[Bisonator98]

I went to the pre-Superbowl activities at the Minneapolis Convention Center with my kids, where we got to do all the combine tests (vertical, 3 cone, 40, etc.). The people running the vertical told me I did 29". I laughed - there is no way my vertical is even close to that. I think they were either just making up answers to folks, or were off for everybody. It was young adults (or even teens?) doing the measurements, and they were going through about 150+ people every hour.

Maybe it was metric as in 29 cm. :)

[oldmantutters]

Maybe it was metric as in 29 cm. :)What is that in hectares?

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[Bison Bridge Guy]

I don't know that these were in the Rules Survey, but here are some proposed changes:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/article/2018-03-02/college-football-change-kickoff-rule-recommended?cid=ncaafcssocial_tw_sf183514365&sf183514365=1

First one allows a fair catch of a kickoff inside the 25, and then spotting the ball on the 25, for player safety. Don't like it.

[westnodak93bison]

https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-rules-committee-proposes-drastic-overhaul-kickoff-returns-212324732.html
NCAA rules committee proposes drastic overhaul to kickoff returns

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[BisonVifte]

I don't know that these were in the Rules Survey, but here are some proposed changes:

https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/article/2018-03-02/college-football-change-kickoff-rule-recommended?cid=ncaafcssocial_tw_sf183514365&sf183514365=1

First one allows a fair catch of a kickoff inside the 25, and then spotting the ball on the 25, for player safety. Don't like it.

You might as well get rid of kickoffs and place the ball at the 25 then.

[HerdBot]

You might as well get rid of kickoffs and place the ball at the 25 then.

Everybody up for the start of the game... the march is on! Uhhh... boom?

[HerdBot]

https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-rules-committee-proposes-drastic-overhaul-kickoff-returns-212324732.html
NCAA rules committee proposes drastic overhaul to kickoff returns

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

That would be the end of the beautiful off tackle run with the fullback cutting the tackler. Reminds me of that amazing combo of Haeg and Jedre Cyr cutting 2 defenders in the playoffs to spring John Crockett for a TD. I guess the play would still work but it looks so badass to knock the defenders down like bowling pins

[IndyBison]

That would be the end of the beautiful off tackle run with the fullback cutting the tackler. Reminds me of that amazing combo of Haeg and Jedre Cyr cutting 2 defenders in the playoffs to spring John Crockett for a TD. I guess the play would still work but it looks so badass to knock the defenders down like bowling pinsMost cut blocks are within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage so they are still legal (assuming from the front and not back towards original position of the ball) but this will reduce some.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

The CFO released a statement with more details on the rule changes. There are a few others not included in the original release mostly because they were probably insignificant to most fans and media (i.e. logo size and placement on field, cameras on officials' hats). The only one of interest would be adding an exception not requiring a team to attempt a try if they are ahead by 1 or 2 points and time expired during the down. The rule already states the try is not attempted if it won't affect the outcome of the game. Since the defense could score 1 or 2 points on a try it was previously required. This is a logical change.

[bisonaudit]

Did I just see something about a kickoff fair caught inside the 25 being treated as a touchback?

[westnodak93bison]

Did I just see something about a kickoff fair caught inside the 25 being treated as a touchback?Yes. Flag football is coming

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[westnodak93bison]

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaa-officially-changes-rules-kickoffs-2018-204656232.html
NCAA officially changes rules on kickoffs for 2018

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[HazenBizon]

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaa-officially-changes-rules-kickoffs-2018-204656232.html
NCAA officially changes rules on kickoffs for 2018

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

The NCAA just removed the importance of coffin corner punters. Returners will now not be afraid to catch balls close to the end zone. It's a damn shame imo.

[X-Factor]

The NCAA just removed the importance of coffin corner punters. Returners will now not be afraid to catch balls close to the end zone. It's a damn shame imo.

That is not what the rule says. The rule is for kickoffs.

[IndyBison]

That is not what the rule says. The rule is for kickoffs.Correct. Kickoffs only. And guys will still return them. They do today out of the end zone so why wouldn't they at the 10? I do think you'll see more touchbacks but it won't eliminate them.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[HazenBizon]

Correct. Kickoffs only. And guys will still return them. They do today out of the end zone so why wouldn't they at the 10? I do think you'll see more touchbacks but it won't eliminate them.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Well, I misread the rule. Thans for correcting me.

[Bison03]

How many returners are going to fair catch at the 10 yard line thinking thry cant get a 15 yard return? Kickoffs are different then punts. There is usually nota lot of defenders around a returner when he catches it. Guys still take it out of the endzone despite the 25 yard line touchback. I just dont see this happening a lot. What it does do is take away the skill of kickers that can make returners field the kick inside the 5.

[TAILG8R]

How many returners are going to fair catch at the 10 yard line thinking thry cant get a 15 yard return? Kickoffs are different then punts. There is usually nota lot of defenders around a returner when he catches it. Guys still take it out of the endzone despite the 25 yard line touchback. I just dont see this happening a lot. What it does do is take away the skill of kickers that can make returners field the kick inside the 5.Correct. I see this mostly having an impact on the kickers that can place it inside the 5 forcing the return. Teams may opt for the touchback instead if having to return a kick outside the hash inside the 5.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[ndsubison1]

Will this deter teams much from actually returning it? Seems like teams would just return it anyways in most circumstances. I can see fair catching it with little clock left though.

[HerdBot]

Will we see more squib kicks? Of course if you position it in the corner, you run the risk of starting at the 40. Or can they still fair catch a squib?

[Hammerhead]

Will we see more squib kicks? Of course if you position it in the corner, you run the risk of starting at the 40. Or can they still fair catch a squib?

From what I remember, you cannot call a fair catch on a kick that has already touched the ground which is why onside kicks usually get bounced off the ground right away.

[wagsabison]

From what I remember, you cannot call a fair catch on a kick that has already touched the ground which is why onside kicks usually get bounced off the ground right away.

I remember we have done it on some punts where the ball has bounced first. Don't recall on kickoffs though.

[CAS4127]

I remember we have done it on some punts where the ball has bounced first. Don't recall on kickoffs though.

You can’t fair catch a punt that has bounced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wagsabison]

You can’t fair catch a punt that has bounced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe we dropped to a knee or something. I was thinking we've done it before.

[stevdock]

You can’t fair catch a punt that has bounced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wasn't there a Ryan Smith return that was called back because he had originally called for a fair catch, the ball then bounced and he tried to return it??

[CAS4127]

Wasn't there a Ryan Smith return that was called back because he had originally called for a fair catch, the ball then bounced and he tried to return it??

Maybe, but that’s not a “fair catch” of a punt that bounced. What it is is a delay of game penalty I believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TAILG8R]

Maybe, but that’s not a “fair catch” of a punt that bounced. What it is is a delay of game penalty I believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct. I wanna say Dudzik did this more than once.

[Christopher Moen]

Wasn't there a Ryan Smith return that was called back because he had originally called for a fair catch, the ball then bounced and he tried to return it??

I believe you might be referring to a play where he "motioned" and yelled at his teammates to get out to the way as the punt was kicked short and he ran up and caught and took off. The officials took his arm motion as a fair catch signal even though I don't remember his arms going above his head.

[HerdBot]

Wasn't there a Ryan Smith return that was called back because he had originally called for a fair catch, the ball then bounced and he tried to return it??

Invalid Fair Catch Signal, I remember that one!

[NDSU1980]

I believe you might be referring to a play where he "motioned" and yelled at his teammates to get out to the way as the punt was kicked short and he ran up and caught and took off. The officials took his arm motion as a fair catch signal even though I don't remember his arms going above his head.

I remember that one clearly. I thought Phil Hansen was going to explode on the radio over that call. He kept saying it's common to wave off your teammate and he never had his arm up all the way.

[1998braves64]

I believe you might be referring to a play where he "motioned" and yelled at his teammates to get out to the way as the punt was kicked short and he ran up and caught and took off. The officials took his arm motion as a fair catch signal even though I don't remember his arms going above his head.That was the first year of any hand signal was going to be a fair catch signal.

Sent by my phone on a bullet train from Hillsboro.

[IndyBison]

Invalid Fair Catch Signal, I remember that one!Correct. A fair catch can only happen if the ball is "caught." By definition, a catch is gaining possession of a ball in flight. A recovery is gaining possession of a ball that has been grounded.

If you give any signal as a member of the return team, the ball will become dead immediately when possessed. If the signal is a valid fair catch signal and the ball is caught, you have a fair catch. If the ball is caught, only the player who signaled is protected, but you also can't tee off on a player who caught it when someone else gives the signal.

If the return player gives the get away signal, it's an invalid signal. There is no penalty other than the return team can't advance it once possessed. You could get a delay of game penalty if you do continue to advance it, but that is rarely called.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

That was the first year of any hand signal was going to be a fair catch signal.

Sent by my phone on a bullet train from Hillsboro.It's not a fair catch signal. It's an invalid fair catch signal. It's been a rule for much longer than that, but it may have been an interpretation clarification. The invalid signal was usually a short arm or just raising but not waving. But players started doing the get away signal more often and it wasn't consistently called the same.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[CalBison97]

Yes. Flag football is coming

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Indeed it is. I recently noticed a young team practicing (10–11 year olds?) and they were wearing protective head gear/helmets similar to this. Flag Football leagues are trending up especially at the younger levels. Will there come a day when it trickles into high school and beyond?
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180417/e14705052a930590add952baa17a98c4.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ndsubison1]

Ive heard some youth leagues have poles/pegs under shoulder pads and if a defender pulls one, the offensive player is considered down.

[TAILG8R]

Ive heard some youth leagues have poles/pegs under shoulder pads and if a defender pulls one, the offensive player is considered down.I'm trying like hell but I can't come up with anything that makes sense when reading this. The defender pulls his own peg? How does a defender reach under another's jersey to pull said peg? None if this makes sense. I need more context or explanation.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[scottietohottie]

I'm trying like hell but I can't come up with anything that makes sense when reading this. The defender pulls his own peg? How does a defender reach under another's jersey to pull said peg? None if this makes sense. I need more context or explanation.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

The defender pulls them off of the ball carrier. Basically flag football. They are on the lower back. They had one broken arm testing.

[T-Funk]

I'm trying like hell but I can't come up with anything that makes sense when reading this. The defender pulls his own peg? How does a defender reach under another's jersey to pull said peg? None if this makes sense. I need more context or explanation.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Check out this recent story from WDAY for context.

http://www.wday.com/news/4431841-ndsu-grad-offers-tackle-football-alternative-avoid-concussions

[TAILG8R]

Check out this recent story from WDAY for context.

http://www.wday.com/news/4431841-ndsu-grad-offers-tackle-football-alternative-avoid-concussions

Ah yes. I have seen those before. When I read "under the shoulder pads" I was picturing something literally underneath the shoulder pads not below them. I've always hated flag football because the damn things are twisting and twirling around as the runner spins, etc. At least this keeps the target somewhat steady.

[CyPanth]

Check out this recent story from WDAY for context.

http://www.wday.com/news/4431841-ndsu-grad-offers-tackle-football-alternative-avoid-concussions


This may help with regard to tackling, but what about blocking? And mid-air collisions when both are going for the ball? The "flag football" solution doesn't seem like a comprehensive solution.