College football leaders took a step Friday aimed at shortening games and reducing the number of plays per game. It’s an issue that has been at the forefront for several years, but has taken on added urgency this offseason as the sport sits a year away from the expanded 12-team College Football Playoff, which will extend the season for some teams and will increase potential injury. exhibitions for players.
The NCAA Football Rules Committee has officially recommended the adoption of three rule changes, which will require approval by the Playing Rules Oversight Committee in April. These are:
- A running timer after the first downs (like the NFL), except the last two minutes of each half.
- Prohibit the use of consecutive timeouts by a team.
- Report a foul in the second or fourth quarter rather than playing a down with no clock.
What you need to know about recommendations
The recommendations come after the rules committee’s annual meetings in Indianapolis this week. The Division I Football Competition Committee also met this week to discuss the topic. These three rule changes received broad support. Other, more dramatic ideas — like running the clock after incomplete passes — haven’t received enough support to move forward at this point.
Tulane athletic director Troy Dannen, who chairs the competition committee, said Athleticism this week, he expects the three rule changes combined to eliminate seven to 10 plays per game.
“This is a first step,” Dannen said.
Pass
The question of game length is twofold. College football games last too long, much longer than their NFL counterparts. And, perhaps more importantly for this discussion, they play on average much more per game.
College football games average about 180 total plays per game, compared to about 155 in the NFL, according to an NCAA study of the 2022 season (which included special teams). This is both a player safety issue with an expanded CFP underway and a fan engagement issue, as FBS games last on average nearly three hours and 30 minutes, while the NFL average is 3:10.
With so many plays per game, there is a greater chance of collisions and injuries. Experts call them “exposures.” Commissioners, including the SEC’s Greg Sankey, have argued for more than a year that there are ways to expand the CFP safely by looking for ways to reduce exposures.
“These are not games,” he said last winter after expansion negotiations initially stalled. “These are exhibitions. These are contacts. So you think: how can we adjust gaming in the modern era to meet a different set of demands?
ACC Commissioner Jim Phillips has led a campaign over the past year to examine college football holistically before making changes to any particular area. Colloquially, it’s called the 365-day review, and it includes, among other topics, an overview of the number of plays per game. Phillips supports all three proposed rule changes and said they have support from all 10 conferences of the Football Bowl Subdivision.
“With the expansion of the playoffs in 2024, a thorough review of options to reduce the total number of games has been a priority among FBS commissioners,” Phillips said. “If you want to expand the playoffs, it can’t be done with the same number of games. You must try to remember him.
“This is the first step. It’s not the only step, but we hope it’s something that will be incorporated into the upcoming 2023 football season.”
Why this? Why now?
It would be virtually impossible for college football executives to add games and then get paid significantly more money without doing anything else, especially in today’s climate. Schools and conferences know they need to do more for athletes, whether in the form of health and safety protocols or, potentially, putting more money in their pockets.
You can’t ask college football players to potentially play 17 games in a season without doing anything to mitigate the risks associated with more snaps. The three rule changes that have been recommended won’t make drastic changes — Dannen estimates they will affect seven to 10 plays per game — but all of it can help. The NCAA continued to change its kickoff rules to make this game safer until it found what worked best. This process could be similar.
Some of these proposals were considered a year ago but did not receive enough support to be adopted. What changed? Well, the presidents and chancellors who oversee the CFP have officially approved the expansion of a group of four teams to 12.
“This may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back, because we now know for sure that there are scenarios where games are added to people’s schedules,” Dannen said. “Another thing that sparked this was the ACC’s call to take a holistic view of football. We reviewed the recruitment rules, calendars, the role of coaches and analysts. This was also one of the areas.
Dannen said there “wasn’t really support at any level” for the idea of running the clock after incomplete passes.
“We’ll want to look at anything that takes away from the game,” Dannen said. “(Running the clock) would take away a lot of plays — probably 15 or 20. But it’s hard to understand when it’s so contrary to the way we clock football.”
Dannen expects the concept will continue to be examined along with any other ideas that come up over the next year.
“The steps we take are measured in terms of the clock,” said Georgia coach Kirby Smart, co-chairman of the rules committee. “We’re going to find out a lot this year how much it changes. But I think it’s a smart decision to look in that direction as we look to play more games.
Required reading
(Photo: Sean M. Haffey/Getty Images)
