NCAA Rule Changes - Effects on Mich

Submitted by Seth on
The NCAA’s Playing Rules Oversight Panel met yesterday to approve three relatively minor rule changes for football.

1. Banned Wedge Kickoffs

THE RULE: When the team receiving a kickoff has more than two players standing within two yards of one another, shoulder to shoulder, it will be assessed a 15-yard penalty—even if there is no contact between the teams.

THE REASON: A 2007 study showed that 20 percent of injuries during kickoffs were concussions.

EXPLANATION: When receiving a kickoff, teams tend to coalesce their blockers into a tight wedge. The way to break through such blocking is to send one of the tacklers into the wedge like a missile and blow it up. Example here



You can see the violence involved in this play. In fact, the reason offenses can only have so many people in the backfield today is because the wedge and wedge-breaking were major sources of deaths in the early game.

The NFL banned wedge blocking last year. Now the NCAA has done it too.

IMPACT: This is ultimately a win for kicking teams, since blocking caravans cannot form while the kick is in the air. It will probably prevent a head injury every three to five games. It's also probably a win for Michigan, since our speedier blockers are more likely to succeed without a wedge, our speedy returners are the least helped by wedge blocking, and most importantly, we are glad it is gone because we really suck at it:



YAY OR NAY: Big Yay. This was a decision made to protect the health of players. Fewer concussions = Sam McGuffie playing for Michigan rather than Rice = win. It wasn't delayed, but it was based on good science. It also looks to open up the kicking game a bit more, forcing the returner to run around a bit and hopefully dodge more guys in space, rather than fight through a tightly packed crowd every time. Plus, the way they defined it is pretty cut-and-dry: when the ball is in the air, you have to be two feet from your teammates. Good rule.




2. No more holding L2 on your way to the end zone

THE RULE: Live-ball penalties for taunting will be assessed from the spot of the foul and eliminate the score. Examples include players finishing touchdown runs by high-stepping into the end zone or pointing the ball toward an opponent.

THE REASON: Old men with objects in their rectums get to make rules. The explanation given is that it's because it's team game. Ask any offensive lineman if he minds if a skill position player jigs into the end-zone rather than coldly running in like a pre-2004 Madden avatar. He don't mind. This is about large, oblong objects in old ani, period.

EXPLANATION: If you taunt before making it to the end zone, and are penalized for it, the penalty will now be assessed as a live play. So let's say you are a receiver, and through your mad football skills you beat a cornerback deep, your QB gets you the ball, and now you have lots of green between yourself and the end zone. At this point you should IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM DO ANYTHING TO SUGGEST THAT YOU ARE HAPPY ABOUT THIS.

If you high-step, hold the ball out to a defender, pump the ball in your arms, or pull a DeSean Jackson:

The score is negated, AND you get a 15-yard penalty.

IMPACT ON MICHIGAN: Well, so long as we continue to deploy 18- to 22-year-old athletes who are excitable and love scoring touchdowns, their body language is likely to negate some touchdowns. They don't say so, but I highly, highly, highly doubt this penalty will ever get called on a (white) quarterback who is jumping up and down in ecstasy while his teammate runs in the pass -- this is geared at showboat receivers and running backs. I'm calling it now: we will get penalized for this, because we have young guys who can score long touchdowns and this makes them happy.

I don't know how tightly they plan to call it, but this might count:



YAY OR NAY:

Nay. With sauce. There is a heavy smell of racism in this. Good sportsmanship is something coaches can teach and kids can display to earn themselves and their programs more respect. But the NCAA negating plays on the football field because a 20-year-old got too excited after the result of the play had been for all intents and purposes determined: that smacks of grumpy old men trying to teach those kids a lesson in manners.




3. No more eye black messages

THE RULE: Bans the use of eye black containing symbols or messages

THE REASON:
.

EXPLANATION: Hey, waitaminute, you can't use all the television cameras to say what you think or represent -- only WE can use all the television cameras to say what we think or represent.

IMPACT ON MICHIGAN: Dudes can't write stuff in eye black anymore (unless a shoe company pays the university top dollar for it). I assume duct tape over one's mouth is still cool.

YAY OR NAY:

Nay.



This is the second rule that could have just gone with a Don't be DeSean Jackson approach. There are precious few guys who actually get national exposure for their eye-black. It's basically Heisman candidates, and the odd Mike Hart-type fella who so personifies his team that TV cameras zoom in on his face a lot. Most eye-black messages are the school logo. Others are usually hometown area codes, or dead or sick friends and relatives.



The committee also approved a rule that will require all coaches boxes to have television monitors beginning in the fall of 2011. This is a good idea. I think. Is it?

Comments

AMazinBlue

April 17th, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^

on is the leap from the 2-yard line and diving into the endzone when there is no reason to do so or the summer-sault(sp) into the endzone, again when there is no need or reason. I have no problem with that aspect of the rule.

Barry Sanders was the greatest running back I have ever seen and he never, not once, danced in the endzone or spiked the ball, he handed to the ref and jogged back to his teammates. He was never criticized for being boring or being a robot.

Herman Moore said it best, "Act like you have been there before."

Unless it is really obvious, the refs won't call this penalty if the game is on the line, the NCAA doesn't want this on their heads to.

If they do in football, will they also do in hoops when someone does some kind of celebration after a dunk? Maybe two free throws and the ball?

kman23

April 17th, 2010 at 8:58 PM ^

Barry Sanders was also in the NFL when you saw him. He wasn't an 18-22 year old kid playing in college. Remember this is not a professional league. Why do we want to take away individuality and fun out of the game? These are kids let them play.

Taunting is one thing but doing a flip into the endzone is another. Who cares?

Kilgore Trout

April 17th, 2010 at 4:06 PM ^

In my opinion, the Wolverine most likely to violate the celebration rule is Forcier, by far. He comes across as the cockiest and most demonstrative player on the team, and it isn't really close.

kman23

April 17th, 2010 at 8:56 PM ^

Yeah, because pointing to the crowd after a game changing TD is "cocky".

These are kids playing a game. Why shouldn't they celebrate? Besides that, when has Forcier ever over celebrated? Can you please provide me some evidence rather than spewing bull shit?

SysMark

April 17th, 2010 at 5:09 PM ^

I expect this call would be reserved for the most obvious cases, e.g. openly taunting an opponent or a flagrant dance into the end zone. The problem is it will be lurking there with the potential to have a drastic impact on a game at a critical point. I don't think the NCAA wants the flak that is going to come with that.

kman23

April 17th, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^

I completely disagree with your take on the eye black messaging. First, I don't think universities like it. Schools can't control what the players write (the coach might but not the school) and as a school I wouldn't want a player to write something that might embarrass the school. While area codes were cool at first it is now not original and boring. I also really hated the constant religious messages. As someone who is religious I found it disgusting that Tebow constantly tried to use football to recruit people to his faith. If you want to recruit people to Jesus do it on your own time, not during a game.

Team logos in the eye black are cool but I still think they are allowed, just not messages.

If a player on a team dies or a family member is sick, is the NCAA really going to not allow the player to write something in their eye black? It's not a penalty right? Players are "just not allowed to". I want to see the NCAA stop a player from "honoring" a friend who has died.

Gustavo Fring

April 17th, 2010 at 9:42 PM ^

And Roger Goodell and all these no-talent ass clowns who are trying to ruin the fun.

Are some celebrations classless? Yes.

But now you are letting this severely impact the outcome of a game. This is ridiculous.

If the NFL is the no fun league, the NCAA are the Anti-Fun Nazis

MCalibur

April 18th, 2010 at 1:32 AM ^

First, the NCAA is taking a subjective call and amplifying its effect by eleventy gagillion percent. Can you imagine if Roundtree's play vs. Illinois last year had been negated by this rule instead of his speed? We'd want to tar and feather that ref and then distribute pictures of the event on the internet.

The second problem I have is that neither taunting nor excessive celebration should be a spot foul. Face masking or holding prevents a defender from stopping the player with the ball. If the foul had not occurred, the defender may have stopped the ball carrier. That is a Spot foul.

Celebrating/Taunting does the opposite; the defender would have an easier time making the play if he were in position to make one, which he is not, which is why his precious little ego might be bruised. That's not a spot foul; it might not even be a foul at all, but let's say that it is indeed unsportsmanlike. This is not a matter of fairness. It's not even a matter of safety. It is a matter of of taste/conduct. That's a dead ball foul and the result of the play should stand.

[EDIT: didn't realize Misopogon was already all over these points. I could have just written co-signed under that post. Oh well.]