Clock Rule Change?

Submitted by bigmc6000 on October 5th, 2009 at 10:06 AM

So I've asked around and I can't seem to find anyone who knows anything about why the clock runs when someone runs out of bounds this year. So, do the clock operators just suck or is there some rule about when a guy runs out of bounds the clock doesn't stop? I've noticed it on multiple plays across multiple games. The guy runs out of bounds and the ref waves his arms in the air (i.e. stop the clock) and the clock keeps going and yet no one on the sideline is bitching about the clock so - what's up? I distinctly remember it happening to us at least a couple times during the MSU game.

P.S. Sorry if this is a stupid question - I tried to get an answer asking some of my friends and none of them seem to know anything about it.



October 5th, 2009 at 10:11 AM ^

They changed that rule this year. Running out of bounds is handled the same way as getting a first down. The clock stops just long enough for them to get set up, then it starts running again.

By the way, I really hate this change.

October 5th, 2009 at 10:10 AM ^

I believe the clock will restart if a player goes out of bounds after the ref has placed the ball, except in the last 2 minutes of either half.

The clock rules are improved from when it restarted after a change of possession and upon kickoffs two years ago, but there are still about 5 fewer plays per game now. It's like some corporate executive decided college football fans really wanted less comebacks and more commercials.


October 5th, 2009 at 10:21 AM ^

I thought I had heard something in the off-season and it still annoys the crap out of me. I still have yet to understand why they want the games to be shorter. The shorter the game the less time I end up watching TV (aka commercials). It seriously makes no sense to me.

You'd think the longer the game = more commercials = more potential to create revenue so, yeah, I've got nothing.


October 5th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^

I think it has to do with games running over and into other games. If you haven't noticed, we haven't missed the first 1-2 drives of the Michigan game because of another game running over its timeslot yet like it used to be.


October 5th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^

I seem to recall the goal being to partially offset the 12th game--by adding another game they create additional chance for injury, by removing some plays from each game they help return that chance closer to where it started.

I inherently don't like the idea of giving me less football per game; I especially don't like anything that makes it harder for epic comebacks--one last drive won't be too badly affected but if you need two big drives like Michigan did you're well outside the last 2 minute exception. Sending the game into overtime turned a fairly boring game (to an outsider) into an extremely exciting one; I would think that facilitating that making that more difficulty is bad for college football.


October 5th, 2009 at 10:26 AM ^

I was wondering the same thing and I actually keep up with rule changes (remember the Wisky game (06?) with the kickoffs outta bounds/clock running? I knew about that one) but didn't know about this rule change. Thanks.