Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Right.

There are no rules stopping a team from playing the first 58 minutes the way they might play the last 2 during a comeback.  Nothing more than a longstanding convention to play more conservatively, early.  But why?

And the spread of the HUNH is showing that more coaches are willing to play "riskier" football earlier in the game, anyway.

I mean, the HUNH is the 2-minute offense all game.

I know CFB already has some OOB clock rules that are tied to the end of half stuff. Expand those.

it's fine if you want to shorten the game and run fewer plays

I guess I am missing something.  What's wrong with the clock running after an incomplete pass?  I mean,  If it's OK for the clock to run after a running play or a completed pass, why shouldn't it keep running after an incomplete pass?

Basic structure of the game as it is and has been constructed?

I wonder if the original intent of the rule, was to give the refs more time to retrieve and set the ball, since an incomplete pass is often further away from where the two squads end a play, compared to a running play or even a completed pass?  And, now that they have multiple balls they can sub in from the sidelines, it's a bit antiquated?

Beyond that, I agree with LittlePig-- it's always seemed arbitrary to me that an incomplete pass stops the clock.  I understand that changing the rule and making it consistent across all types of plays could dramatically change the way games are played, especially in the final minutes of a half.  But... so what?

In general I'm in favor of consistency in the rules, and against arbitrary carve-outs that are meaningless with respect to the regular sporting intent of the on-field play.

Right,  if you can't stop the clock in the last 2 minutes, it just means you better start running your 2-minute offense a little sooner.

With that said,  I would not mind this change.  I would get rid of all timeouts and have a rule that says the clock stops after every play in the last minute only.  This would be true regardless of whether the offense is ahead or behind.  If the offense is ahead, they can not simply kneel down to end the game.  If the offense is behind, they will have a chance to score without needing to call time-outs or get out of bounds.

Just as I don't see why a clock rule should be different for an incomplete pass compared to a running play, I also don't see any reason to change a clock rule for the final minute of the game.  If the rule was appropriate for the first 59 minutes, it is appropriate for the final minute.

The rulebook needs to be smaller, not larger.  Make them all consistent.  Make them the same for every type of play, and at every point in the game.

I wonder if the original intent of the rule, was to give the refs more time to retrieve and set the ball, since an incomplete pass is often further away from where the two squads end a play, compared to a running play or even a completed pass?  And, now that they have multiple balls they can sub in from the sidelines, it's a bit antiquated?

Beyond that, I agree with LittlePig-- it's always seemed arbitrary to me that an incomplete pass stops the clock.  I understand that changing the rule and making it consistent across all types of plays could dramatically change the way games are played, especially in the final minutes of a half.  But... so what?

In general I'm in favor of consistency in the rules, and against arbitrary carve-outs that are meaningless with respect to the regular sporting intent of the on-field play.

I think that probably was the original intent of the rule, but I think it’s still valid.  How often do you see a QB zip a pass over a guy’s head over the middle and it goes skipping 20-30 yards downfield?  I get that there is a ball boy ready with a new ball but someone still has to retrieve the ball that might end up 50 yards past the LOS.  You can’t just leave it in the middle of the field.  It just seems weird to punish the offense with a ticking clock while a 60 year old with a pot belly slow jogs to get the ball.

Idk. I don’t worry about the length of games as much as some others do I guess.  I usually reserve my dinners with world leaders during the week so I can watch the games I want to on Saturday. 😁

Who is complaining about the length of football games in the first place??  Aside from the 7-overtime goofball games, I have literally never even considered a game being too long. 

Same.  Years ago I watched an interview with John Madden and the reporter asked him about the length of games.  He said he had never watched a really great football game and afterwards said, “Holy shit, that took forever!”  That’s always sort have been my take on it.

If I’m watching a game on a Saturday it’s usually my main priority that day anyway. I’m not checking my watch if it goes past the 3 hour mark.

3 TOs is fine

one being a 30 sec TO

it's the zebras with replay and the TV commercials that are too long