NCAA Football Rules Committee recommends changes for the 2012 season

[SoCal]

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2012/february/committee+recommends+several+football+rules+propos als+to+enhance+safety

Committee recommends several football rules proposals to enhance safety

By Ty Halpin
NCAA.org

The NCAA Football Rules Committee, which met Tuesday-Thursday in Charlotte, N.C., has recommended several rules proposals intended to enhance student-athlete safety for the 2012 season. Even though it is a non-rules change year as part of the two-year cycle process, these rule changes can be proposed for immediate implementation because they directly impact student-athlete safety.

“In all of our proposals, we are continuing the annual effort to find ways to make our game safer where we can,” said Scot Dapp, chair of the committee and athletics director at Moravian College. “Without question, these changes will enhance student-athlete safety and we feel very comfortable based on the data we collected that the impact will be significant.”

The proposed changes include:
•Kickoff and Touchback Starting Lines Moved. The committee voted to move the kickoff to the 35-yard line (currently set at the 30-yard line), and to require that kicking team players must be no further than five yards from the 35 at the kick, which is intended to limit the running start kicking teams have during the play. The committee also voted to move the touchback distance on free kicks to the 25-yard line instead of the 20-yard line to encourage more touchbacks. NCAA data indicates injuries during kickoffs occur more often than in other phases of the game.
•Loss of Helmet During Play. If a player loses his helmet (other than as the result of a foul by the opponent, like a facemask), it will be treated like an injury. The player must leave the game and is not allowed to participate for the next play. Current injury timeout rules guard against using this rule to gain an advantage from stopping the clock. Additionally, if a player loses his helmet, he must not continue to participate in play to protect him from injury. Data collected during the 2011 season indicated that helmets came off of players more than two times per game.
•Blocking Below the Waist. The intent of the changes made last season were to only allow blocking below the waist when the opposing player is likely to be prepared for this contact, but the opposite impact was discovered in some cases. To clarify the intent, the committee approved wording that essentially allows offensive players in the tackle box at the snap that are not in motion to block below the waist legally without restriction. All other players are restricted from blocking below the waist with a few exceptions (e.g. straight ahead blocks).
•Shield Blocking Scheme on Punting Plays. The committee reviewed several examples of shield blocking, which has become a popular blocking scheme for punting teams. In several cases, a receiving team player attempts to jump over this type of scheme in the backfield to block a punt. In some cases, these players are contacted and end up flipping in the air and landing on their head or shoulders. The committee is extremely concerned about this type of action and proposed a rule similar to the leaping rule on place kicks that does not allow the receiving team to jump over blockers, unless the player jumps straight up or between two players.
•Additional Protection to Kick Returner. Through officiating interpretation, the committee approved a recommendation to provide a kick returner additional protection to complete a catch before allowing contact by the kicking team.


All rules change recommendations must be approved by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which meets via conference call Feb. 21. The proposals will first be sent to the NCAA membership for comment.

[Collier11]

The having to miss a play cus your helmet comes off is ridiculous IMO, the rest of the rules sound fine except the new touchback at the 25 rule...I get it though. Hey, we may finally get a touchback or two per game now also, lol

[En_Fuego]

That Helmet rule is really stupid

[ouwasp]

Maybe the Sooners should petition for a rule that would allow OU to kickoff from the 50. Other teams, of course, would still have to kick from the 35.

[SicEmBaylor]

For the love of god.

[SicEmBaylor]

Pretty soon, football is going to be sissified enough that even I can play.

[EatLeadCommie]

I don't mind the helmet rule because I recall watching a few games this year where the guy lost his helmet like 2-3 plays in a row. It was ridiculous and quite obviously meant to stall the game. I do think, however, that it should pertain to defensive players and not offensive players. But are they going to penalize players if they remain in the play after losing the helmet? That seems pretty dumb.

The kickoff rule change will be good for us, for sure. However, having people line up not more than 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage is dumb. It's not like they're running any faster by the time they hit the guy after running for 45 yards versus 50.

The other dumb rule is the one pertaining to punt formations. That one just seems like they made it up out of thin air.

[MeMyself&Me]

The helmet rule is the only one I like. The rest of them either sissify the sport (most of them) or make it look more bizarre (touchback at the 25?).

[badger]

I wonder if OU asked for the helmet rule after the Texas A&M game. If you don't recall, early on in the game some big dorky d-line guy lost his helmet twice and pretended that he didn't to slow our offense down. The second time it happened, the ref grabbed the helmet, gave it to the guy and pointed at the sideline. It didn't happen again.

[oudavid1]

Helmets, they are not that hard to strap up. Fix it dude.

[FtwTxSooner]

After the Texas A&M game (who also did that in some of thier other games), I have no problem with the helmet rule.

[Curly Bill]

I too like the helmet rule, the rest of that stuff not so much.

[jkjsooner]

Through officiating interpretation, the committee approved a recommendation to provide a kick returner additional protection to complete a catch before allowing contact by the kicking team.

What exactly does this mean? Is this going to be similar to the halo rule?

The reason I ask is that the halo rules caused more dangerous situations than it prevented. Guys rarely called a fair catch and the punishment for violating the halo (at least for the first year or two) was only a 5 yard penalty. That is of course if you just violated the halo and didn't hit the guy early.

Remember the Arkansas game? We intentionally violated the halo on just about every punt and creamed the guy over and over. I think the Pigs are still upset about that.

[jkjsooner]

I don't like some of these rules because the rules are simply getting too complex. I understand why most Europeans can't get into American football. It's just one rule after another and it gets worse every year. I love our football but the fact that Rugby's rules are much simpler without compromising theh player's health can easily be used to argue it is a better game. I don't agree but if I were born in Europe I probably would hold that view as well.

I wonder if removing some padding would actually make the game safer. Many people have suggested that.

Obviously American football has some things working against it when considering safety.


Blocking isn't allowed in rugby which means fewer hits and much fewer blindside hits.
In football it's not enough to tackle a guy if he drags you for a yard or two. The game is built around collisions - stopping the guy while giving up as little ground as possible.
Players aren't exposed in rugby in the same manner that a QB is while throwing the ball or a receiver is while jumping to catch a pass.
300 lbs guys generally wouldn't have the stamina to play rugby.



One more point, if you're too much of a sissy to play football then your opinion on decisions pertaining to the health of those who do play it is meaningless.

I include myself in the first category. I grew up in a town that did not have a football team so I never played the game at a real level. I may complain about the game getting more and more complex but I have no right to say that the game is sissified.

[TUSooner]

Eliminate hard helmets and facemasks -- that is, go back to leather helmet days -- and all of these problems would disappear rapidly. (Well, they would disappear after a few of the really stupid players got totally whacked in the head because they didn't realize the difference between padded leather and high-impact plastic.) Players would also have to learn actual tackling instead of just colliding. All this will happen in approximately never.

[badger]

Eliminate hard helmets and facemasks -- that is, go back to leather helmet days -- and all of these problems would disappear rapidly. (Well, they would disappear after a few of the really stupid players got totally whacked in the head because they didn't realize the difference between padded leather and high-impact plastic.) Players would also have to learn actual tackling instead of just colliding. All this will happen in approximately never.

Eliminate seat belts and air bags -- that is, go back to the free drivin' days -- and all the reckless driving would disappear rapidly. (Well, they would disappear after a few of the really stupid drivers got totally wrecked in the head because they didn't realize the difference between slamming on the brakes with a seat belt on and high-impact on the head when they go through the windshield). Drivers would learn to be too afraid to drive, let alone just colliding. All this will happen in approximately never, thank gawd.

[TUSooner]

I don't like some of these rules because the rules are simply getting too complex. I understand why most Europeans can't get into American football. It's just one rule after another and it gets worse every year. I love our football but the fact that Rugby's rules are much simpler without compromising theh player's health can easily be used to argue it is a better game. I don't agree but if I were born in Europe I probably would hold that view as well.

I wonder if removing some padding would actually make the game safer. Many people have suggested that.

Obviously American football has some things working against it when considering safety.


Blocking isn't allowed in rugby which means fewer hits and much fewer blindside hits.
In football it's not enough to tackle a guy if he drags you for a yard or two. The game is built around collisions - stopping the guy while giving up as little ground as possible.
Players aren't exposed in rugby in the same manner that a QB is while throwing the ball or a receiver is while jumping to catch a pass.
300 lbs guys generally wouldn't have the stamina to play rugby.



One more point, if you're too much of a sissy to play football then your opinion on decisions pertaining to the health of those who do play it is meaningless.

I include myself in the first category. I grew up in a town that did not have a football team so I never played the game at a real level. I may complain about the game getting more and more complex but I have no right to say that the game is sissified.
Good post. I recommend French "Top 14" rugby on ESPN3. Despite our dim view of most things French, their Rubgy (Union) is arguably the best in the world, with lots of top international players.

[TUSooner]

Eliminate seat belts and air bags -- that is, go back to the free drivin' days -- and all the reckless driving would disappear rapidly. (Well, they would disappear after a few of the really stupid drivers got totally wrecked in the head because they didn't realize the difference between slamming on the brakes with a seat belt on and high-impact on the head when they go through the windshield). Drivers would learn to be too afraid to drive, let alone just colliding. All this will happen in approximately never, thank gawd.

Not a good analogy. In fact, a very lame one. Going back to horse & buggies days would have been a better one. But seriously, the hard football helmet is a weapon, either intentionally or not, and the facemask makes a player feel invincible. Don't take the word of a chair-jockey like me, ask Mike Ditka.

[badger]

Not a good analogy. In fact, a very lame one. Going back to horse & buggies days would have been a better one. But seriously, the hard football helmet is a weapon, either intentionally or not, and the facemask makes a player feel invincible. Don't take the word of a chair-jockey like me, ask Mike Ditka.

:P it's friday let me have some fun

[MeMyself&Me]

Kickoffs moved up and touchbacks at the 25. Might as well get rid of kickoffs and spot the ball on the 25 to begin play and after scoring. Would eliminate kickoff related injuries and net the same result.

[jkjsooner]

Eliminate seat belts and air bags -- that is, go back to the free drivin' days -- and all the reckless driving would disappear rapidly. (Well, they would disappear after a few of the really stupid drivers got totally wrecked in the head because they didn't realize the difference between slamming on the brakes with a seat belt on and high-impact on the head when they go through the windshield). Drivers would learn to be too afraid to drive, let alone just colliding. All this will happen in approximately never, thank gawd.

I don't think that's a fair analogy at all. I doubt the presence of seat belts encourages significantly more reckless driving. People don't drive with the expectation that they're going to be in a wreck. You take precautions but it is still the unexpected. When you play football you are expecting hits.

Plenty of people have argued hard helmets and facemasks contribute to the vioilent nature of collisions in football. They argue that pads are used as a weapon as much as a protection from injury.

It's similar to a boxing glove. The glove is to pretect the hitters hands. The glove is not designed to protect the person receiving the hits. Other than superficial wounds, a boxing glove probably increases the danger of brain trauma because it encourages more voilent hits.

[badger]

IT IS FRIDAY

I WAS HAVING FUN

[KantoSooner]

1. How hard is it to buckle a chin strap? After umpty million reps in high school and college, you should have worked out how to keep your helmet on. If not, you're too stupid to play football.
2. Helmet as weapon. Pad the thing on the outside as well as on the inside. You could create two layers of wrestling mat type material sandwiched around a core of very durable, yet flexible plastic (I'd suggest High Density Polyethylene or Polypropylene). You'd get superior impact dissipation and utterly eliminate use of the helmet as a weapon. a face cage could be created that would go around the entire head to eliminate the issues of anchoring a facemask to softer materials and maybe breaking loose at impact.
It wouldn't look as studly, but it would work much better.
Likewise shoulder pads.
There's fashion at work rather than actual concern for player safety.

[Curly Bill]

If it's all about safety, you guys remember the Michelin Man?

[jkjsooner]

IT IS FRIDAY

I WAS HAVING FUN

Didn't mean to pile on. I didn't see the other post or your response before adding mine. :-)

[badger]

Didn't mean to pile on. I didn't see the other post or your response before adding mine. :-)

It's cool.

[Fraggle145]

25 yards on a touchback sucks. Especially, because even with the 5 yd bump to the 35 I dont think that we have a kicker that can kick them consistently.

And even if we did, 5 extra yards for the Offense? Apparently the NCAA hates Defense.

If our guys can ever figure out how to cover on a kickoff the fact that we still cant kick it to the endzone might work in our favor.

[TUSooner]

The big picture here is that the game itself is changing, "evolving" maybe. What started as a running game, has moved more and more to a passing game. (Well, duh.) Rules changes in recent decades have favored the passing game: protecting the QB, liberalized intentional grounding rules, more liberal blocking rules for the O-line. Now the rules are starting to protect the receivers from ball and brain jarring crashes. The kick-off rules are making the kick-off obsolete. Pure brain farting here: At some point, will it be so easy to make 1st & 10 by passing that we go Canadian with 3 downs, or make it 1st & 15? Ho about kickoffs from the 50 to induce more onside kicksm, or allowing KOs to be spotted where they go out of bounds (like punts)?

The game will continue to change; the question is how? Those who want to preserve the "purity" of the game are going to have a really hard time figuring out what is "pure." I suggest that -- whatever it is -- it's not the game that 20-, 30-somethings grew up watching, which somebody instantly transplanted from 1952 might marvel or scoff at. The big change, and least likely to happen quickly, IMHO, is changing the helmet. It is well-nigh incontrovertible that the helmet as a weapon is the #1 culprit in head injuries. They may prevent cuts and bruises to the outside of the head, but they don't stop the gray matter from sloshing around in the skull. Maybe the no-crash rules will first make the hard helmet obsolete.

[StoopTroup]

Up in the recruiting Forum I was called out on not wanting Everage or TRRW type of players on defense. I felt that the NCAA was pussifying the Game. I believe these new Ruling continue to verify exactly why I am right and that we need players who have speed and can tackle and squeeze off the opportunities Offenses are getting by playing this game of Space that is currently being played.

OU and Landry laying out record numbers on Offense but having a Defense, that some felt was to complicated, that's not able to shut down the oppositions passing game shows just how much the Game has changed. It used to be important to stop the rushing Game and make the Offense pass against you....now it's probably better that they rush and burn clock. Even Nebbishka has given up on their Rushing Game compared to what they used to do.

As far as the rules about the kicking game....Why don't they just put the ball on the 20 and forget about the Kickoff? I won't have to yell "OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.....U!" on the kickoff anymore and can go back to just sitting around waiting for something to cheer about. :D ;)

[Flagstaffsooner]

NCAA Rules Committee Minutes (http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2012/2/10/2789743/minutes-of-the-ncaa-football-rules-committee-february-2012-meeting)

[swardboy]

I've got an idea: Let's go to a tip-off.

[badger]

I've got an idea: Let's go to a tip-off.

Let's do whatever the XFL used to do :P