Daily Archives: December 29, 2006

Tick Tock

Evidently, according to this LA Times article (h/t The Wizard of Odds), the NCAA is going to give a serious look at revising two rules instituted for the 2006 season: Rule 3-2-5 dictated that the clock start when the ball is free kicked and rule 3-2-5-e, the more controversial, ordered that, after a possession change, the clock would start on the officials’ ready-for-play signal.

Sounds like there may be more than a few unhappy head coaches:

“… I don’t know many coaches that are too happy with” the new rules, said Florida State Coach Bobby Bowden. “They’re trying to speed the game up. All they’re speeding up are [coaching] firings.”

At one point this year, Florida Coach Urban Meyer characterized the rule change as “awful.”

Oregon Coach Mike Bellotti told The Times, “It’s the most dramatic, drastic change I’ve seen. Nobody likes it.”

Bellotti made those comments before the season.

Texas Coach Mack Brown complained after his team’s Sept. 9 loss to No. 1 Ohio State that the new clock rules made it more difficult for a trailing team to mount a fourth-quarter comeback.

“They [the Buckeyes] scored with six minutes left and the game was over before we had a chance to do anything,” Brown said on a conference call after that game. “… I hate it.”

USC Coach Pete Carroll, who didn’t want instant replay in college football, thinks the clock rule has to be changed.

“I don’t like it,” Carroll said. “I don’t like it and I think we made a mistake here with this rule and I think we should fix it…”

Although maybe not everyone is that unhappy:

… Teaff said that, contrary to published reports, many coaches didn’t have a problem with the changes, especially defensive coaches.

“It was very interesting,” Teaff said of the survey. “The coaches were pretty well split on it.”

Ironically, I think that Georgia, which has a history under Richt of suffering through some game mismanagement issues now and then, did a fine job this year handing the new clock management rules. The Tech game was an excellent example of that. So from a selfish standpoint, I’m not on the side of those who think it’s a serious problem. But it sounds like a change is gonna come.

My only question is, if they do change the rules and the games go on longer as a result, should we expect Lincoln Financial and CBS to cut back on commercial time?

About these ads

4 Comments

Filed under College Football, The NCAA

PAC-10/SEC showdown, 2007 strength of schedule style

In light of my post from yesterday about conference strength of schedule standings, I thought it might be interesting to post a comparison of the PAC-10′s out of conference schedule for 2007 with that of the SEC. So, courtesy of NationalChamps.net, here we go.

First, the SEC:

  • Alabama: Western Carolina, Florida State, Houston, Louisiana-Monroe (for ‘Bama, that’s an upgrade over some years past)
  • Arkansas: Troy, North Texas, UT-Chattanooga, Florida International (ugh…)
  • Auburn: New Mexico State, South Florida, Tulane, [still looking]
  • Florida: UCF, Troy, Florida Atlantic, Florida State
  • Georgia: Oklahoma State, Western Carolina, Troy, Georgia Tech (mixed bag, but should be two top 25 teams there)
  • Kentucky: Eastern Kentucky, Temple, Louisville, Florida Atlantic (the Wildcats’ first four games of the year, BTW)
  • LSU: Middle Tennessee, Virginia Tech, Tulane, Louisiana Tech
  • Mississippi: Missouri, Louisiana Tech, Northwestern State, Memphis
  • Mississippi State: West Virginia is the only one announced so far (which doesn’t bode well, IMO)
  • South Carolina: Louisiana-Lafayette, South Carolina State, North Carolina, Clemson
  • Tennessee: California, Southern Miss, Northern Illinois, Louisiana-Lafayette
  • Vanderbilt: Richmond, Eastern Michigan, Kent State, Wake Forest

Now, the PAC-10:

  • Arizona: New Mexico is the only announced non-conference opponent at present
  • Arizona State: San Jose State, San Diego State, Colorado
  • California: Tennessee, Colorado State, Louisiana Tech
  • Oregon: Houston, Michigan, Fresno State
  • Oregon State: Utah is the only announced non-conference opponent at present
  • Stanford: San Jose State, TCU, Notre Dame
  • UCLA: BYU, Utah, Notre Dame (impressive)
  • USC: Idaho, Nebraska, Notre Dame
  • Washington: Syracuse, Boise State, Ohio State
  • Washington State: Wisconsin, San Diego State, Idaho

Admittedly, the results are somewhat skewed by three of the schools listed only having one non-conference opponent scheduled at present, but is there much doubt as to which conference overall has a more impressive looking non-conference schedule?

Two more questions to ponder: from those lists, which conference would you expect to go into next season with the higher strength of schedule rating? And how much of your opinion do you think is based on the SEC schools having to fill out their schedules with one more non-conference opponent than do the PAC-10 schools?

11 Comments

Filed under Pac-12 Football, SEC Football

Zen and the art of football coaching

Listen carefully to what Chan has to say about his new starting quarterback:

…But the intangibles, the way he studies the game, the way he handles himself with the team, with the offense. Those are things we know about, but we don’t know about…

Ahhh… pay attention, grasshopper. Those are things we know about, but we don’t know about. Obviously for Chan Gailey, offense is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma (you know how much I love Churchill quotes).

We can see why Georgia Tech has been an offensive powerhouse under the man who is clearly unappreciated as a philosopher of the game…

Comments Off

Filed under Georgia Tech Football