The clock keeps ticking

There’s been no better place to keep up with the effect of the new clock rules on the college game this year than at The Wizard of Odds.  So here’s what we learn with this week’s post on the subject:

… Although 13 minutes have been shaved from the length of the average game,9.06 plays have been lost, according to data compiled by Marty Couvillion of

… Given the lack of protest from the rest of the coaching fraternity, there is a strong possibility that the 40/25 rules could be here to stay. That would swing open the doors for more commercialization and the likelihood that in two or three years the length of games will once again be pushing the 3:20 mark.

Take notice of what’s happening. Long commercial breaks often suck the energy out of the stadium. For fans sitting at home, commercials are now being inserted after kickoffs, following the NFL blueprint.

Depressing stuff.

What I’ve noticed so far is that the 40-second clock hasn’t impacted the game nearly as much as the new rule on out of bounds plays has.  That’s been palpable, and something I noticed as early as this year’s G-Day game.  The ‘Bama game brought home that it’s nearly impossible to mount a comeback from a severe first half deficit, which by definition makes the college game more boring.

Two or three years from now I’ll be curious to see if the new clock rules have any effect on the game’s popularity.


Filed under The Blogosphere, The NCAA

5 responses to “The clock keeps ticking

  1. Robert

    This is what I don’t like about the new rules as well Senator.

    I don’t mind the 40-second play clock at all…

    But, running the ball out of bounds to stop the clock has always been a crucial part of late-game comebacks in the NCAA. Only having the old rule inside of two minutes is just lame…

    It’s a shame that that was one of the casualties of the rules adjustments.

    I hope that will be re-visited after the season ends.


  2. Munson's_call

    I can’t stand the new out of bounds clock rules either. I don’t want the game shortened when I wait all week to see my favorite team play or for the “big match up ” of the week. I am watching something I like! Why would I want an enjoyable experience shortened? I would rather watch 3 1/2 to 4 hours of a football game over only 3 hours. Granted, I want the extra time to be football more so than TV commercials.

    If it is more ad time they are after I would much prefer to see more on screen graphics with ads than shortening the time of play to squeeze in more commercial breaks. Showing me less football makes me have negative feelings towards the sponsors and less interested in watching their ads. I often start watching games late now using my DVR just so I can fast forward through the commercial breaks anyway.


  3. HVL Dawg

    I’m still trying to figure out who, besides TV executives, decided the game was too long? I mean I understand that making TV happy provides buckets of money, but how much money is enough? Do we have enough? Did we ten, twenty or thirty years ago? There will NEVER be ENOUGH money.

    C’mon Damon. The clock rules are messing up some games. Stick up for the fans! You’ve got the power.


  4. tidefanintn

    As a Bama fan, I enjoyed seeing Vandy beat Auburn, but I was still nauseated to see two minutes still on the clock and Vandy able to go into the Victory formation. That absolutely kills the intensity of what was otherwise a closely-contested game.


  5. I agree with Robert’s comment above. Beginning the clock after out of bounds is ridiculous.

    I told my husband that it seemed like we had no chance to come back against BAMA. He explained the clock rule change to me. I now hate it too.

    He mentioned that we never would have come back against Pur-don’t in the 2000 Outback Bowl with the new clock rules (were down 25 pts at half).

    Just as long as they dont curb my tailgating…. 😉