Tweet
Ramifications of rule changes in NCAA Football
written August 28, 2006
New rule changes in NCAA football figure to depress scoring. However, there are broader ramifications for fans and bettors.
Effective this year, the clock will start when an official marks the ball ready for play. Previously, the clock didn't start before the snap. Also, the clock starts on a kickoff when the ball is kicked, rather than when it touches the hands of a receiver.
These rules are being implemented to compress games into a smaller temporal window. The games were growing increasingly longer as more games were televised - dictating more commercial breaks - and as more teams embraced modes of attack that translated into more frequent clock stoppages.
No one seems quite certain how many plays will be "lost" as a consequence of these rule revisions. Estimates range from 10 to 20, with most estimates tending toward the lower end of this spectrum.
According to Dave Malinsky, the average number of snaps in an NCAA game last year (both teams combined) was 135. The tally omits punts and field goal attempts.
An average of one point was scored for every 2.6 snaps. Hence, taking 12 snaps out of the mix figures to depress scoring by approximately four-and-a-half points per game.
Knowing this fact, the knee-jerk reaction is to lean toward the "under" in early season games. Oddsmakers tend to be reactive, rather than proactive. However, there are other ramifications that aren't so obvious.
Perhaps we should also be leaning toward the underdog in games with a high tariff. At last glance, Texas was favored by 41 points over North Texas. Disregarding the fact that NTSU is a notoriously bad underdog in this price range, shouldn't the number be "37"?
Teams with hurry-up offenses like Texas Tech are already habituated to working with a "short clock." These teams seemingly have an advantage -- at least early in the season if the opponent is wed to a more traditional mode of attack.
With these rule changes, a team theoretically has a lower probability of overcoming a big deficit and pulling a game out of the fire. There are obvious ramifications here with respect to in-game betting.
No team forged a more improbable comeback last year than Ball State. Trailing 25-7 on the road at Eastern Michigan, the Cardinals scored 19 unanswered points in the final 7:30 to salvage some glory from a disappointing season.
Ball State coach Brady Hoke concedes that his team would have been incapable of mounting a comeback of this magnitude if the new rules had been put into play last season. In common with many of his colleagues, Hoke is opposed to these rule changes. Games with less drama are inherently less fan-friendly.
Perhaps it was this understanding that prompted the NCAA to reduce the length of kicking tees from two inches to one inch. This revision is designed to bring more excitement into the game by diminishing the frequency of touchbacks.
This may enhance scoring, negating the impact of fewer snaps. We doubt that the premier kick return specialists will get more touches, but if the ball doesn't travel as high or as far, smart strategy will dictate more pooch kicks. Either way, it figures that relatively more offensive drives will begin closer to midfield than the 20-yard line.
All of this is food for thought as we set about preparing for another season of college football. I don't pretend to know all the ramifications of these rule changes, but I know that they will have some impact and I'd like to be ahead of the curve. I'll be back in a jiff with some forecasts of upcoming games.
written August 28, 2006
New rule changes in NCAA football figure to depress scoring. However, there are broader ramifications for fans and bettors.
Effective this year, the clock will start when an official marks the ball ready for play. Previously, the clock didn't start before the snap. Also, the clock starts on a kickoff when the ball is kicked, rather than when it touches the hands of a receiver.
These rules are being implemented to compress games into a smaller temporal window. The games were growing increasingly longer as more games were televised - dictating more commercial breaks - and as more teams embraced modes of attack that translated into more frequent clock stoppages.
No one seems quite certain how many plays will be "lost" as a consequence of these rule revisions. Estimates range from 10 to 20, with most estimates tending toward the lower end of this spectrum.
According to Dave Malinsky, the average number of snaps in an NCAA game last year (both teams combined) was 135. The tally omits punts and field goal attempts.
An average of one point was scored for every 2.6 snaps. Hence, taking 12 snaps out of the mix figures to depress scoring by approximately four-and-a-half points per game.
Knowing this fact, the knee-jerk reaction is to lean toward the "under" in early season games. Oddsmakers tend to be reactive, rather than proactive. However, there are other ramifications that aren't so obvious.
Perhaps we should also be leaning toward the underdog in games with a high tariff. At last glance, Texas was favored by 41 points over North Texas. Disregarding the fact that NTSU is a notoriously bad underdog in this price range, shouldn't the number be "37"?
Teams with hurry-up offenses like Texas Tech are already habituated to working with a "short clock." These teams seemingly have an advantage -- at least early in the season if the opponent is wed to a more traditional mode of attack.
With these rule changes, a team theoretically has a lower probability of overcoming a big deficit and pulling a game out of the fire. There are obvious ramifications here with respect to in-game betting.
No team forged a more improbable comeback last year than Ball State. Trailing 25-7 on the road at Eastern Michigan, the Cardinals scored 19 unanswered points in the final 7:30 to salvage some glory from a disappointing season.
Ball State coach Brady Hoke concedes that his team would have been incapable of mounting a comeback of this magnitude if the new rules had been put into play last season. In common with many of his colleagues, Hoke is opposed to these rule changes. Games with less drama are inherently less fan-friendly.
Perhaps it was this understanding that prompted the NCAA to reduce the length of kicking tees from two inches to one inch. This revision is designed to bring more excitement into the game by diminishing the frequency of touchbacks.
This may enhance scoring, negating the impact of fewer snaps. We doubt that the premier kick return specialists will get more touches, but if the ball doesn't travel as high or as far, smart strategy will dictate more pooch kicks. Either way, it figures that relatively more offensive drives will begin closer to midfield than the 20-yard line.
All of this is food for thought as we set about preparing for another season of college football. I don't pretend to know all the ramifications of these rule changes, but I know that they will have some impact and I'd like to be ahead of the curve. I'll be back in a jiff with some forecasts of upcoming games.
Comment