Two-Minute Warning in College Football?

Nebfanatic said:
Absolutely hate it with a passion. Would be a terrible change.
Click to expand...


Bigger clock  :laughpound .

Seriously, I hate NFL PI penalty.  Though I like extra point .....15 yards kicker instead of 3 yards.  More challenging.  How about XFL extra point ??

XFL-tiered-extra-point-rule-300x187.jpg


 
teachercd said:
Anything that makes the game last longer is good for fans.

75% of us watch the games as entertainment and with friends.  I want that to last longer, not shorter.  There is a huge difference from a 3 hour game and a game that goes over 3:30.

It is one more beer, 5 more stories, more memories, more fun.  
Click to expand...
30 minutes more of getting out of what the wife actually wants you to be doing. 

 
admo said:
A two-minute warning should not be the focus if college football is trying to be more like the NFL.  It only benefits a financial decision.

Hey if you want to be taken seriously about the bridge gap, why not look at hash marks?  Why the 10 feet difference?

Why not NFL overtime rules?

Why not NFL play clock rules?

Why not have a legal reception with 2 feet in bounds?

Why not have speakers in QBs heads to call plays like the NFL does?

Why not make extra point kicks 33 yards?

I mean, a 2 minute warning is nice but that just means a TV break.  It always gets cut to a sponsored commercial. 
Click to expand...
I don't know if "focus" is necessarily the right word. I wager a lot of these things are probably already being looked at (or have been looked at) but some are more complicated than others to analyze and implement.

For example, you mention overtime rules. IMO that's a far more controversial topic in comparison to whether or not there's a 2-min. warning because there are a lot of strong opinions as to which one is better, and 'better' is wildly subjective depending on what someone values.

 
Enhance said:
I don't know if "focus" is necessarily the right word. I wager a lot of these things are probably already being looked at (or have been looked at) but some are more complicated than others to analyze and implement.

For example, you mention overtime rules. IMO that's a far more controversial topic in comparison to whether or not there's a 2-min. warning because there are a lot of strong opinions as to which one is better, and 'better' is wildly subjective depending on what someone values.
Click to expand...
I was just a C student, so bare with me.  If college football is communicating an idea.... to incorporate an NFL rule, to help eliminate commercials during the earlier part of the game by adding a 2-minute warning rule??  That doesn't make sense to me. And it is not going to help the game and everybody knows it. 

All it will do is provide more television commercials at the end of the game.  The 2 minute warning is an automatic Television break.

By the way, I provided 6 different NFL rules that could benefit college football.  Unfortunately, those rules would not benefit TV breaks, TV sponsors and TV advertisements.  

All a 2-minute warning does is give viewers another commercial break, so they can grab nachos or call their grandma.   

The game changing ideas I provided are basic NFL rules that would help the college football game, college players and their future.  But those rules will not ultimately and financially help Ted the TV executive, Home Depot, Lilly at ATT,  or T-Mobile and Verizon, State Farm or Liberty Biberty.  Which is exactly why the idea of a 2-minute warning is being mentioned for college football. 

No wonder the idea isn't being floated around for "2 feet in bounds" for a reception.  Because there is no money involved in that.  Further kicks placed back on extra point tries?  No money.  How about a spot foul on pass interference like the NFL does?  No money.  I hope people understand the underlining thinking by now.  Changes typically comes down to money more often than not.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The clock stops to move the chains on every first down, 2 minute warning isn't needed.  Just like the 2 pt conversion quit being needed when CFB opted for OT.  Now teams are forced to go for 2 in extended OT's to avoid 7 OT periods.  Short sighted, reactionary rules drive the world...

 
floridacorn said:
The clock stops to move the chains on every first down, 2 minute warning isn't needed.  Just like the 2 pt conversion quit being needed when CFB opted for OT.  Now teams are forced to go for 2 in extended OT's to avoid 7 OT periods.  Short sighted, reactionary rules drive the world...
Click to expand...


So, since the clock no longer stops on first downs, the two minute warning is needed.   :confucius

 
admo said:
I was just a C student, so bare with me.  If college football is communicating an idea.... to incorporate an NFL rule, to help eliminate commercials during the earlier part of the game by adding a 2-minute warning rule??  That doesn't make sense to me. And it is not going to help the game and everybody knows it. 

All it will do is provide more television commercials at the end of the game.  The 2 minute warning is an automatic Television break.

By the way, I provided 6 different NFL rules that could benefit college football.  Unfortunately, those rules would not benefit TV breaks, TV sponsors and TV advertisements.  

All a 2-minute warning does is give viewers another commercial break, so they can grab nachos or call their grandma.   

The game changing ideas I provided are basic NFL rules that would help the college football game, college players and their future.  But those rules will not ultimately and financially help Ted the TV executive, Home Depot, Lilly at ATT,  or T-Mobile and Verizon, State Farm or Liberty Biberty.  Which is exactly why the idea of a 2-minute warning is being mentioned for college football. 

No wonder the idea isn't being floated around for "2 feet in bounds" for a reception.  Because there is no money involved in that.  Further kicks placed back on extra point tries?  No money.  How about a spot foul on pass interference like the NFL does?  No money.  I hope people understand the underlining thinking by now.  Changes typically comes down to money more often than not.  
Click to expand...
For what it's worth, I don't fully disagree with your perspective on the matter. I just think a 2-min. warning is a low-hanging fruit change, which is perhaps partially to explain why it's getting talked about vs. changing something major like the overtime rules. Obviously there are financial angles to everything.

That said, CFB implemented three new rules in 2023, none of which scream 'we did this for the money,' at least not to me:
1) Running clock after first downs (except for in last 2 min. of half) - early data showed this resulted in 5+ fewer players per game and shortened the average game by 5 min.

2) No more back-to-back timeouts

3) No quarter extensions on defensive penalties

Money obviously talks but college football also loves its tradition. I don't know if their goal is to be "more like the NFL" but I don't think they're necessarily adverse to making changes they feel are better for the game even if there isn't an abundantly clear financial angle to it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top