Celebrate Good Times – Just Not at the Goal Line
While the last few years have brought some new rules to college football, coaches are considering some real game altering changes for the 2009. Here’s a look at what will be coming up for review to college football coaches across the nation when The NCAA football rules committee meets next.
Taunting
Jake Locker: On NoticeThe rule that sparked this article would call for taunting to be considered a live ball foul, instead of a dead ball foul. This means if a player was flagged for taunting on his way into the end zone or when he gets in, the points will be taken off the scoreboard and the offending team will be penalized 15 yards from the spot of the foul. The current rule leaves the score as is and tacks on 15 yards to the PAT. Committee chairman and University of Oregon coach, Mike Bellotti, seems to think this would benefit the college game, but The Vest disagrees. When asked about the potential for the new rule, JT answered:
“I believe the current rule is satisfactory.It is our job as coaches to make sure our guys perform appropriately, not the officials”.
Very Tressel-esque answer to say the least, but I assume most coaches will give similar responses. Bellotti says the rule may take a couple of years to perfect, in order to get all conferences on the same page, but this rule could be tough to pass without the support of big time coaches like Tressel.
I think instituting this rule would be absolutely ridiculous. Games could be decided on calls like these and then the referees judgments of what is or is not taunting would come into question. If the Buckeyes MNC dreams were shattered because Terrelle Pryor was talking a little smack on his way into the endzone in Ann Arbor next year, we would be going bonkers. The penalty for such rules like taunting and excessive celebration as is seem to be good enough, and I don’t think the coaches will change this rule any time soon.
Punter Safety
Despite what the header may suggest, the next rule to be considered for this year, regards a lack of safety for the punter. This new rule, if voted in, would state that the punter can be hit if he leaves the kicking zone before punting. Defenses would still not be able to hit the punter if he has already kicked the ball, but this new rule gives attempting blockers a little more leeway in terms of how aggressive they are able to be. Currently many punters roll out to either side before they kick the ball, as OSU witnessed in Glendale, and this proposed rule would allow those players to be hit.
I favor this rule if it is passed for one sole reason: I hate rugby style punters. If you watch these guys play against your team, you sit there the entire game worrying that there is going to be a fake punt every time your team forces its opponents to boot. By rolling out, the punter has the option to kick the ball, run it, or pass it, enabling very creative fake punt options. It is only right that if the opposing team is able to fake you out the whole game, that you are now allowed to go after them as if they were running or passing the ball. Let’s hope this rule gets in and Brian Rolle gets to put a licking on some punter that tries to sneak one on the Bucks.
Visiting Jerseys
Old traditions forging new rulesThe final proposed rule change may have been inspired by the USC-UCLA game during the last week of the season. In that game, Pete Carroll (and later Rick Neuheisel) gave up a time out so that the visiting Trojans could wear their red jerseys against rival UCLA in their blue jerseys. It used to be a tradition when the teams shared the Coliseum that they would both wear colors, and Pete and Rick decided that bringing back this ritual was worth a time out in the first half. So after my little history story, the new proposed rule is that visiting teams could wear a jersey color other than white pending conference approval and with the stipulation that it must be distinctly different from the home team’s color. This rule does not seem to be a big deal and could also be in effect this year.
While this rule will go down as the USC Rule, which definitely bothers me, I think it is a good one. How cool would it be to see Michigan and OSU go at it in Scarlet and Blue or Florida and Georgia to go at it in Blue and Black? Although I do enjoy going into Ann Arbor and stomping on them in the whites, it would be kind of cool to see the colors flying come the last week in November. I don’t see this rule as a big deal, as long as the colors don’t clash and they won’t considering it must get conference approval.
Which rules do you guys think should pass the vote and which do you think should be left out? Do you have a problem with Pete Carroll solely dictating the proposal of a rule? Would you want to see the Wolverines and the Buckeyes square off in home jerseys?
New Taunting Penalty – No
Punter Safety – Yes, they wear a helmet and pads they should be able to get jacked up too
Visiting Jersey – Yes , IMO I dont think the big ten will go for it but I do agree with watching Ohio State/Michigan in dark jersey’s wiould be cool
current taunting pen. is 15 yards on either the PAT (ala jake locker) OR the kick (the fact that it can go on the kick is the classless “U” doing outrageous stunts after the game was no longer in doubt). either way
taunting – no way
punter – yes
visiting jersey – 100% yes.
I don’t want see the new taunting rule either. Had that rule been put in place for the 2005 season, Santonio Holmes’ TD would have been nullified b/c he clearly taunted before scoring on ND Safety Tom Zibokowski in the 2006 Fiesta Bowl.
i still say that wasn’t a taunting dive…
against michigan i mean
Against Michigan, it wasn’t. Against ND, it clearly was.
Can we just do away with taunting and excessive celebration rules? The only people who get their feelings hurt are bitter fans. Most college football players are smart enough to realize it’s no big deal.
Especially celebration. Kids are kids. Let them have fun. Taunting I can at least see justifications for limiting.
And another thing, stemming from way too much NFL: stop pussyfooting around the quarterback. I’m related to two different guys who played CFB at the D-1 level (FCS, though), both quarterbacks, and both think the roughing penalties have gone way too far. One doesn’t think a flag should be thrown unless the quarterback is actually tackled. I don’t go that far. QBs wear pads. Most also wear flak jackets and other protective gear. They can take a hit.
Also, TL;DR: The NFL isn’t nearly as fun to watch because of the crackdown on touchdown celebrations and quarterback penalties. Don’t turn college football into the No Fun League too.
I’m fine with there being some penalty for excessive celebration, but only dead ball, and only if it’s *really* bad.
Guy throwing his hands in the air when he scores, or pointing, who cares? Guy starts trying to imitate MC Hammer in the end zone, that I don’t need to see.
Eh. Fat dudes dancing poorly and football are like peas in a pod.
if the jersey rule gets approved, look out. it wont just be usc – ucla wearing their traditional jerseys against eachother. some of the lesser teams in america are going to come out with nonsense awful jerseys to wear on their meaningless thursday night games, and you better believe that oregon is going to come out with something resembling a glow worm having diareha all over a football jersey.
i know, im being a bit dramatic. but you give someone an inch, they will most likely take a mile.
…..If the Buckeyes MNC dreams were shattered because Terrelle Pryor was talking a little smack on his way into the endzone in Ann Arbor next year……..
I think that’s the point of the rule, to get people to stop taunting as they go into the endzone. The only buckeyes in my memory banks to do this are Holmes, and Boston. While I think they should focus on different things, and this is a dumb change, Tressel would get his guys under control, and we would never see the Georgia dancing in the endzone after a TD again. More players need to flip the ball to the ref like they’ve been there before instead of dancing around like idiots. I seem to be the only one who thinks like Speilman.
No you aren’t, I completely agree with you and Chris Spielman.
Yeah, I really don’t like taunting and overt the top celebration (Georgia dancing in the endzone) When the celebration turns to rubbing it in, it becomes classes and arrogant. However, the rule change would be ridiculous. Changing field position is one thing, but taking points off the board for a foul that really does not attribute to the play of the game would be pure controversy.
Beanie is also guilty of a taunting/celebrating. Remember that little hop into the endzone? If the new rules stick that would have been called. And while Tress does have his players under control who couldn’t see Ray Small doing something dumb post TD and costing us. I think the rule is fine now, but would be up for a change to penalize something as ridiculous as what Georgia did.
I agree in theory. David Boston backpedaling and the like is nothing more than lack of class, and deserves whatever it gets.
Problem is, I don’t trust them to call it right. I’d rather pass on the two (and a half – beanie) theoretical fair calls we can remember than have even one score called back due to a ticky-tack stupid flag.
Also, it’s ironic nobody is bringing up any opponents taunting us, just embarrassment about stunts our own guys have pulled. I know UM has taunted us, but I really can’t remember a specific play. That in itself says it’s an unnecessary rule.
Charles Woodson, 1991 — Heisman pose
Under the proposed rule that would get about a bazzilione flags. Question is where do you mark it? At the 15 or at like the nine since it happaned about six-yards deep into the end zone.
That’s my main complaint with this penalty — it could ruin classic CFB moments. I hate the Woodson TD, but it is a defining moment in the OSU-UM rivalry. Also, what about Ian Johnson tossing the football into the crowd and then proposing to his girlfriend after the ‘07 Fiesta. All of a sudden Boise St. is flagged and that moment is lost for fans forever.
Desmond Howard. I fucking hate him forever for that.
um you mean d. howard, right?
Ever since I was a little kid I’ve always wanted to see an OSU-UM game where both schools wear their dark jerseys. Let’s make it happen, folks.
We might as well wear Scarlet in the the Big (Out)House. It’s like a home game for us anymore anyway.
the Jersey rule is great… that should not even be an issue.
As for the celebration rule, Belloti and others just want to level the playing field and give their teams a chance to beat the big boyz. If you can’t win on the field, then create rules that help you win. WTF??? are you kidding me…. can you imagine a bowl game where OSU plays Oregon and Pryor runs in for the winning TD with a few seconds left on the clock only to have it taken away because he pointed up to heaven and hugged his teammates??? American society had dumbed everything down to the lowest common denominator and now Belloti and his crew are tying to steal an advantage for the little guy. I say screw that, and screw him. Keep the 15 yards, because a score is a score and if your guys can’t stop it…. too damn bad!!!
Live ball celebration penalty – No. I disagree with poguemahone because I think the celebration penalties are generally a good thing. If we didn’t have those, you would see all kinds of Chad Johnson style shenanigans every time someone scored, and it would quickly get out of hound. The penalties on Holmes a couple years ago were silly, but in general I think it’s a good rule.
Punter safety rule – Yes. Agree with you on all counts. If that S.O.B. rolls out to punt, let him get plastered.
Jersey rule – I guess I’m the only one here who likes the old rule. While I think we can grant USC and UCLA an exception, in general I like the idea that the visiting team has to wear white. It keeps things simple.
The proposed celebration rule is foolish; it will probably have a perverse effect. Referees don’t WANT to make calls that decide games (witness the ref’s hesitation at the end of the OSU-Miami Fiesta Bowl), and so they may be less willing to call celebration penalties knowing that they’ll be taking points off the board.
Whether the ref calls it or not, fans on one side will feel cheated: taking away points is obviously too draconian, but if the ref doesn’t do it, the other team will feel that the points were scored in violation of the rules.
The real issue behind the taunting rule would be if it was a last second touchdown to win or tie. Lets say, for instance, your team throws a long pass complete to a wideout who marches untouched into the endzone to win the game. If he taunts (and this rule is in effect) and the clock has run out, the game is over and your team loses because the game can end on an offensive penalty.
I understand that we’re trying to keep kids from taunting here by making the penalties more serious, but we should DEFINITELY be keeping the refs from having the power to decide games based on judgment calls. If this rule passes I guarantee you’re going to see a game decided because some ref calls a little taunting in the way the player’s legs were moving as he crossed into the endzone.
Hell, we’ve already seen something like this in the BYU-Washington game this year, and we want to make it worse? Totally ridiculous.
Just to clarify, I’m against the live-ball celebration or taunting penalty. Keep the rule as it is.
College football rules are getting out of HOUND! Why are we losing focus on the game? Jersey’s, taunting & not being able to hit players that are fully padded? I say let USC become the next “oregon”, let ‘em wear whatever they want (if the opposing team has no problem with it), or any team at that matter! As far as the taunting rule, what happend to playing with class (J.T. said it best), act like you’ve been there (it just looks better)! Punters that “roll out” should be free game, why not? Really, what is the problem with that, their safe in the “box” area? Out of HOUND, I tell ya!
Does anyone really ever have trouble telling who the visiting team is? I think where uniforms are similar (a la Texas Tech playing Cincinnati in all blacks, perhaps – could happen) the coaches just need to talk before the game to figure out who’s wearing white (home team would decide most of the time, I’d think – neutral sites they’d have to talk); how often is this really an issue, though?
The celebration rule will be a disaster. The refs already have too much influence on the game and this will only make it worse. I don’t like all that clowning around – I’m too old school, I guess – but the way the rule is written and enforced is fine.
I like the change with the punter. The jersey change is fine too. Let the teams/coaches decide what they want to wear. I don’t like the celebration rule, but if they do change it the players will have to celebrate after the PAT.
Good article. I don’t see that much taunting as players go into the endzone as it stands right now, so it seems the rule change is out of left field, or at least 10 years late.
Like the kicker rule change. If they’re going out there to act as an kicker/option-QB, then they should be subject to a defensive play on the ball carrier.
Jerseys. I couldn’t believe there was actually a rule written down forbidding two schools from wearing their home jerseys to the same game, so far as to institute a well-defined penalty if a violation occurs (the forfeited timeout). Someone had too much time and too much power when they sat down with that one. Ohio State and Michigan won’t be switching to wearing both home jerseys, but if USC and UCLA want to, then why shouldn’t they be allowed?
Next, your team will have to actually apologize for beating the shit out of the opposing team.
Can you imagine losing a game because the kicker jumped into the holders arms during the celebration?? Or your wide receiver holding up the Number 1 as he runs into the endzone. This is the most ridiculous proposed rule change ever and who ever brought it up should be shot.
Dear scUM-
I am truly sorry that you had to be a part of last Saturdays 42-7 demolition of your inferior team. On behalf of the entire Buckeye squad, I would like to extended my deepest aplogies to you and your team full of scUm’s. Good luck next year, as we come into your Big (Out)House and make it 6 in a row. Maybe Barwis should get them running wind sprints until vomitting occurs just so that I will not be forced to write this letter next year, again, for the 6th time.
Love,
Jimmy Tressel
I can’t believe – unless I somehow missed it – that they’re not reviewing the helmet to helmet contact rule! WTF?! Part way through the season I decided that it needs to become a reviewable play – sometimes you’ll have a guy make a great should tackle and then get penalized 15, other times a guy will get knock out cold after a hat on hat hit and there won’t be any call… it’s incredibly dangerous, horribly inconsistent, and sometimes downright dirty. There are surely multiple solutions to this problem, but by making such a play reviewable I don’t think you’d see as many guys recklessly flying into other guys head first.
That’s a great point, Kurt. Remember those hits during the Wisconsin-Minnesota game at the end of the year? One of the Minnesota guys had a chunk the size of the M missing from his helmet after one particular hit! It got ridiculous.
Right, and they’re discussing uniform colors and taunting punters… who do I need to call at the NCAA!?
Stop it, just stop it with the celebration rules. This is about old guys wanting to have control over what the young guys do on the field. This gets fought in every generation, haircuts in the ’60’s baggy pants in the ’90’s etc….They need to abolish the rule and only call true unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, like waving the ball in the opponents face after a touchdown, or having the whole team come down from the bench a la Georgia/Florida. A guy leaping into the end zone, turning around and going into the end zone backwards needs to be handled by the coach, not change the outcome of a game. This rule will be a disaster and honestly could create a potential dangerous situation if it overturns a touchdown at the end of the game. Soccer style riots anyone…I don’t want them in College Football.
I think changing the celebration rule borders on insane. How do you ask guys to play with passion, demand it really, and then penalize them when they are unable–in the heat of battle–to rein it in??? Why would anyone want a game decided on adrenaline and not ability? Who cares about taunting. When did this sport get so touchy-feely? Is this not a MAN’S game???????????
…makes since to implement the jersey role though if they take Belloti’s recommendation–everyone will need a pink one.