The AJC's headline writers are really getting on my nerves. The headling for Tony Barnhart's article about the proposed rules changes in football is NCAA extends play clock. No, the NCAA did not extend the play clock. There is a proposition to extend the play clock, but it has not yet been extended. Do these people read the articles they write headlines for?
I haven't fully digested all of these changes, and I'm not sure it's worth worrying about until they get voted on anyway. But, to me the ones that stand out the most are being able to take the ball at the 40 if the kickoff goes out of bounds, and the removal of the five yard face mask. Under the proposed new rules, if a facemask infraction is what we used to call incidental there will be no flag thrown. No harm no foul?
My concern about removing the incidental face mask rule is that players will have an even greater incentive to try to get away with a full contact facemask. Why not see how far you can go. If you're gonna give 15, might as well get something out of it.
ReplyDeleteThat kind of thinking wouldn't surprise me. And I'd expect to see a ot of it from TT's squad.