Game Length
- Thread starter nwiacyclonefant
- Start date
I am 100% against any measure that reduces the amount of game play in the interest of shortening the game. Everyone knows what is making games too long. Deal with the real issue rather than giving us less football for our time investment.
Ironically coaches are against long media breaks, not one of them realizing that those media breaks are footing the bill for their bloated salaries.
I did notice that Gundy was uncharacteristically silent...
I'm not sure why we've got the white hat looking at a monitor or even running over to a headset. They've all got mics and earpieces. Put the replay guy on the same system and lets get it moving.
Those of us watching at home pretty much know the answer based on replays long before the ref announces it. I've wondered why you can't have an official up in the box that can't look faster and make the call for the guys on the field.
We talking TVs or sex?But at home I can switch channels which is also nice.
It's going to be interesting to see how things progress. With sports being the only big, reliable money driver left for traditional ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, but also increasingly expensive, they're going to need to fit more ads in.
On the flip side, I know a lot of die-hard fans that have stopped getting season tickets due to how long and monopolizing the days have become. ADs won't always be able to fill those seats when the experience at home keeps getting better.
On the flip side, I know a lot of die-hard fans that have stopped getting season tickets due to how long and monopolizing the days have become. ADs won't always be able to fill those seats when the experience at home keeps getting better.
When Petras throws 5 total completions, things are going to drag on.
I still like college better but I think they could do away with stopping the clock on 1st downs. And yes, reviews need to be quicker. If you can't decide in 30 seconds it's not definitive.
You might not even get a chance to get to the definitive camera angle in 30 seconds.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
But that’s … literally the way it works?
The replay official in the booth, if he sees something worthy of another look, buzzes down to the officials on the field so they can stop play. Now, it’s my understanding it’s the replay official who makes the actual determination and tells the referee … I don’t know why they bring out a monitor for the referee to look, too.
If you’re talking targeting, that’s an automatic review once it’s called on the field. Then the replay official says yes, it was or no, it wasn’t. Again, doesn’t seem necessary to give the referee a monitor.
I also agree with some kind of time limit on reviews. They’re supposed to correct obvious mistakes made on the field due to the speed of the game/bad sight lines for the onfield officials - it’s not supposed to be a Zapruder film where the replay guy looks for pixels between the ball and the ground. Look at the replay - is the call obviously wrong? Overturn it. Obviously right? Confirm it. Can’t really tell? The call stands - don’t spend 15 minutes running it back and forth hoping you’ll find something new eventually.
I didn't realize that. I assumed that since they brought out that tiny monitor that the on field official was reviewing and making the decision. I guess my point is that alot of times we've seen the replay two or three time before the official has even gone over. Just seems like they could speed up the process. I like the fact that they generally get the correct call in the end but it can really change momentum a team may have gotten.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
I still remember the early years of replay, when it was never even close to a sure thing that they’d get it right. One game I was watching years ago (I remember it as Ole Miss, for some reason) there was a close play for a score. They went to replay, fans at home watching multiple replays could see yeah, it was the right call, absolutely confirmed … and they overturned it after several minutes. And don’t get me started on Iowa State and the magical moving goal line on replay in Stillwater some years back, or David Montgomery’s Liberty Bowl “fumble” …
Or Texas "down by contact" fumble when you can clearly see Iowa State player who ran with the ball away from the pile when the UT ball carrier finally hits the ground.
I remember a play and might be one that you referring to but the announcers and the guy in NY and all of us on TV saw it one way and the ref came back with a different call that obviously went against us and the guys on TV were stunned and almost didn't know what to say. I guess that is why I had my original comment, when we at home can see multiple replays and can get to the right conclusion long before the ref does why not just tell the ref it's under review and tell him the whether it stands or is overturned without him even looking at that little monitor. Anyway, great win for the Cyclones this past weekend!!
So the white hat can see what the replay official is seeing while the RO is going through the process.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
Well, yeah, I guess so the referee can confer and be able to communicate the correct call to the stadium … still, the decision comes from the booth and, as you can see from many, many comments here, dragging out the monitor for the on-field referee certainly confuses the fans as to who is making the actual decision.
I think the ref should be looking at the time and placement of stuff to speed things up. It's either option A or B, and option A is already on the field and clock so it's just option B that can change stuff. 95% of the time this would speed things up.
