TV commercials have ruined college football...

MtNittany

All-American
Oct 12, 2021
4,027
5,572
113
The 2006 rule change on only stopping the clock on out of bounds plays inside of 2 minutes cost us watching 13 plays/game (both teams combined).

Just since the 2023 rule change where the clock doesn't stop for a first down unless inside of 2 minutes, each team is losing an average of 4.5 plays MORE per game.

What's so special about 2:00? A team that has been trailing all game and is coming back doesn't need a clock stop at 2:27? Or 3:13? A team that is ahead, and runs out of bounds at 6:00 shouldn't have the clock stopped? Why?

These rule changes were obviously sold as speeding up the game, but they were to sell advertising, and while the claims are made that the ad time is the same (I don't believe them), the fact is we are seeing less and less football in between the ads every year.
 
Last edited:

KingLando

All-Conference
Nov 29, 2021
8,608
4,537
113
The 2006 rule change on only stopping the clock on out of bounds plays inside of 2 minutes cost us watching 13 plays/game (both teams combined).

Just since the 2023 rule change where the clock doesn't stop for a first down unless inside of 2 minutes, each team is losing an average of 4.5 plays MORE per game.

What's so special about 2:00? A team that has been trailing all game and is coming back doesn't need a clock stop at 2:27? Or 3:13? A team that is ahead, and runs out of bounds at 6:00 shouldn't have the clock stopped? Why?

These rule changes were obviously sold as speeding up the game, but they were to sell advertising, and while the claims are made that the ad time is the same (I don't believe them), the fact is we are seeing less and less football in between the ads every year.
Where are you getting these numbers?
I can't locate find real data prior to 2005 but for 2005 it was 135 plays--it did go up to 140 and was 137 the year before the rule change--this year it's 131.
You are correct though--the length of the game hasn't changed--the reason is we're probably getting more commercials but 13 is reach
 

psuno1

All-Conference
Feb 4, 2004
1,110
1,375
113
The 2006 rule change on only stopping the clock on out of bounds plays inside of 2 minutes cost us watching 13 plays/game (both teams combined).

Just since the 2023 rule change where the clock doesn't stop for a first down unless inside of 2 minutes, each team is losing an average of 4.5 plays MORE per game.

What's so special about 2:00? A team that has been trailing all game and is coming back doesn't need a clock stop at 2:27? Or 3:13? A team that is ahead, and runs out of bounds at 6:00 shouldn't have the clock stopped? Why?

These rule changes were obviously sold as speeding up the game, but they were to sell advertising, and while the claims are made that the ad time is the same (I don't believe them), the fact is we are seeing less and less football in between the ads every year.
That and stopping every other play to check replay is annoying it is almost like they control the out come.
 

op2

All-Conference
Mar 16, 2014
12,202
2,021
103
Has anyone anywhere ever said, after an interview of a coach by a sideline reporter at the end of the quarter or half, wow, that was informative, I'm glad they talked to the coach?

I'd rather see an ad than a meaningless interview of a coach that you know is going to give nothing but coachspeak, and the most meaningless coachspeak of all because it comes during the game when the coach's first priority is to finish the interview and get back to the game.
 

Rocco3

Junior
Mar 25, 2022
305
330
63
The 2006 rule change on only stopping the clock on out of bounds plays inside of 2 minutes cost us watching 13 plays/game (both teams combined).

Just since the 2023 rule change where the clock doesn't stop for a first down unless inside of 2 minutes, each team is losing an average of 4.5 plays MORE per game.

What's so special about 2:00? A team that has been trailing all game and is coming back doesn't need a clock stop at 2:27? Or 3:13? A team that is ahead, and runs out of bounds at 6:00 shouldn't have the clock stopped? Why?

These rule changes were obviously sold as speeding up the game, but they were to sell advertising, and while the claims are made that the ad time is the same (I don't believe them), the fact is we are seeing less and less football in between the ads every year.
Have you looked at this site. They are kind of hard to ignore since they are plastered in you face on every click.
 

Warlerski

Junior
Jun 23, 2016
237
302
63
The 2006 rule change on only stopping the clock on out of bounds plays inside of 2 minutes cost us watching 13 plays/game (both teams combined).

Just since the 2023 rule change where the clock doesn't stop for a first down unless inside of 2 minutes, each team is losing an average of 4.5 plays MORE per game.

What's so special about 2:00? A team that has been trailing all game and is coming back doesn't need a clock stop at 2:27? Or 3:13? A team that is ahead, and runs out of bounds at 6:00 shouldn't have the clock stopped? Why?

These rule changes were obviously sold as speeding up the game, but they were to sell advertising, and while the claims are made that the ad time is the same (I don't believe them), the fact is we are seeing less and less football in between the ads every year.
2 things come to mind when looking at how CFB has gone downhill.
1. The portal. The game is now played mostly by mercenaries.
2. The sideline reporters. Usually a hot woman, but not always. Have they ever added anything to the game? I have never seen it.
 

BobPSU92

Heisman
Aug 22, 2001
45,979
38,175
113
Disease commercials are the worst ... and 10 commercials every 7 minutes of some movie channels. Sickening to say the least.

Prescription drug commercials are only legal in the U.S. and New Zealand. Stupid cash money. I hate U.S.

Then there are all the online gambling commercials. 😞
 
  • Like
Reactions: NittPicker

Big_O

All-Conference
Jun 28, 2001
1,774
2,896
113
The esoteric drug commercials for rare conditions are ridiculous. And they cost $$$ which the drug companies could use for lowering prices, although nowadays the savings from not running expensive commercials likely would go to the upper echelon executives bonuses.

Notice that drug prices really went up after the advent of TV advertising for prescription drugs. And the discounts given to countries with socialized medicine are also a driver of US drug costs. The companies just pass the discount to US consumers to make up the difference.

Rant over.
 

Bwank

Junior
Jul 16, 2021
151
259
63
The 2006 rule change on only stopping the clock on out of bounds plays inside of 2 minutes cost us watching 13 plays/game (both teams combined).

Just since the 2023 rule change where the clock doesn't stop for a first down unless inside of 2 minutes, each team is losing an average of 4.5 plays MORE per game.

What's so special about 2:00? A team that has been trailing all game and is coming back doesn't need a clock stop at 2:27? Or 3:13? A team that is ahead, and runs out of bounds at 6:00 shouldn't have the clock stopped? Why?

These rule changes were obviously sold as speeding up the game, but they were to sell advertising, and while the claims are made that the ad time is the same (I don't believe them), the fact is we are seeing less and less football in between the ads every year.
I hate when the commercials make you miss plays because the commercials are more important to the network then the actual game
 
BWI

Latest

  1. 01 BWI Football Penn State TE Andrew Rappleyea: Nittany Lions have no choice but to look forward
  2. 02 BWI Recruiting New Penn State pick logged in Rivals Recruiting Prediction Machine
  3. 03 BWI Football Penn State notes: Matt Campbell provides an Alex Manske update, calls Koby Howard 'questionable' again, and more
  4. 04 BWI Football Penn State moves veteran defender to its linebacker room as search for depth, better play, continues
  5. 05 BWI Football Penn State vs. Purdue Preview Show