Welcome to PatsFans.com

Would you favor a 30 second play clock?

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by VJCPatriot, Aug 25, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    12,366
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +51 / 1 / -4

    I would. It would create a more fast paced game. Also teams couldn't count on "killing" the clock as much. So there would be more scoring and the finish of games would be more tense/exciting since it's harder to hold the ball the entire time to end it. If a team is in the lead but can't gain first downs, they'd likely have to punt and give the other team another chance to mount a comeback.
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2008
  2. JoePats

    JoePats Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,145
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    A 30 second playclock you'd have to go to college rules where you don't start the clock until they spot the ball. There's no way they could do it as they do currently, starting the playclock as soon as the previous play ends (if inbounds).
  3. pheenix11

    pheenix11 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,311
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    There aren't many things I would say this about but I think the NFL the way it is now is pretty much perfect. Everything from the schedule to the playclock seems to be just about right. From a purely selfish perspective the Pats are usually the ones trying to run out the clock, so no I wouldn't want to see them make that more difficult. :D
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,406
    Likes Received:
    137
    Ratings:
    +264 / 10 / -26

    Compared to just about any other major sport football is paced just fine, killing the clock is a major strategy for any team..
  5. JoePats

    JoePats Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,145
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    I agree, and along those lines I think college football should adapt the NFL policies of timing the game. If a player goes out of bounds, they stop the clock for good instead of restarting after the ball is spotted, stopping the clock on a first down until they spot the ball, the games take 4 hours.
  6. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    16,405
    Likes Received:
    275
    Ratings:
    +722 / 5 / -14

    #61 Jersey

    Why does the game need to be sped up? Most are right at three hours including halftime as is. I wouldn't want it any shorter than that. The game that needs a 30-second play clock is baseball (between pitches).
  7. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,989
    Likes Received:
    322
    Ratings:
    +797 / 5 / -3

    The increase of delay of game penalties would grow exponentially. It would make it very difficult to do substitutions and allow QBs to audible and read defenses. I think they should just keep it like it is.
  8. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Messages:
    13,262
    Likes Received:
    114
    Ratings:
    +358 / 0 / -1

    I sometimes think that would be a good idea worth considering now. Seems like far too often after a long play that stays inbounds, the team with the ball ends up with a delay of game or needing to call a timeout.
  9. primetime

    primetime Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Messages:
    5,082
    Likes Received:
    62
    Ratings:
    +217 / 22 / -10

    #18 Jersey

    I think they should return it to the clock being stopped after going out of bounds, rather than being re-started on ball placement. While the college game is way too slow (and occasionally hard to watch) because it's stopped after first downs, the pro game is a little too fast (not enough plays) because of the rule change where the clock doesn't stop when the ball goes out of bounds until like the last 5 minutes of the half or whatever.
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2008
  10. Sicilian

    Sicilian On the Roster

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    5,005
    Likes Received:
    161
    Ratings:
    +373 / 1 / -2

    Assuming the D doesn't call any timeouts, the MOST amount of time you can kill without getting a 1st down is 2:00. I think that's balanced pretty well, especially with timeouts and the two minute warning. If a defense can't make stops in obvious running / short distance situations, why should the league give them ANY advantage?
  11. fumbrunner

    fumbrunner Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,991
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    In the CFL, its a 20 second play clock from when the play is whistled in. Its one of the few rules that I prefer over the NFL. It leads to great finishes because teams can't kill the clock with 2 minutes to play.

    Other rules I prefer in the CFL, Unlimited motion for receivers, no fair catch (defenders must give the punt returner 5 yds).
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2008
  12. Scouse Patriot

    Scouse Patriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,957
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    No problems the way it is. If it aint broke...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>