The week in review

◊ I think I'll make this a weekly thing, particularly during the off-season. Anyway, here's what you should know, as we wrap up the week:

• Just when you thought Penn State was settling down at the quarterback spot, this happened, sending shock waves throughout the message boards. Matt Simms (formerly of Louisville, by way of Don Bosco in NJ), is looking to play JUCO for a year, then try to get in at Oklahoma or PENN STATE.

My Take: Listen to me, it won't happen. Not now, not ever. If he thinks he can come into Holuba Hall and just start competing for the job, think again. Kevin Newsome is here, and Paul Jones is on the way for '10. Put this rumor to bed, fast. Penn State doesn't like JUCO players (about 99% of the time), and won't be too keen on bringing in a high-profile (in name at least) skill player.

• On Wednesday, the NCAA rules committee rolled out a shitastic new rule–yes, another one–regarding penalties and "unsportsmanlike conduct."

Here's the SI.com wire story for the background. And TINNOMJ's reaction... 11W's and Orson's as well.

My Take: I'm not a fan of deregulation, but college football needs heavy doses of Alan Greenspan and Ronald Reagan right now. Over the last few years, we've seen the rules committee run roughshod over our game. Sometimes it's a good thing, as in the RC's cooperation with instant replay adoption. But too many other times, the RC's actions leave us all baffled, if not frustrated. Remember that fantastically doomed experiment that was Rule 3-2-5-E, in 2006? It's made a few of us upset, especially when we realized it was more about creating additional media timeouts, rather than its stated purpose of speeding up the game. But this proposed taunting penalty, should it be adopted as is, will turn out to be nothing short of the complete disaster the 2006 clock rules were. It's time for the RC to wake up.

• Yesterday, it was also revealed that the BCS is happy where it is right now, and likes being happy where it is right now. For those of us who were hoping to see the Cotton Bowl's inclusion into the formula, thus moving closer to the true plus-one system, this was a real nail in the coffin... for now.

My Take: Just relax, and take it. I don't like the BCS. Not many fans do. But is it really as bad as the taunting rule news? Not really. The BCS and college presidents run the show. And unless we stop watching the games, and buying up BCS bowl tickets like there's no tomorrow, we don't have much clout over how the system is run.

• Penn State picked up a big-time recruit this week. Oh, and did I mention is was a–are you sitting down?–basketball recruit. Needless to say, mired in a terrible losing streak, with the NCAA tournament berth gone, and the NIT steadily stepping aside, this was a shocker.

My Take: This is a major coup for Ed DeChellis & Co. Penn State took a nosedive this week, but was able to pull it up for a few minutes with this news. I'm not a fan of mediocrity, but that's what you're going to get with Penn State basketball, at least for a little while longer. When I was at Penn State, 15 wins was a major accomplishment. It wasn't that long ago. I"m not saying we need to lower our standards that much, but an understanding of the situation is critical for this program's future. The BigTen is a good conference this year, more so than usual. Penn State has managed to play with the big boys though it all.

• The BigTen coaching situation ironed out a small wrinkle this week, with the news that Kirk Ferentz is staying at Iowa... for a while. (HT: BHGP)

My Take: Ferentz had been in warm water the last few seasons, when his teams greatly underperformed with better talent than his more successful teams had from 2002-2004 (31 wins, 2 bowl wins over the SEC). But that doesn't mean he can't coach, or isn't good for the Hawkeyes. Ferentz has had a better 7-game run vs. Penn State than Jim Tressel, and only Michigan has done equal (well, you could really say 'Michigan & The Refs') over that span. On the flip side, Ferentz faces a daunting task going into 2009. He loses Shonn Greene, and two of the best defensive tackles in college football. If he can coax 8-9 wins out of this team next season, this was a great move by the university. But anything less than 7 wins will turn up the heat, even more than before.

• Oh yeah, and then there was a BigTen Bloggers Roundtable this week. Can we say shameless self-promotion?

Have a great weekend...

More below the fold...

Well, I'm smarter than at least one football writer

Someone pointed out to me a while back that there's a test you can take online. That test is the same test given to prospective college football officials. I wasn't too motivated to do it. That is, I wasn't until I found out Dennis Dodd took it, and got a 46 (out of 100). So what was the first thing I did after that revelation? Why, I took the test of course. I thought that since someone (even though he's not my favorite writer) like Dodd got only a 46, I'd probably score lower. Who wouldn't think that? What do you know, folks, I scored a 51. No, I didn't look up any of the answers before submission. (I took the written version of the test over two nights, about two hours total, then punched in my online answers) So a 51 isn't so freaking bad, considering only six years ago I didn't even know how the downs system worked. I kid you not, until I marched onto the field for my first Penn State football game--UCF 2002--I didn't give a rats ass about football. Here's my test results:

More below the fold...

Pretty soon, the commercials will have to take "Football Timeouts"

I realize this is almost old news at this point, so I won’t present it as breaking by any means. What I want to do is pick apart what exactly each of these rules would mean to college football, whenever they’re approved. Frankly, I hope sooner than later.

“… after a year of consideration, the committee proposed a 40/25 second play clock system to encourage a consistent pace of play. All rules proposals will be sent for membership comment and considered by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel before taking effect.”

What I think: This is a good step for CFB. But it’s being taken for the wrong reason. More on that later. But the idea of a 40-second play clock will help keep the game flowing, and allow NFL fans to easily transition to watching CFB.

“A main charge of the rules committee is to enhance the safety of our student-athletes,” said Michael Clark, chair of the committee and head coach at Bridgewater (Virginia) College. “In recent years, the committee has attempted to address head-down contact and dangerous helmet contact in general. The committee is directing game officials to strictly penalize head-down contact as well as players that target defenseless opponents.”

What I think: MICHAEL ROBINSON. I remember watching, live, M-Rob lowering his shoulder into Minnesota defensive back Brandon Owens, who decided to lower his own body—helmet first—into the tackle. Robinson never even hit the ground, but Owens crumbled like a rag doll. At the time, it was a great hit, but later turned out to be very tragic for Owens; he never played again. I have one question for Clark, just who would have been penalized on that play? Robinson lowered his shoulder into the tackle, Owens lowered his helmet into Robinson, but Owens ended up getting hurt? Would you penalize Owens, who was on a gurney a few minutes later?

“A proposal relating to the chop block rule... Another safety proposal deals with a dangerous tackle – commonly referred to as a “horse collar.” Any player will now be prohibited from grabbing the inside back collar of the shoulder pads or jersey, or the inside collar of the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, and immediately pulling the runner down.”

What I think: This one’s not really much of an impact. Players will just have to learn how to properly tackle. That’s all.

“Two other major proposals deal with the pace of play. The rules committee passed a 40/25 second play clock system in an effort to standardize the pace of play. Unless the game is stopped for administrative reasons (e.g., change of possession, injury, etc.), the offensive team will have 40 seconds to snap the ball after it is declared dead.”

What I think: Already covered.

“Additionally, the committee made a change in the timing of the game after a play in which a runner goes out of bounds. Except in the last two minutes of each half, the game clock will start on a signal from the referee, rather than on the snap.”

What I think: This one’s huge. For years, everyone’s known that in CFB, you could completely stop the clock by going out of bounds. Not any more folks. But, as I said in the beginning, this is for the wrong reason. Why did it take so long for the NCAA to propose this, and seriously consider adopting it? Is it a coincidence that it comes right after the NCAA tried to cater to the telecoms by providing more commercial time, rather than actually shortening the game? This is about as transparent as Bush trying to protect the telecoms under the guise of national security (oops, sorry, but I couldn’t resist that one). I could be wrong (about the length of football games). I hope this really does shorten them, but if they are only three or five minutes shorter, you’ll know who to blame, and who is really responsible for deleting game time to insert commercial time.

“The committee also made the following proposals:
• In the rules relating to instant replay, plays where a fumble leads to an immediate recovery may be reviewed.
• In replay rules, a coach that challenges a play and is successful will retain the right to challenge one more time for a maximum of two.
• When a kickoff goes out of bounds, the receiving team may accept the ball at the 40-yard line instead of the 35.
• The incidental five-yard face mask foul was removed. All face mask fouls (pulling, twisting or turning) will be a 15-yard penalty.
• A yardage penalty for sideline control was instituted.”

What I think about these: They’re all nice, simple rule changes. The one that sticks out is the face mask change. I hate the incidental. HATE IT. How many times have we sat through games, wondering why one team got the five-yarder, but the other didn’t? Just go by the personal foul variety. It makes it much easier.

But I’m sure all of this is truly for the benefit of CFB, right? Right.

More below the fold...