clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

College football rule changes: Should NCAA force injured players to sit?

If defenses fake injuries to counter up-tempo offenses, what's the logical counter?

Northwestern player looks toward Northwestern sideline then he all falls down.
Redonkulous Bear

Sonny Dykes talked about rules for combating fake injuries. What rules would you put in place for a player being injured? Here are Sonny's suggestions.

Leland Wong: Opponents to new rules could argue that restrictions based on plays or series are flawed because those are arbitrary lengths of time. I would like to see them define a set period of time to run a set of diagnostic exams to evaluate the player's health and ensure he can return to his normal resting state before returning to the game. Additionally, I'd like to see them change the substitution rules when a player goes down. Play stops purely as a precaution to that player. Other defenders should not be allowed to leave the game and the replacement player should play the same position as the injured defender. That way, the offense can continue to exploit any on-field mismatches that the offense coach may have noticed. I think this will cut down on the defense's desire to fake injuries; they'll still be able to get an unethical breather, but they won't be able to optimize their personnel based on changes in down or distance.

Berkelium97: I like the idea of taking out the player for the rest of the drive. It's easy to support the rule from the perspective of player safety: if someone is injured enough that he can't get off the field, he deserves to be examined by the medical staff for several minutes. This rule is easy to implement too; it's certainly easier than a rule saying a player must sit out X plays or miss Y minutes. That would be too much for teams/officials to monitor during the game.


(HT Redonkulous Bear)

atomsareenough: I agree 100% with Sonny. I think if a player is hurt badly enough to result in a stoppage of play and training staff coming out on the field, they need to stay out long enough to be properly evaluated. Sitting out the rest of the possession makes sense to me, even moreso than say, "sit out 5 plays", because that's actually two changes of possession unless it's a 2-way player. Also, if it's for an undetermined number of plays, it's harder for coaches to game with fake injuries, because they may not know how many more plays are going to be left in the drive, so it would be a gamble rather than a calculated risk. It's hard to to a cost-benefit analysis when you don't know what the cost is. Also, in case of real injury, it gives enough time for medical staff to actually tend to a player, which is important. Sitting out a drive isn't that big a penalty for the player, either. So, that sounds about right.

Ruey Yen: It is going to be tough to enforce a rule to prevent faking injuries, but something like having the injured player be unavailable for a minimum amount of time would be a positive step. I think the risk of an injured player not getting medical attention to prevent not having to leave the game is not that high. In men's basketball, injured player has to be substitute out of the game and it takes a stoppage in play or timeout to bring them back in. There was definitely a game last year where the Bears basketball players (Justin Cobbs, Richard Solomon, etc.) were helping each other getting stretched out, rather than the medical staff, in order to have the players staying in the game.

Sam Fielder: I think that any player that is injured should have to sit out the rest of that series, whatever that might be.

What do you think? Vote and comment!