SEC commissioner Mike Slive: 10-second rule debate 'exposed a glaring error in the process'
Mike Slive joked that he'd be "squeezed to pieces" if he took a side on the 10-second rule debate that was waged earlier this year.The SEC Commissioner did, however, provide what he described as a "thought" on how a similar back-and-forth could be avoided in the future.
In a question-and-answer session with reporters at the APSE Southeastern regional meeting Monday, Slive called for the formation of a competition committee filled with "people who care about the game" that ultimately would be responsible for making recommendations to the NCAA Football Rules Committee.
"This would have been a perfect subject for someone to look at the game itself who cared about the game and then come up with an interpretation," Slive said. "Then and only then would it go to the rules committee for some change in the game because they believed in the long-term best interest of the game that 'this is a good idea or not a good idea.'
"This debate exposed a glaring error in the process. Hopefully we can fill that."
Such committees exist in other collegiate sports, including men's basketball and baseball, but not football. The NFL has a competition committee.
Slive said he's a member of the men's basketball committee, which meets annually to discuss "how's the game being played, what is the relationship to offense and defense, how does officiating impact the game.
Under the current structure, the NCAA Football Rules Committee can only make non-health related rules changes in odd-numbered years.
In February, the NCAA Football Rules committee proposed an initiative that would have prevented offenses from snapping the ball until 10 seconds ran off the 40-second play clock. It drew immediate criticism from coast to coast, particularly from coaches who run uptempo offenses, and was ultimately tabled one day before it was set to go before the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel.
Alabama coach
Nick Saban, who was in attendance when the proposal was drafted, and Auburn coach
Gus Malzahn stood on opposite sides of the issue. Saban said he believed the increased number of plays and "exposures" didn't jive with the NCAA's increased limits placed on practice time.
"I know a lot of you say there's no statistical information that says if you play 88 plays in the game you have a better chance to get hurt if you play 65 plays in a game," Saban said in March. "Over 12 games, that's 250 plays, approximately. That's four games more than you are playing.
"Everything we've ever done in the NCAA has been to limit exposure. So we cut back spring practice. We say you've got to practice in shorts. We say you have to practice so many days in shells ... We cut back how many days you can practice in pads, how many scrimmages we can have. So many acclimation days. Can't have consecutive two-a-days. We have all these rules to limit exposure.
Malzahn strongly disagreed with the committee's assertion that player safety was at risk because of the increased pace of the game. He suggested a "healthy debate" occur throughout 2014 before it went before the Rules Committee in 2015.
If Slive's idea came to pass, that's exactly what would happen.
Read More Here...
