Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 587650">I believe the logic behind it is to get in more commercial breaks, not fewer.Under the old rules, the out of bounds plays elongated the total elapsed time of the game while those brief clock stoppages were not long enough to squeeze in a commercial.  For example, burning an extra 10 seconds of clock per play on 12 out of bounds plays buys a 2 minute official time out for a commercial break without elongating the elapsed time.According to the first graph in the following link, games run longer now than they ever have.<a href="http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/baseball-games-don-t-need-to-be-shortened-082614" target="_blank">http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-bit-outside/story/baseball-games-don-t-need-to-be-shortened-082614</a>The NFL's solution to early games running into the late ones was simple:  they bumped the late games to 4:15 Eastern and even 4:30 for the national late games.As an aside, I've been inclined to mark the beginning of the post-modern game at 1978, the year the so called "Mel Blount Rule" was instituted prohibiting DBs from chucking receivers past 5 yards.  Note it was from that point forward that the chart line goes strait up as the league evolved toward pass heavy offenses as a result.  Of course, more passing elongates the game with incompletion timeouts.</blockquote>

Total: 91 (members: 4, guests: 87)