ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, April 13, 1996 TAG: 9604150010
SECTION: SPORTS PAGE: B-1 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: ANALYSIS
SOURCE: JACK BOGACZYK STAFF WRITER
NCAA TEAMS will have to settle it on the field next season in a change that may make coaches' jobs easier.
Someone once said that the worst way to waste a beautiful April afternoon is at a spring football game. There are worse things, however.
How about a spring game that goes overtime?
It could happen today at Virginia or next Saturday at Virginia Tech, when the state's two Division I-A programs wrap up off-season drills. If a spring game is supposed to be about preparation, then overtime could be part of the intrasquad game plans.
After last season, the NCAA Football Rules Committee voted to play overtime in all NCAA games, in all divisions, starting with the 1996 season. Four Division I-AA conferences have used the tiebreaker system during the regular season for several years. It also has been part of the NCAA playoffs in the three lower divisions since 1981.
Last season, the tiebreaker was instituted for all Division I-A bowl games. It came into play at the Las Vegas Bowl, where Toledo kicked an OT field goal to beat Nevada 40-37. The system gives both teams a chance to score after regulation time has expired.
In an overtime period, each team gets an offensive series beginning on the opponent's 25-yard line. A team's possession ends when it scores, turns the ball over or fails to convert on fourth down. The game continues until the tie is broken.
It's no surprise that most coaches like the system. ``It does take some of the pressure off the coaches,'' said Tech's Frank Beamer, who was first exposed to the tiebreaker system by the Ohio Valley Conference when he was head coach at Murray State from 1981-86. ``I think one reason they're doing it is because of the bowl situation, where a tie could keep you from going [with six I-A wins].''
When the College Football Association conducted a survey among coaches several years ago, about 65 percent favored a tiebreaker of some kind. Virginia coach George Welsh is one of those, although he's not sure he likes the matching-possessions concept.
``I've been an advocate of a tiebreaker for a long time, so I'm for it,'' said Welsh. ``I'm not sure I like this format, although I know it's worked in I-AA. I feel like we'd be better off with the NFL system of sudden death, where somebody kicks off.
``It's hard to plan for something when you get the ball on the 25-yard line. It seems like a team that goes on defense first has a little bit of an advantage, and that might not be fair. ... I don't know why they did it. I do know why they did it in the NFL. They don't want those ties.''
But does the game really need overtime, however?
There haven't been that many ties in college football in recent years. The last truly memorable tie came in 1966, Notre Dame-Michigan State, 10-10. In 82 Rose Bowls, there has been one tie, in 1927. The Orange Bowl's six-decade history has no ties.
Last season, with 107 teams playing 11-game schedules in I-A football, there were only seven ties. In the past decade, about 2 percent of all I-A games have ended in ties. Penn State coach Joe Paterno has coached in three ties in 30 years. The ACC and Big East have had only one tie each in the conference standings in the '90s. In Division III, the Old Dominion Athletic Conference has had one league game end in a tie in the last 14 seasons.
With new telecast contracts beginning this year, the tiebreaker system is sure to extend some networks past their scheduled airtime. It's not that big a deal on all-sports ESPN. Just wait until a CBS or ABC affiliate has its local news block blown out by a field-goal duel in OT, however, and the screaming will begin.
The NFL in recent years has tinkered with rules and gone to a 12-minute halftime to keep its average game around 3 hours. The college game, with more clock stoppages for first-down chain movement, regularly runs in the 31/2-hour range, especially when it's a televised game.
Beamer is correct in saying, ``The networks like close games at the end because it keeps people watching. It's like overtime in basketball.'' What will happen, however, is that coaches will force more games into overtime. Told there were only seven ties in I-A football last year, the Hokies' coach said, ``I think you're going to see more ties now, or games going into overtime.''
He's right. Given a choice, most coaches would prefer to save their gambling for games played in Atlantic City or Las Vegas. Last season, I-A teams were successful on 40 percent of their two-point conversions and 94 percent of their extra-point kicks. So, if a team scores a touchdown and trails by one point in the final minute, what do you think the coach is going to choose to do?
``The two-point conversion has eliminated a lot of the ties in college football,'' Welsh said. ``The new system is better though, in my mind. You don't have to go for two to win. I'd rather go into overtime With the success rate down around 40 percent [on two-point conversions], the odds aren't good you're going to win.
``Of course, if you kick for the tie, you'll get criticized for it.''
The tiebreaking system not only diminishes the importance of the two-point try, it will save coaches from having to decide when it's time to kick and when it's time to run or pass. ``Trying to score [on a conversion] from the 3 isn't easy,'' Beamer said. ``In the NFL, they go from the 2.''
The overtime rule also puts more emphasis on defense and the kicking game. The coin flip to begin the tiebreaking periods will be huge, because most teams - particularly those with good place-kickers - will choose to play defense and see what the opponent can do, then try to match or beat it.
``If you have a guy who can kick it, you're definitely going to play for a tie at the end,'' Beamer said, ``especially at home, where you have the crowd, know the field conditions, the wind.''
The new rule also could revise the way a coach or an offensive coordinator calls the game - perhaps as early as the second quarter - in choosing whether to go for one or two points on a conversion or choosing whether to kick a field goal. Also, a team's play in the red zone (inside the opponent's 20) will be more crucial in the overall game plan, because that's where all of overtime is played.
``I think fans are going to like this,'' Beamer said. ``You're better off with a winner and a loser. With the bowl situation being what it is [with a team required to have six I-A victories to qualify], a loss hurts only one team. With a a tie, neither team has helped itself.''
Beamer recalled his second game as head coach at his alma mater, in September 1987. The Hokies scored at UVa with 1:24 to play in the fourth quarter, cutting the Cavaliers' lead to 14-13. With his program having inherited NCAA probation and in a rebuilding mode, Beamer chose to try for two and the win. A pitch-sweep to Malcolm Blacken was stuffed by the Cavaliers.
``If you have a chance to go for two with less than two minutes to go and you don't, that's `controversy,''' Beamer said. ``In that situation, then, we went for it. If it were under the new rule and I had to make that decision, we'd have kicked the extra point and played for overtime. The percentages are much better.''
LENGTH: Long : 124 linesby CNB