 |
| |
|
 |
 |
Not so angelic NCAA strengthens 'halo' rulePosted: Wednesday March 20, 2002 4:54 PM
The halo rule may be the most vilified entry in the NCAA rule book, but it is going nowhere for the foreseeable future. Five years after its inception and one year after the American Football Coaches Association recommended that the halo be stripped from the rule book, the NCAA Football Rules Committee toughened it. The committee doubled the cost of the violation, from five yards to 10 yards. The decision gave a stiff-arm to the scores of coaches, writers and TV jocks who have criticized the rule. By increasing the penalty, committee members came down squarely on the side of player safety. The halo, as every screaming color analyst knows, is the two-yard circle of life given to punt returners. Any defender who encroaches upon that circle is guilty of interference. The idea is to protect the returner, who is looking up in order to catch the ball and can't protect himself from the hit of a defender running full speed with mayhem on his agenda. Detractors of the rule maintain that it gives an unfair advantage to the returner by asking a defender to do what is antithetical to virtually every other part of the game: slow down. By not going full speed, the defender leaves himself more vulnerable to a feint. That is why every halo violation witnessed on television is accompanied by outrage from commentators who say, "That's not football." It's an easy way to stir up controversy. While you would be hard-pressed to find a coach who will admit it publicly, the cost of a five-yard penalty in order to prevent a long punt return is a bargain. Defenders certainly have paid less attention to the rule. All-Pac-10 safety Troy Polamalu of USC entered the halo and delivered a devastating hit to Kansas State returner Aaron Lockett as he caught the ball in the Wildcats' 10-6 season-opening victory last September. After Polamalu's hit, the Big 12 instructed its officials that any defender who didn't "break down" -- that is, slow down and get in position to tackle -- before he violated the halo should be hit with a 15-yard roughing penalty and ejected. The league witnessed no more overt violations of the rule. Fresno State sophomore Kendall Edwards committed two halo violations last season. The first one, against Oregon State, was deemed such a good play, despite the penalty, that coaches from eight schools contacted Fresno State, asking to see the video. The second one, against Boise State, sent returner Tim Gilligan to the hospital for swelling in his throat and got Edwards kicked off the Bulldogs' punt return team. Even Bulldogs special teams coach John Baxter said he was "totally sickened" by the play. That incident displayed the susceptibility to injury that gave rise to the halo rule in the first place. Though some coaches continue to insist that proper coaching is all that is necessary to prevent such plays, the rules committee decided to err on the side of caution. Donnie Duncan, the senior associate commissioner of the Big 12 and chair of the rules committee, said that the group discussed abandoning the rule. In doing so, however, "We [would be] removing a protection, a safety measure," Duncan said. The 10-yard rule, he continued, "gives that security back to the kid returning punts. If this does not provide safety for the player, it will be a glaring reflection on the defender and how he has been taught." Let the word go forth: The halo is here to stay. The path to a coach's heart is exactly 10 yards long. No coach will be willing to give up that much to stop a punt returner. Coaches may continue to complain -- and TV commentators almost certainly will -- but bring up the magic words player safety and the halo rule will live for years to come. Sports Illustrated senior writer Ivan Maisel covers college football for the magazine and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
