Have you ever wanted something badly but knew it was a terrible idea that would eventually leave you unsatisfied?
That’s my feeling about additional access to college football replay reviews.
It started in the Atlantic Coast Conference last season, and the Big XII Conference announced its plans last week to supposedly better serve fans this season.
When replays happen during TV broadcasts of games in those conferences, the broadcast partners will offer access to the decision-making process — ostensibly giving fans valuable behind-the-scenes information as rules officials work through things from their centralized review centers.
It’s an idea that’s been on my wish list for years. Making the case has long seemed logical — let’s just show fans how and why things happen and offer some clarity. Serve the fans. What could be simpler?
Plus, in the money-hungry world of college athletics, it’s a sponsorship opportunity, an asset to be sold. Broadcasters and/or conferences could sell sponsorship to the segments.
It’s never that simple, though. Especially with the replay.
Because there’s a process, it becomes almost performative when more people are watching.
Sure, there are numerous considerations and factors in a specific ruling or on-field situation that gets reviewed. Sometimes it’s not as simple as it looks. There’s an if-then decision tree that officials systematically use to home in on what matters and get to a decision.
Sometimes, though, it is simple, but it gets made more complicated because of the process.
What’s clear on the initial replay that almost everyone sees as part of the current approach, regularly seems to take longer than necessary for confirmation of the obvious. That’s not serving fans. Those are the kinds of things any supposedly improved replay process should fix.
According to the Associated Press, from a 2023 story about the ACC’s centralized and public replay approach, something between 40 and 45% of college football replays get overturned on review. So, one could argue there’s a clear need for improvement in the replay process.
Again, in theory, replay review and access to it should add clarity.
Unfortunately, nothing good has happened with consistently in the long history of replay technology.
The Big XII’s move is appreciated — sparking optimism for similar adoption by the Big Ten Conference and Southeastern Conference — it’s just hard to believe the supposedly fan-friendly, simple approach will develop that way from week to week.
Additionally, in a typical bit of college football irony, while former coaches and current participants are lobbying Congress to help stakeholders save themselves from their own greed and inconsistency, because they do not want to become the NFL, a centralized, more public replay review just mimics what happens in pro football.
It’s my sincere hope the Big Ten will start sharing access to its replay process — as soon as this season would be nice. With all the investments fans have been asked to make in this pay-for-play era, it would be nice for them to get something of value in return. Access to replay review could be that.
In addition, weekly segments from the Big Ten sharing rulings would be great and help fans understand the sport better. The content would work well on shows like B1G Today and especially on social media. Those are all more positive reasons for the move.
So, it’s a potentially exciting and intriguing — reasons for hope. There’s also a nagging sense it’ll be ultimately unsatisfying, though.
If you’ve enjoyed this content, please subscribe to Stuff Somers Says With Steve on YouTube. Or join our newsletter by entering your email below.
