The NCAA Rules Committee is at it again....

#301
#301
Orangedogsrule said:
No, it's not.
1. D does't know the play.
2. Granted to you, the initial contact is a wash.
3. IF the D lineman penetrates and the play is to the other side, he has to shed the block and pursue. You see O linemen slow down before the D ALL the time after this because they know they're out of play and BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BLOCK IN THE BACK.

Apart from initial contact, which I grant you, the defensive line runs more each play than offense. Even if it's only a little. And that adds up during the game, and is why defenses are often so gassed towards the end. So we here it from announcers all the time. "This offense is beginning to impose it's will". Even before teams started running the HUNH.

It's the continuous pursuit
Click to expand...

Don't think containing that deadly rusher isn't as much work. It's just as much work. Tell Jason Kelce he's lazy. I actually played ironman in high school because we had a lack of linemen.

The defense makes inplay adjustments based off of looks they've seen in film. This is why film study is vital for defenses. Coaches do different things in different looks at different times. Those times they make those decisions are tendencies.
 
Last edited:
#302
#302
thebjd said:
He really doesn't have trouble with anyone regardless of the scheme they run. LSU beat them running a pro-style offense. The Gators beat them running whatever that Tebow spread was. He won the rematches decisively in both instances as well as soundly beating A&M in that rematch. What he has trouble with are special players and Heisman finalists. I do like the fact Bama is on a two game losing streak.
Click to expand...

Saban has trouble not having control of the game. HUNH teams are harder to control...even with the best players......hence push to change rules.
 
#303
#303
Burger said:
Don't think not containing that deadly rusher isn't as much work. It's just as much work. Tell Jason Kelce he's lazy. I actually played ironman in high school because we had a lack of linemen.

The defense makes inplay adjustments based off of looks they've seen in film. This is why film study is vital for defenses. Coaches do different things in different looks at different times. Those times they make those decisions are tendencies.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously saying that playing defensive end doesn't require more energy than an offensive tackle? Both require work but c'mon man. Fighting through and around an offensive lineman and then running down the play takes a lot more energy.
 
#304
#304
thebjd said:
Are you seriously saying that playing defensive end doesn't require more energy than an offensive tackle? Both require work but c'mon man. Fighting through and around an offensive lineman and then running down the play takes a lot more energy.
Click to expand...

The offensive lineman is suppose to push you out of the way and go kill a linebacker. Gotta chase down the next guy you're blocking. Haven't you seen the film of the linemen running ahead of the back? Come on man. Weak sauce. Y'all do need to go play a game. It's the only way you'll get this one. Playing one game would help prove my point.
 
#305
#305
Burger said:
The offensive lineman is suppose to push you out of the way and go kill a linebacker. Gotta chase down the next guy you're blocking. Haven't you seen the film of the linemen running ahead of the back? Come on man. Weak sauce. Y'all do need to go play a game. It's the only way you'll get this one. Playing one game would help prove my point.
Click to expand...

I played both ways in high school. Not that I can relate to SEC level players, but I can promise you that playing a game against random dudes from the internet would not teach me a thing I don't already know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#306
#306
Burger said:
The offensive lineman is suppose to push you out of the way and go kill a linebacker. Gotta chase down the next guy you're blocking. Haven't you seen the film of the linemen running ahead of the back? Come on man. Weak sauce. Y'all do need to go play a game. It's the only way you'll get this one. Playing one game would help prove my point.
Click to expand...

well ah'm approachin 65 so ah ain't gonna be playin no tackle

But, in my younger years, before chicket**** two platoon ball became vogue, I played both ways on left end, and some halfback....defense is harder ... from my own experience.

And that IS pretty much consensus among coaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#307
#307
Burger said:
The offensive lineman is suppose to push you out of the way and go kill a linebacker. Gotta chase down the next guy you're blocking. Haven't you seen the film of the linemen running ahead of the back? Come on man. Weak sauce. Y'all do need to go play a game. It's the only way you'll get this one. Playing one game would help prove my point.
Click to expand...

Why do defensive players stand around with their hands on their hips after long drives while the offense seems un-phased? I never played past high school but having to fight through blockers and physically bring a player to the ground takes a lot more effort than anything on offense with the possible exception of the running back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#308
#308
Good for you guys. I was too damn small as a lineman, so I sucked. I remember having just as hard of a time at right tackle as I did at defensive tackle.
 
#309
#309
I actually like the fast paced offense. There just needs to be a way found, whether through rule tweaking or officiating to allow the defense to ALSO be able to play it's best game.

1. Get them as fit as possible through S&C. Stamina
2. Training table nutrition has to be observed. Adding weight has to monitored.
3. Recruit players suited to a hurry up defense.
3. Practice running in players that are suited to the look the DC sees. Man-to-man and zone switches have to be seamless.
4. Well duh...aint that what they already do?
 
#310
#310
Orangedogsrule said:
I actually like the fast paced offense. There just needs to be a way found, whether through rule tweaking or officiating to allow the defense to ALSO be able to play it's best game.

1. Get them as fit as possible through S&C. Stamina
2. Training table nutrition has to be observed. Adding weight has to monitored.
3. Recruit players suited to a hurry up defense.
3. Practice running in players that are suited to the look the DC sees. Man-to-man and zone switches have to be seamless.
4. Well duh...aint that what they already do?
Click to expand...

Exactly, hence the start of evolution. You'll see defenses stop this crap very soon. Don't worry about that.
 
#311
#311
Why don't we just play 3 downs and eliminate the punt... Why don't we just eliminate kickoffs .... Hell lets just flip a coin to decide who wins... My god football is slowly becoming a pu$$y sport
 
#312
#312
Big Orange 98 said:
Why don't we just play 3 downs and eliminate the punt... Why don't we just eliminate kickoffs .... Hell lets just flip a coin to decide who wins... My god football is slowly becoming a pu$$y sport
Click to expand...

So sez the reincarnation of an 1890's football fan. Or the 1910's, 20's, 30's
..........60's..... ad naseum
 
Last edited:
#314
#314
HuntsVol_AL said:
HUNH does not provide an "unfair" competitive advantage. It is fair. Both teams can do it.
Click to expand...

Sure they can. But even so, that just means both Ds have to, at times, play huffing and puffing and blowing nobodys house down.

Don't get me wrong, I love HUNH. But I also love defense. I want to see football played when both sides can have in the best package and players their coaches can. All this dust up will do is, after the rules committee gets through tinkering, is make for better football. I suspect it will be no more than having an official stand over the ball til both sides are set. Which is already done in some conferences. Possibly letting the D sub in some way to be determined that doesn't give them an unfair advantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#316
#316
Orangedogsrule said:
Sure they can. But even so, that just means both Ds have to, at times, play huffing and puffing and blowing nobodys house down.

Don't get me wrong, I love HUNH. But I also love defense. I want to see football played when both sides can have in the best package and players their coaches can. All this dust up will do is, after the rules committee gets through tinkering, is make for better football. I suspect it will be no more than having an official stand over the ball til both sides are set. Which is already done in some conferences. Possibly letting the D sub in some way to be determined that doesn't give them an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...

You know legislation hardly ever results in good. California proves that. It's just going to create more problems in the future.
Let evolution take care of defenses. They will adapt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#317
#317
Burger said:
You know legislation hardly ever results in good. California proves that. It's just going to create more problems in the future.
Let evolution take care of defenses. They will adapt.
Click to expand...

It's the NCAA Football Rules Commitee, not the State Senate. Tinkering with the rules of football is what they do. If you make a commitee they WILL commitify (immawordsmith) every time they meet, and this commitee meets every year to consider rule changes proposed by any member of the NCAA. They do have their own rule that every other year only football rule changes affecting player safety get considered. This is one of those years. So, proponents of getting a change to help the D against SOME issues of the HUNH got their position TO BEGIN TO BE LOOKED AT from the exhausted, caught offguard lineman safety issue, without regard to whether they have the documentation to make their case. e.g. They basically know it won't pass the general vote March 6th, but now it's front and center, studies will be done, and in a year or three minor tweaking will begin. If anything happens before that I'd be suprised ... except for possibly some conferences instructing their officiating crews to stand over the ball a few seconds to determine everyones ready. Heck I've seen offenses snap before some of their own are ready & get called. Whether substitution relief is made remains to be seen. As for tweaking rules, the only way to stop that would be for the NCAA to disband the commitee.
 
#318
#318
Big Orange 98 said:
Why don't we just play 3 downs and eliminate the punt... Why don't we just eliminate kickoffs .... Hell lets just flip a coin to decide who wins... My god football is slowly becoming a pu$$y sport
Click to expand...

To be fair this particular issue is not about player safety and those pushing the idea should go ahead and clear the air on that part of it.
 
#321
#321
BeecherVol said:
To be fair this particular issue is not about player safety and those pushing the idea should go ahead and clear the air on that part of it.
Click to expand...

Well the issue more there (and I'll try to find an article mentioning), I think, was that because this all falls on a certain year falling within a rotation.


Here found it, from ESPN

The NCAA's playing rules oversight panel will discuss the proposed changes March 6. The only adjustments allowed this year -- not designated as a rules-change year -- are those that involve player safety or modify a previous rule change such as targeting.
Click to expand...
 
#323
#323
bamawriter said:
I played both ways in high school. Not that I can relate to SEC level players, I can promise you that playing a game against random dudes from the internet would not teach me a thing I don't already know.
Click to expand...


Bama fans are grabbing at straws... Your coach overstepped his bounds and honestly who can blame him. If you can't beat them legislate them. Your defense will evolve and adapt (and it will unfortunately), or it will get passed by.

I think Kliff K. said it best it's not a surprise his last three losses were to hunh offenses.


As for Bielema he is working with a few bent chromosomes and probably should just keep his mouth closed.


I do think it is sickening though that they are using player safety as an excuse for their reluctance to adapt. If they truly cared for the players they would limit the at risk overweight and sickle cell trait players to less plays or limit play at all (sickle cell trait is roughly 8% of African American population). Should probably limit 2 a days and post training workouts, should limit practices in that hot Bama sun, etc...

And before you say one word of "well they can't limit the number of plays they run, waaaaa waaaaa". Horseshirt, call a f`ing timeout, tell your exhausted player to take a knee. Oh wait that would cost a timeout.... or would hold that player out of the next play. Yeah your coach cares about his players...
 
#324
#324
Is saben even involved in this story?
The artical talks to coaches against the rule change but is there another artical where saben is pushing the rule change?
 
#325
#325
orangeslice13 said:
Is saben even involved in this story?
The artical talks to coaches against the rule change but is there another artical where saben is pushing the rule change?
Click to expand...

Yes, he's the first to say it, but Bret has a bigger mouth apparently. It's why its called the Saban rule.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top