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

#179
#179
SmokinBob said:
Soo why have the rule? It won't change anything - therefore it is unnecessary.
Click to expand...

Now the D can be caught with to many on the feild if they try to sub and the O does not. The O can run to the line without calling a play and snap the ball. This rule change pervents this but does not slow down a real up tempo O where they actually intend to run a play.

That's one reason, if I think on it for a while I'm sure I can think of others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#180
#180
Col_Cathcart said:
The concern with this particular rule change is that they haven't really presented evidence of a problem (unless that problem is bama can't seem to adequately defend HUNH offenses).

Offenses have been gradually speeding up for years. If there had been a corresponding rise in injury rates, don't you think those statistics would have been front and center when they presented this rule change? People say that there are "more opportunities" to be injured. Well, it's been happening for years. These opportunities aren't just theoretical. You can literally count the number of plays and the number of injuries and see if there's a statistically significant correlation. I suspect that the reason the NCAA isn't showcasing those numbers is because such a correlation does not exist.
Click to expand...

For me its not about injury. Its about coaches being able to coach. If you catch a D in a bad match up you shouldn't be able to exploit it for 10 plays.

This rule does not slow the O in any way. It just allows the D to adjust. The only coaches crying about this are all well known for having Shat D's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#181
#181
Proud and happy to be a Vol fan. I'm grateful that our tradition, history, and pride is powerful and meaningful.....win or loose....12-0 or 0-12.
I can't image CBJ or any UT coach campaigning to change rules because of losing 4 games in 4 years.
It's crazy...
Always great to be a Vol fan








edit: maybe not always...well yeah pretty much always:loco:
 
#182
#182
crusse10 said:
It leads to more opportunities to get injured, though. That's irrefutable.
Click to expand...

So do 320lb linemen. Maybe they should be outlawed too. College football is becoming a real farce.

After the former NFL players are finished draining that league for injuries that took place years ago the lawyers will then turn to college players who never played in the NFL and push class action lawsuits that will cause the financial ruin of the game. I can see colleges viewing college athletics as a liability in the very near future and consider eliminating them all together.

But I am of the opinion that if Saban can hypocritically dictate the rules of the game while at the same time using enhancement methods to create super huge athletes, then maybe it is time to end the fiasco that is college football. If Saban cared about the college athlete then he would do some research on the long lasting health effects of his own training methods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#183
#183
crusse10 said:
A fluke play that could have been avoided doesn't mean that one team and coach is superior to a superior coach
Click to expand...

A superior coach does not stand on the sideline with no excuse for the other team running a 109 missed field goal back for the winning TD as time is running out. And later says in the press conference that I never thought of being beaten on a missed field goal.

The superior coach found a way to win the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#184
#184
onevol74 said:
A superior coach does not stand on the sideline with no excuse for the other team running a 109 missed field goal back for the winning TD as time is running out. And later says in the press conference that I never thought of being beaten on a missed field goal.

The superior coach found a way to win the game.
Click to expand...
Gus Malzahn is a superior coach to Nick Saban, which is why he found a way to win the game.
Nick Saban is a superior coach to Les Miles, which is why he found a way to win the game.
Les Miles is a superior coach to Gus Malzahn, which is why he found a way to win the game.

Uh oh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#186
#186
onevol74 said:
So do 320lb linemen. Maybe they should be outlawed too. College football is becoming a real farce.

After the former NFL players are finished draining that league for injuries that took place years ago the lawyers will then turn to college players who never played in the NFL and push class action lawsuits that will cause the financial ruin of the game. I can see colleges viewing college athletics as a liability in the very near future and consider eliminating them all together.

But I am of the opinion that if Saban can hypocritically dictate the rules of the game while at the same time using enhancement methods to create super huge athletes, then maybe it is time to end the fiasco that is college football. If Saban cared about the college athlete then he would do some research on the long lasting health effects of his own training methods.
Click to expand...

He doesn't give two she-its about player safety. He had his lackeys in the NCAA pull this crap because he got his arsehole widened by Johnny Football and Malzahn. This automatically makes him a sissy who deserves no respect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#188
#188
Quite simple, the offense should dictate tempo. If the defense can't sub because the offense wants a fast tempo, the defense should be better conditioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#189
#189
UTRavens said:
Gus Malzahn is a superior coach to Nick Saban, which is why he found a way to win the game.
Nick Saban is a superior coach to Les Miles, which is why he found a way to win the game.
Les Miles is a superior coach to Gus Malzahn, which is why he found a way to win the game.

Uh oh.
Click to expand...

slapped in the face with logic
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#190
#190
I don't have a problem with the Defense having the opportunity to change personal,after all so many rules have been implemented to help get more points on the score board,don't hit the Quarter Back to hard,don't touch a Receiver, hell they even changed the field,set the hash marks closer together so the Offense could score more points,I say give the Defense a bone
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#191
#191
crusse10 said:
All these coaches saying "where's the proof?!?"

The proof is in the amount of plays run, therefore more chances to get injured on both sides.
Click to expand...

Hey Saban, I like you worry about player safety and not about the drumming Oklahoma gave you with their fast pace offense. Serious note, Oklahoma would have penalized 6 times in their game with bammer. Info came out on 104.5 yesterday during the midday show. So no hidden agendas here.
 
#192
#192
Should be slowed down. Less chance of injury. Huddle required is only way it will get done.
 
#193
#193
MFL said:
Should be slowed down. Less chance of injury. Huddle required is only way it will get done.
Click to expand...

Should we take every way equalizer out of the game? Because, it's a way lesser teams try to compete with the big boys. No data shows this is more dangerous, but you're going on assumptions. Stanford doesn't have problems with injuries as they pummel Oregon or are you pretending that doesn't happen. My point, there is no data that backs your point up. Coaches are trying to change this so they can win. The last two teams that beat Saban ran speed offenses.
 
#194
#194
The simple fact that Saban is for it should be reason enough for all Vol fans to be against it.

Many coaches aren't convinced this is a player safety issue.

"I don't see the injury piece," said Boston College coach Steve Addazio, whose team runs an offense that is rarely in a rush. "I think we need more data."

Redding said the proposal was not made based on a study of data.

"I can't say there is hard physical evidence," he said. "It's more common sense."

Redding added he studied film of two games involving up-tempo offenses and only once in each game did a team snap the ball within 10 seconds of the 40-second clock starting.

"The majority of time was somewhere in the 20s," he said. "The average time was 17 seconds.

"You really don't impact what people are already doing."

If there is no hard data for it improving player safety and it won't impact what teams are already doing for the most part, why change the rule?

Just another bloated bureaucracy at work changing something for the sake of change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#195
#195
JonGrudensAgent said:
The simple fact that Saban is for it should be reason enough for all Vol fans to be against it.

Many coaches aren't convinced this is a player safety issue.

"I don't see the injury piece," said Boston College coach Steve Addazio, whose team runs an offense that is rarely in a rush. "I think we need more data."

Redding said the proposal was not made based on a study of data.

"I can't say there is hard physical evidence," he said. "It's more common sense."

Redding added he studied film of two games involving up-tempo offenses and only once in each game did a team snap the ball within 10 seconds of the 40-second clock starting.

"The majority of time was somewhere in the 20s," he said. "The average time was 17 seconds.

"You really don't impact what people are already doing."

If there is no hard data for it improving player safety and it won't impact what teams are already doing for the most part, why change the rule?

Just another bloated bureaucracy at work changing something for the sake of change.
Click to expand...

They are wanting to do it because the fast pace no huddle gets to the line quick and calls the play there amd butt hurt saban with his unconditioned monster linemen get torched. Its really quite simple to see this is meant to not have to condition the big uglies up front even though stanford shows it can be done.
 
#196
#196
onevol74 said:
So do 320lb linemen. Maybe they should be outlawed too. College football is becoming a real farce.

After the former NFL players are finished draining that league for injuries that took place years ago the lawyers will then turn to college players who never played in the NFL and push class action lawsuits that will cause the financial ruin of the game. I can see colleges viewing college athletics as a liability in the very near future and consider eliminating them all together.

But I am of the opinion that if Saban can hypocritically dictate the rules of the game while at the same time using enhancement methods to create super huge athletes, then maybe it is time to end the fiasco that is college football. If Saban cared about the college athlete then he would do some research on the long lasting health effects of his own training methods.
Click to expand...

Eddie Lacy and Trent Richardson are both examples. Eddie Lacy came to GB with a worn down body. He's damaged goods because of how hard Saban ran him.
 
#198
#198
Burger said:
Eddie Lacy and Trent Richardson are both examples. Eddie Lacy came to GB with a worn down body. He's damaged goods because of how hard Saban ran him.
Click to expand...

Which is absolutely silly considering bama is always about 15 deep at running back and at least 10 of them are 5*.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#199
#199
Doyle Hargraves said:
Which is absolutely silly considering bama is always about 15 deep at running back and at least 10 of them are 5*.
Click to expand...

How do you think I feel as a Packers fan. Lacy will be done before he's 27 because of the damage. I've also heard his knee is an injury waiting to happen.
 
#200
#200
While I don't support this rule change, I find it funny that people are knocking Saban for supporting a change that benefits him despite no evidence that it will help. Every SEC coach other than Meyer supported the recruiting "Saban Rule" back in '09, and that had no justification other than "Wahhh! Saban works harder than us and we don't want to try and compete with him! No fair!"
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top