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

#204
#204
orangeslice13 said:
I've played devils advcate in this thread but the reality is the D could sub if they were prepaired. Be ready to run guys on and off the feild. You know...... practice subbing and be ready to play the uptempo teams.
Click to expand...

You get it.
 
#205
#205
orangeslice13 said:
I've played devils advcate in this thread but the reality is the D could sub if they were prepaired. Be ready to run guys on and off the feild. You know...... practice subbing and be ready to play the uptempo teams.
Click to expand...

They're designed more to exploit a rule to not let you do that on defense though. That's the somewhat gimmicky aspect of it, unfortunately.
 
#209
#209
Doyle Hargraves said:
Adept, overcome, or gtfo imo.
Click to expand...

You can only condition the body so much. Generally, playing defense has to expend more energy with what their play style warrants than an offense does, anyways.

Plus, I don't think any offense should be able to exploit one wrong matchup play against the defense for like 10 straight plays, by using what feels like a loophole in the rulebook.



This isn't about slowing down the offense at all, this is about allowing the defense to make substitutions.


That or maybe we should just tell the defenses play cover 2 all drive and let the offenses do all the work from here on out.
 
Last edited:
#210
#210
TrueOrange said:
You can only condition the body so much. Generally, playing defense has to expend more energy with what their play style warrants than an offense does, anyways.

Plus, I don't think any offense should be able to exploit one wrong matchup play against the defense for like 10 straight plays, by using what feels like a loophole in the rulebook.



This isn't about slowing down the offense at all, this is about allowing the defense to make substitutions.


That or maybe we should just tell the defenses play cover 2 all drive and let the offenses do all the work.
Click to expand...

Defenses have less plays for a reason. Defense is reaction to the offense. Defenses have to be bigger, faster, stronger than the O if they want to dominate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#212
#212
orangeslice13 said:
I've played devils advcate in this thread but the reality is the D could sub if they were prepaired. Be ready to run guys on and off the feild. You know...... practice subbing and be ready to play the uptempo teams.
Click to expand...

If the offense is running down the field to get "set", then no matter how quickly the defense tries to sub they will get hit with a substitution foul 9 out of 10 times. That's why my beef is with teams being allowed to get set and then move en masse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#213
#213
Burger said:
Defenses have less plays for a reason. Defense is reaction to the offense. Defenses have to be bigger, faster, stronger than the O if they want to dominate.
Click to expand...

you get a thumbs up for me for being the first correct user of dominate/dominant that I've read on message boards in days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#215
#215
bamawriter said:
The problem usually rears its head with the adjective rather than the verb.
Click to expand...

I believe it's more because people here it as "dämənət" instead of "dämənənt", so they think that it's spelled dominate and that both words are spelled the same

(meaning they don't don't hear a second "n" therefore don't think it exists)
 
#216
#216
crusse10 said:
I believe it's more because people here it as "dämənət" instead of "dämənənt", so they think that it's spelled dominate and that both words are spelled the same

(meaning they don't don't hear a second "n" therefore don't think it exists)
Click to expand...

That's exactly why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#219
#219
Burger said:
The basic grammar mistakes are terrible. The worst is the misuse of your vs you're and there vs. their and they're.
Click to expand...

That upset me so much that I've basically moved on from it to other things. Dominant/Dominate and "I could care less" are near the top of my list now.

I always say something like "oh could you? Just how much less could you care?"
 
#220
#220
bamawriter said:
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!"
Click to expand...


Slow down...I'm writing this down....Wahhh...Saban...:compute:
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#221
#221
bamawriter said:
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!"
Click to expand...

If there is no hard evidence it will help or affect the game, then why else propose it?

Instead, they are using the backdoor excuse of "player safety" to try to justify it.

As meticulous as Saban is, I am sure he has worked out some way that this could be an advantage for his team.

And let's keep in mind that you are comparing apples to oranges regarding the "Saban Rule".

One is a recruiting rule and the other can directly affect the flow of every single game played.

He was making now impermissible contacts to players by "bumping" into them that other coaches weren't doing or at least getting caught at doing.


It isn't that other coaches aren't willing to work hard, they would just like an even playing field for the rules.
 
#222
#222
crusse10 said:
I believe it's more because people here it as "dämənət" instead of "dämənənt", so they think that it's spelled dominate and that both words are spelled the same

(meaning they don't don't hear a second "n" therefore don't think it exists)
Click to expand...

Wtf. Get a freaking life guys. Who gives two Shiite Muslims about any of this garbage?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#223
#223
JonGrudensAgent said:
If there is no hard evidence it will help or affect the game, then why else propose it?

Instead, they are using the backdoor excuse of "player safety" to try to justify it.

As meticulous as Saban is, I am sure he has worked out some way that this could be an advantage for his team.

And let's keep in mind that you are comparing apples to oranges regarding the "Saban Rule".

One is a recruiting rule and the other can directly affect the flow of every single game played.

He was making now impermissible contacts to players by "bumping" into them that other coaches weren't doing or at least getting caught at doing.


It isn't that other coaches aren't willing to work hard, they would just like an even playing field for the rules.
Click to expand...

The Saban Rule didn't simply strengthen the bump rule, it limited the timeframes that head coaches can make in person recruiting trips. It had everything to do with Saban working harder than his peers and all but one deciding that, rather than putting in more work, Saban should be reigned in.

As for the rule change being discussed, I pretty much agree with you.
 
#224
#224
bamawriter said:
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!"
Click to expand...

You find it funny people are knocking Saban for a change that benefits him despite no evidence that it will help? are you serious?
So you think it wont help Saban to substitute dlineman after every two snaps??? really??
:lol:
 
Last edited:
#225
#225
bamawriter said:
If the offense is running down the field to get "set", then no matter how quickly the defense tries to sub they will get hit with a substitution foul 9 out of 10 times. That's why my beef is with teams being allowed to get set and then move en masse.
Click to expand...

Then the D's should practice it and be prepared. No? Defense can sub every play if they want. If the offense can run a play in 10 seconds without subbing then it is on the D to stop it. It the same personnel as the play before, D should be able to stop it.

Same with the pre snap shift. The defense can shift as well. If personnel aren't changing the it is what it is. If the defense feels they can't stop certain formations without subbing then they can always try and sub or line-up the best they can. Completely disagree there is a sense of unfairness to the D in HUNH doing a pre snap shift. Nothing on the field has changed from the previous play. Nothing.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top