|
Title: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 12, 2014, 06:04:52 PM http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/football-rules-committee-slightly-adjusts-targeting-rule-defensive
Quote The committee recommended that if the instant replay official rules that a disqualification should not have occurred, and if the targeting foul is not accompanied by another personal foul, the 15-yard penalty for targeting should not be enforced. Quote The committee also recommended a rules change that will allow defensive units to substitute within the first 10 seconds of the 40-second play clock, with the exception of the final two minutes of each half, starting with the 2014 season. Quote Under this rule proposal, the offense will not be allowed to snap the ball until the play clock reaches 29 seconds or less. If the offense snaps the ball before the play clock reaches 29 seconds, a 5-yard, delay-of-game penalty will be assessed. Under current rules, defensive players are not guaranteed an opportunity to substitute unless the offense substitutes first. This part of the rule will remain in place in scenarios where the play clock starts at 25 seconds. The Gus bus will hit the mediocrity wall if the 10 second rule passes. I'm glad they are addressing that stupid targeting rule. It will be very interesting and probably controversial if the 10 second rule passes. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 12, 2014, 06:13:34 PM I'm glad this happened, especially the target rule.
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 12, 2014, 06:16:42 PM I'm glad this happened, especially the target rule. People are already coming out of the woodwork accusing the REC of pushing the slow down of the HUNH. :lol2: Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 12, 2014, 06:26:40 PM I'm glad this happened, especially the target rule. People are already coming out of the woodwork accusing the REC of pushing the slow down of the HUNH. :lol2: It was a year ago that CNS brought all of this to everyone's attention that it should be looked at and some changes made. Well, it only took one year for them to take his advice and do what he said to do. I know this will burn some butts nationally. The REC only makes sure that it happens. >:( Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 12, 2014, 07:16:16 PM I'm glad this happened, especially the target rule. People are already coming out of the woodwork accusing the REC of pushing the slow down of the HUNH. :lol2: It was a year ago that CNS brought all of this to everyone's attention that it should be looked at and some changes made. Well, it only took one year for them to take his advice and do what he said to do. I know this will burn some butts nationally. The REC only makes sure that it happens. >:( :worship: :worship: :worship: Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Chechem on February 12, 2014, 07:28:37 PM HOPEFULLY they'll pass the 10-sec rule.
But will they? I fear they'll table it for a year. The statement below sounds like it's a done deal. Quote The committee discussed the issue thoroughly before coming to the conclusion that defensive teams should be allowed some period of time to substitute. The committee believes that 10 seconds provides sufficient time for defensive player substitutions without inhibiting the ability of an offense to play at a fast pace. Research indicated that teams with fast-paced, no-huddle offenses rarely snap the ball with 30 seconds or more on the play clock. This rules proposal also aligns with a request from the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports that sport rules committees review substitution rules in regards to player safety. http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/football-rules-committee-slightly-adjusts-targeting-rule-defensiveIn the NCAA’s non-rules change years, proposals can only be made for student-athlete safety reasons or modifications that enhance the intent of a previous rules change. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 12, 2014, 07:51:34 PM HOPEFULLY they'll pass the 10-sec rule. But will they? I fear they'll table it for a year. The statement below sounds like it's a done deal. Quote The committee discussed the issue thoroughly before coming to the conclusion that defensive teams should be allowed some period of time to substitute. The committee believes that 10 seconds provides sufficient time for defensive player substitutions without inhibiting the ability of an offense to play at a fast pace. Research indicated that teams with fast-paced, no-huddle offenses rarely snap the ball with 30 seconds or more on the play clock. This rules proposal also aligns with a request from the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports that sport rules committees review substitution rules in regards to player safety. http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/football-rules-committee-slightly-adjusts-targeting-rule-defensiveIn the NCAA’s non-rules change years, proposals can only be made for student-athlete safety reasons or modifications that enhance the intent of a previous rules change. I certainly hope it passes too, but it will not be passed without a fight from the Oregons, TAMUs and Baylors of the college football world. The HUNH teams have completely sold out, and put all their eggs in this basket. They will not let this pass quietly. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Marshal Dillon on February 12, 2014, 07:52:51 PM I'm glad this happened, especially the target rule. BINGO!!! :dance: Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: bamaphil on February 12, 2014, 10:28:08 PM Allowing the 15 yard penalty to stand after the booth overturned the targeting call was ridiculous and Bama got screwed a couple of times last year. Hope it changes.
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: McBaman on February 13, 2014, 08:53:44 AM Fixing the targeting rule is a no brainer that even NCAA should be able to fix with this proposal.
The :10 sec/HUNH rule will have lots of discussion. There will be need for more facts to support changing the rules and for that reason I doubt it will pass this year. Part of me says 'leave it alone.' If the one team can figure a way to run their O to advantage, then the other team has to figure a way to defend it. I guess there was a time when the forward pass was thought of as a gimmick. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 13, 2014, 11:14:15 AM I think everyone knew the targeting rule would be changed this year.
I like the 10 sec HUNH rule change. To me allowing the defense to sub is not the issue. Most teams that run the HUNH rush to line and try to snap the ball before the defense is set. If the defense is set they slow down and call a play by signals from from the sideline. The 10 sec rule will allow the defense time to get set which makes it a level playing field. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: cbbama99 on February 13, 2014, 05:06:10 PM I think everyone knew the targeting rule would be changed this year. I like the 10 sec HUNH rule change. To me allowing the defense to sub is not the issue. Most teams that run the HUNH rush to line and try to snap the ball before the defense is set. If the defense is set they slow down and call a play by signals from from the sideline. The 10 sec rule will allow the defense time to get set which makes it a level playing field. My thoughts Ed Zachary. To me, it has always been about giving the defense enough time to get set instead of rushing around trying to figure out where to go while the offense already knows what it is going to do. Unfair advantage, in opinion. Besides, pretty much anything the barners are against, I am pro. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 13, 2014, 07:40:32 PM My opinion is that either the offense or defense should be able to substitute at any time and the ball not put in play until the changes are made. There is a huge advantage for the offense the way it is set up now. The same goes for linemen being down field on passing plays, another huge advantage for the offense and that cost Bama the game in the Iron Bowl this year. :wall:
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Bamaphile on February 13, 2014, 10:36:04 PM To me, the HUNH is like a game of chess where one person can use his allotted time to make his move, but as soon as he's made a move, the other player has less than 10 seconds to decide what his next move will be. The person who doesn't have any time to think about a response is at an unfair advantage before any move is made. How would proponents of the HUNH feel if the defense was allowed to just go and clobber the quarterback as soon as the ball was marked ready for play before the center even snapped the ball? The defense could make the argument that just because the offense hadn't snapped the ball, that's no reason why they couldn't do what they wanted to do. It's just ridiculous.
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 14, 2014, 08:03:29 AM To me, the HUNH is like a game of chess where one person can use his allotted time to make his move, but as soon as he's made a move, the other player has less than 10 seconds to decide what his next move will be. The person who doesn't have any time to think about a response is at an unfair advantage before any move is made. How would proponents of the HUNH feel if the defense was allowed to just go and clobber the quarterback as soon as the ball was marked ready for play before the center even snapped the ball? The defense could make the argument that just because the offense hadn't snapped the ball, that's no reason why they couldn't do what they wanted to do. It's just ridiculous. In baseball the pitcher can not make a pitch until the batter is in the box and ready. The ump will even allow the batter time time to kick around a little dirt. Once the batter is ready the pitch can be thrown. In basketball the ref holds the ball until both sides are in position and ready for play. The NFL gets it. Many NFL teams run no huddle. It is effective and wears the defense down but the refs will not rush to put the ball in play. They take their normal time and make sure the defense is ready before the offense can snap the ball. The hurry up in college is an unfair offensive advantage. I don't know if the 10 sec rule is the best way to control it. I think the ref's could do it by following the NFL model. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 14, 2014, 08:58:04 AM Well, what we were all probably thinking is true.
"Nick Saban voiced support of rule (and Bielema)" http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10453325/nick-saban-bret-bielema-backed-committee-proposal-slow-rule Quote NEW YORK -- Alabama coach Nick Saban and Arkansas coach Bret Bielema voiced their concerns about the effects of up-tempo, no-huddle offenses on player safety to the NCAA committee that passed a proposal to slow down those attacks. Neither Saban nor Bielema were on the committee and they did not vote on the proposal passed Wednesday to allow defenses time to substitute between plays by prohibiting offenses from snapping the ball until 29 seconds are left on the 40-second play clock.NCAA coordinator of officials Rogers Redding said Thursday that Bielema was at the meeting in Indianapolis as a representative of the American Football Coaches Association. "Coach Saban asked for the opportunity to meet with the committee and talk about this," Redding said. "It's not routine, but it's not unique, either." Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Chechem on February 14, 2014, 12:11:39 PM Quote The proposal must be approved by the playing rules oversight panel, which meets March 6. Redding said it's not a rubber stamp panel, but more often than not it approves proposals. The panel does not consider competitive issues, Redding said. "Their role is to examine rules on the basis of player safety, economic impact and image of the game," he said. Right now the proposal is in what is known as a comment period. Coaches can electronically submit their opinions to the NCAA on the proposal, supporting it or opposing it. :popcorn2: :popcorn2: :popcorn2: :popcorn2: :popcorn2: :popcorn2: Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 15, 2014, 04:16:24 PM The fixing of the targeting rule is good.
Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their offense is junk. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 15, 2014, 04:38:20 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk.
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 15, 2014, 04:46:28 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 15, 2014, 04:50:03 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. The sport of basketball would disagree. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: cbbama99 on February 15, 2014, 04:56:53 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. In what way, just out of curiosity? The sport of basketball would disagree. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 15, 2014, 05:19:44 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. The sport of basketball would disagree. Basketball is a continuous game. There is no whistle after a made basket. However, after a whistle the ref will not put the ball back in play until both teams are ready. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 15, 2014, 05:27:13 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. The sport of basketball would disagree. Basketball is a continuous game. There is no whistle after a made basket. However, after a whistle the ref will not put the ball back in play until most teams are ready. I am aware of how the game of basketball is played. I just witnessed BAMA losing to the worst team in the SEC. Whistle, or no whistle, "any other sport" does not allow both sides the ability to be set before play resumes/begins. If you play assignment football and cover your assignment it does not matter if the opposition is running a HUNH, run and shoot, or any other scheme. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 15, 2014, 05:35:30 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. The sport of basketball would disagree. Basketball is a continuous game. There is no whistle after a made basket. However, after a whistle the ref will not put the ball back in play until most teams are ready. I am aware of how the game of basketball is played. I just witnessed BAMA losing to the worst team in the SEC. Whistle, or no whistle, "any other sport" does not allow both sides the ability to be set before play resumes/begins. If you play assignment football and cover your assignment it does not matter if the opposition is running a HUNH, run and shoot, or any other scheme. Name one sport that allows a team to "hurry up" after a stoppage in play in an attempt to catch the other team out of position. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 15, 2014, 05:46:22 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. The sport of basketball would disagree. Basketball is a continuous game. There is no whistle after a made basket. However, after a whistle the ref will not put the ball back in play until most teams are ready. I am aware of how the game of basketball is played. I just witnessed BAMA losing to the worst team in the SEC. Whistle, or no whistle, "any other sport" does not allow both sides the ability to be set before play resumes/begins. If you play assignment football and cover your assignment it does not matter if the opposition is running a HUNH, run and shoot, or any other scheme. Name one sport that allows a team to "hurry up" after a stoppage in play in an attempt to catch the other team out of position. I already did. Basketball. Ask Larry Bird about it. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 15, 2014, 05:48:36 PM Anything that limits a team's ability to operate their defense is junk. I agree. As pmull pointed out earlier, in any other sport, both sides have the ability to be set, so that it's a level playing field. The sport of basketball would disagree. Basketball is a continuous game. There is no whistle after a made basket. However, after a whistle the ref will not put the ball back in play until most teams are ready. I am aware of how the game of basketball is played. I just witnessed BAMA losing to the worst team in the SEC. Whistle, or no whistle, "any other sport" does not allow both sides the ability to be set before play resumes/begins. If you play assignment football and cover your assignment it does not matter if the opposition is running a HUNH, run and shoot, or any other scheme. Name one sport that allows a team to "hurry up" after a stoppage in play in an attempt to catch the other team out of position. I already did. Basketball. Ask Larry Bird about it. Maybe you should call Larry because I don't think you know what you are talking about. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 15, 2014, 06:08:28 PM Maybe you should call Larry because I don't think you know what you are talking about. Says the guy who thinks Grant is doing a bang up job. Firstly, comparing basketball, and most certainly baseball, to football is like comparing apples to cats. Just b/c you do not like my answers does not make me incorrect. Call Peyton Manning and ask him about HUNH in football, and from the pro set no less. You are going to honestly claim that referees hold balls for extended periods of time in basketball games to prevent the offensive team from a quick inbound pass? With a few exceptions, the only time a referee holds the ball in a basketball game until both teams are completely set is on the opening tip. How about soccer? How about rugby? How about volleyball? Those are all sports, in addition to basketball, where the offensive team is generally allowed to move without the readiness of the defense being an issue. You wanted sports, right? Should a rule also be put in place that limits the number of running backs, or receivers, on the field in the event that the defense does not have enough serviceable secondary players, or linebackers, to adequately cover the offensive players in that particular offensive package? Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 15, 2014, 06:23:43 PM Maybe you should call Larry because I don't think you know what you are talking about. Says the guy who thinks Grant is doing a bang up job. Firstly, comparing basketball, and most certainly baseball, to football is like comparing apples to cats. Just b/c you do not like my answers does not make me incorrect. Call Peyton Manning and ask him about HUNH in football, and from the pro set no less. You are going to honestly claim that referees hold balls for extended periods of time in basketball games to prevent the offensive team from a quick inbound pass? With a few exceptions, the only time a referee holds the ball in a basketball game until both teams are completely set is on the opening tip. How about soccer? How about rugby? How about volleyball? Those are all sports, in addition to basketball, where the offensive team is generally allowed to move without the readiness of the defense being an issue. You wanted sports, right? Should a rule also be put in place that limits the number of running backs, or receivers, on the field in the event that the defense does not have enough serviceable secondary players, or linebackers, to adequately cover the offensive players in that particular offensive package? Like the other poster stated, you have no clue as to what you are talking about. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 15, 2014, 06:24:44 PM Maybe you should call Larry because I don't think you know what you are talking about. Says the guy who thinks Grant is doing a bang up job. Firstly, comparing basketball, and most certainly baseball, to football is like comparing apples to cats. Just b/c you do not like my answers does not make me incorrect. Call Peyton Manning and ask him about HUNH in football, and from the pro set no less. You are going to honestly claim that referees hold balls for extended periods of time in basketball games to prevent the offensive team from a quick inbound pass? With a few exceptions, the only time a referee holds the ball in a basketball game until both teams are completely set is on the opening tip. How about soccer? How about rugby? How about volleyball? Those are all sports, in addition to basketball, where the offensive team is generally allowed to move without the readiness of the defense being an issue. You wanted sports, right? Should a rule also be put in place that limits the number of running backs, or receivers, on the field in the event that the defense does not have enough serviceable secondary players, or linebackers, to adequately cover the offensive players in that particular offensive package? You are overlooking the main point. In all other sports, teams are able to substitute, and in doing so, the officials keep the ball out of play until the substitution is complete. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 15, 2014, 06:28:01 PM Maybe you should call Larry because I don't think you know what you are talking about. Says the guy who thinks Grant is doing a bang up job. Firstly, comparing basketball, and most certainly baseball, to football is like comparing apples to cats. Just b/c you do not like my answers does not make me incorrect. Call Peyton Manning and ask him about HUNH in football, and from the pro set no less. You are going to honestly claim that referees hold balls for extended periods of time in basketball games to prevent the offensive team from a quick inbound pass? With a few exceptions, the only time a referee holds the ball in a basketball game until both teams are completely set is on the opening tip. How about soccer? How about rugby? How about volleyball? Those are all sports, in addition to basketball, where the offensive team is generally allowed to move without the readiness of the defense being an issue. You wanted sports, right? Should a rule also be put in place that limits the number of running backs, or receivers, on the field in the event that the defense does not have enough serviceable secondary players, or linebackers, to adequately cover the offensive players in that particular offensive package? Running a no huddle like Payton Manning and several NFL teams to is not the "hurry up". NFL officials do a good job of dictating pace. College officials let offenses move at a pace that not only the defense is not set but the refs are also out of position. In basketball refs will allow time for a defensive player to tie his shoe before putting the ball in play if necessary. In volleyball the server does not rush to serve trying to catch the opposing team out of position. That would be considered poor sportsmanship. You may be right about soccer and rugby. The next time I watch an entire game of either of those sports will be my first time. We don't agree on this. Nothing wrong with that. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 16, 2014, 10:00:02 AM "I'm a man, I'm 40" weighs in.
http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/93597/gundy-voices-opposition-to-rule-change Quote The no huddle, fast tempo style has changed the game of CFB. Our sport has exploded in popularity with high scoring games & packed stadiums. BS! The most watched games in CF are the Bama/LSU type games. If the truth be known and people are honest, most would tell you they would like to see more defense. The Big 12 and all their HUNH teams have become irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 16, 2014, 10:17:45 AM Ellis Johnson comments when he was DC for South Carolina. I wonder how he feels now that he is working for auburn?
Quote Johnson said, “One thing that has gotten into it that I’ve been pretty outspoken, that I really think is starting to deteriorate some of college football is the hurry up offenses. There is nothing wrong a pace and speeding up the play on the operation side. I get that.” “But what’s happening now with the rules is that you can snap it as soon as you want to or you can sit on it for 40 seconds, and there is no in-between.” “Canadian ball is very fast-paced, but the offense can’t sit there all day long. They have a 20 second limit. The NFL cut it out with Buffalo in the 90’s, they kind of put some cold water on it a little bit with the Colts not too many years ago. What they realized is they’re taking the game of football and turning it into soccer or lacrosse. There’s nothing wrong with those sports, but that’s not football.” "What it's about now is who can snap the football before the other team lines up. You can’t hardly get your players on and off the field. You can’t get your signals in and out. It’s become who has the best signal system or verbiage system. “ “Frankly, I don’t know what that proves except someone has a better verbiage package. It’s not about blocking, tackling, running, route running, throwing, and so forth. It’s something the college football world needs to look at.” http://www.footballscoop.com/news/3841-ellis-johnson-explains-why-hurry-up-offenses-are-deteriorating-the-game Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 16, 2014, 10:26:45 AM The NFL's response to Chip Kelly's offense.
Quote NFL officials aren't going to rush to spot the ball just because Kelly's Philadelphia Eagles have rushed to the line. The officials will make sure that between-plays procedures are followed. "We have to make sure teams understand that they don't control the tempo, our officials do," Dean Blandino, the league's vice president of officiating, told the Journal. "We're going through our normal ball mechanics, we aren't going to rush [unless] it's in the two minute drill." Teams can't snap the ball until the officials signal that they're ready. All 32 teams have been made aware of this, Blandino told the Journal. He added that Kelly did not show any "overconcern" when he was briefed. "They (the Eagles) had questions about what the parameters were going to be," Blandino told the Journal. "It's going to be different from college." http://www.oregonlive.com/nfl/index.ssf/2013/07/not_so_fast_nfl_officials_tell.html Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 16, 2014, 10:51:49 AM Running a no huddle like Payton Manning and several NFL teams to is not the "hurry up". Come on. A no huddle is a "hurry up" offense. NFL officials do a good job of dictating pace. I just do not think the refs should be the ultimate arbiter for the pace of the game. but the refs are also out of position. I find this to be a valid argument. In basketball refs will allow time for a defensive player to tie his shoe before putting the ball in play if necessary. Accommodations of this sort are made in football as well. In volleyball the server does not rush to serve trying to catch the opposing team out of position. They also do not unnecessarily wait for the opposition to discuss strategy and set position.Comparing sports that are only similar in the sense that they involve teams and are are played on a plain (court/field) does not constitute a sound basis for a comparative discussion. That would be considered poor sportsmanship Sportsmanship is another issue. We don't agree on this Clearly.Nothing wrong with that. Most assuredly, I respect your opinion and enjoy the discussion.Allow me to present you with something for thought. -The rule will allow for the referee to hold play for 10 seconds On a 12 play drive that would amount 2 minutes of clock time. Over the course of the game a very large portion (5+ minutes) of time could be lost b/c of a referee's opinion of what constitutes readiness. That is 2 possessions, one for each team, at a minimum, and constitutes a significant loss of offensive production. With as subjective as so many calls are in football presently (that lead to fans talking about being cheated, or having to play against the refs) I do not think that it is a good idea to add another layer of human error/involvement to the game. As an aside, I was not born when Coach Bryant installed the wishbone and subsequently began winning with it. Does anyone remember if there was a call for rule changes to lessen the advantage given to a team who ran the wishbone offense? Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: 2Stater on February 16, 2014, 12:25:48 PM Quote As an aside, I was not born when Coach Bryant installed the wishbone and subsequently began winning with it. Does anyone remember if there was a call for rule changes to lessen the advantage given to a team who ran the wishbone offense? RTR, I do not recall anyone calling for a change in rules with the Wishbone. There will always be a difference of opinion about this rule. I for one can't technically see all no huddle offenses being considered hurry up. If you look at Peyton and the Broncos, especially since he checks off so much, there is nothing hurry up about them. Some people don't think that the 10 second rule will make that much difference, but what it will do, is guarantee that the defense has 10 seconds to substitute. The reason I'm for it is that I want to see the best that both sides have on every play. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 16, 2014, 01:10:05 PM My problem with the HUNH is that the offense runs to line up. If they catch the defense not lined up yet they run a set play. If the defense is ready they take their time and get the call from the sideline. This type of offense is not allowed in high school or NFL. No huddles are run at every level but only after an official puts the ball in play. IMO college refs need to determine the pace of play just like the NFL.
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: roll tide roll on February 16, 2014, 05:02:45 PM I for one can't technically see all no huddle offenses being considered hurry up. Sure, but technically a no huddle is a hurry up. Whether it is executed in that manner is entirely situational and varies from team to team and play to play. A HUNH team does not always run an offense that is true to the definition of HUNH.Some people don't think that the 10 second rule will make that much difference, but what it will do, is guarantee that the defense has 10 seconds to substitute. The reason I'm for it is that I want to see the best that both sides have on every play. The interesting thing is that the 10 second rule will shorten (number of plays) the game, which is something the NCAA has been trying to accomplish for years.If they are going to have a 10 second break they should just hold the ball for 10 seconds. It is simply ridiculous that a referee will hold a ball for 10 seconds of game clock after every play. The reason I'm for it is that I want to see the best that both sides have on every play. I see that side of the argument. I also believe that the best team wins 99.9% of the time. Usually when the best team does not win is when human error is involved.My problem with the HUNH is that the offense runs to line up. If they catch the defense not lined up yet they run a set play. How many times have you yelled for someone to "hurry up and snap the ball" because the defense was clearly out of alignment and not ready to defend?If the defense is ready they take their time and get the call from the sideline. This type of offense is not allowed in high school or NFL. Adapt, or die. This is not high school or the NFL.Coach Saban and Coach Smart both said that the reason BAMA lost to boogerU is b/c the players did not play their assignments. boogerU's TD to tie is a perfect example. No huddles are run at every level but only after an official puts the ball in play. Like I said, my biggest problem with the rule is that it allows the referees to run time off of the game clock. If you want a 10 second break between plays, then have a 10 second break between plays. IMO college refs need to determine the pace of play just like the NFL. So, when your team is driving with no timeouts and time running out, and the referees are slow walking the ball between whistles you are okay with that?Honestly, I think that people see the HUNH as a disadvantage for their team and want a rule in place that they think "levels the playing field" in their minds ans since their team does not run the HUNH they are okay with taking it away. Coach Bryant learned and installed the wishbone after being trounced by it. Allowing for 10 seconds of game clock to be lost between every play is bad for all teams involved and the game as a whole. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Chechem on February 16, 2014, 05:06:25 PM Quote So, when your team is driving with no timeouts and time running out, and the referees are slow walking the ball between whistles you are okay with that? Honestly, I think that people see the HUNH as a disadvantage for their team and want a rule in place that they think "levels the playing field" in their minds ans since their team does not run the HUNH they are okay with taking it away. Coach Bryant learned and installed the wishbone after being trounced by it. Allowing for 10 seconds of game clock to be lost between every play is bad for all teams involved and the game as a whole. I can see both sides. One thing that I haven't heard: Teams used to rush out for a quick punt (to gain an advantage) before the defense could field the appropriate team. That went away... Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 16, 2014, 06:43:28 PM There really isn't a rule needed as the argument goes to slow down the HUNH teams, they just need to take out the no substitution rule for the defense and the officials be required to put in ball in play after a team has made their substitutions. If there are no substitutions, then put the ball in play.
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: bamaphil on February 17, 2014, 05:12:01 AM College football is cyclical. Someone develops a new or different offensive scheme and has some success. Everyone else seeks to emulate it. A good defensive coach figures out how to stop it. Everyone emulates the defensive plan. Someone develops a new or different offensive scheme and has some success....
The HUNH will be out of fashion in a few years. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: SUPERCOACH on February 17, 2014, 12:12:59 PM After thinking about this for several days, I don't like this rule. I do like the idea of giving the defense a chance to substitute. I think both sides should have the ability to substitute equally. However I don't see telling the officials to waste 10 seconds after EVERY play. What if the defense WANTS them to go fast? Maybe they are behind and they want the ball back, and the offense is willing to go fast just because that is their standard operating procedure.
I think they need to come up with a different rule to give the defense the opportunity to substitute as needed. Maybe the defense can send in substitutes immediately when the play is dead, and as long as they are coming on to the field before the ball is spotted for the next play the refs just stand over the ball until the switch is made. Or maybe you only allow them to do that on a 1st down while the chains are being moved since there is already a slight delay. I think they can come up with a better way to address this than an artificial 10 second delay. JMHO. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: pmull on February 17, 2014, 12:48:47 PM After thinking about this for several days, I don't like this rule. I do like the idea of giving the defense a chance to substitute. I think both sides should have the ability to substitute equally. However I don't see telling the officials to waste 10 seconds after EVERY play. What if the defense WANTS them to go fast? Maybe they are behind and they want the ball back, and the offense is willing to go fast just because that is their standard operating procedure. I think they need to come up with a different rule to give the defense the opportunity to substitute as needed. Maybe the defense can send in substitutes immediately when the play is dead, and as long as they are coming on to the field before the ball is spotted for the next play the refs just stand over the ball until the switch is made. Or maybe you only allow them to do that on a 1st down while the chains are being moved since there is already a slight delay. I think they can come up with a better way to address this than an artificial 10 second delay. JMHO. I agree. A change needs to be made but I do not like the 10 sec rule. When the offense subs the defense has 3 seconds to sub or the official will put the ball in play. That rule should apply whether the offense subs or not. Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: ricky023 on February 17, 2014, 01:07:02 PM Well brethren, I have been reading up on all of your responses and I have to tell you that I am pretty confused right now. I see the 10 sec. rule but how could it affect either team. Man I am dumb as a rock. I thought the NCAA was going to do something that protects players safety. I may be missing something but I don't see any safety here it only talks about time. Ya'll keep posting and I'll keep reading and maybe someday a light will come on. RTR!
Title: Re: Rule changes proposal could slow down HUNH, make targeting foul consistant Post by: Jamos on February 17, 2014, 06:31:52 PM After thinking about this for several days, I don't like this rule. I do like the idea of giving the defense a chance to substitute. I think both sides should have the ability to substitute equally. However I don't see telling the officials to waste 10 seconds after EVERY play. What if the defense WANTS them to go fast? Maybe they are behind and they want the ball back, and the offense is willing to go fast just because that is their standard operating procedure. I think they need to come up with a different rule to give the defense the opportunity to substitute as needed. Maybe the defense can send in substitutes immediately when the play is dead, and as long as they are coming on to the field before the ball is spotted for the next play the refs just stand over the ball until the switch is made. Or maybe you only allow them to do that on a 1st down while the chains are being moved since there is already a slight delay. I think they can come up with a better way to address this than an artificial 10 second delay. JMHO. ^^^THIS^^^ This is exactly what they need to do, no big deal involving anything other than the ref putting the ball in play. As far as the safety of the players, the substitutions being allowed is what will take care of that issue. CNS is only asking to be able to substitute whenever he feels it is necessary for his players. Some folks are making a big mountain out of a mole hill with this issue. :wall: |