Saban finally speaks about 10 second rule

[mrwallace2ku]

Sup Wallace, Worlds not bad to me right now. Back in the South again doing work closer to home for IBM, so I am getting to spend more time on the lake at home. Cant complain, just wish winter would give us a few more warm days to enjoy more lake time.

I know Nick has stepped in it, but I still stand on the premise that football should be about the best on best, not about who can get to the line first and snap the ball.

I hear ya Bo, but life aint fair either. Hope ya gets to fishing on your lake soon enough. Enjoy being close to your family more too.

BTW...They hung up the leather helmets 70 years ago ol' timer!

 

[trojanfight]

If he's so concerned about player safety why schedule the smaller slower FCS schools? Along with sun belt etc. I would be curious to know how many injuries these smaller schools have compared to injuries in their own conferences

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

If he's so concerned about player safety why schedule the smaller slower FCS schools? Along with sun belt etc. I would be curious to know how many injuries these smaller schools have compared to injuries in their own conferences

Last I checked, the AD is responsible for scheduling the teams.

 

[trojanfan12]

Didnt realize he had to explain himself to America. Whether he asked to speak to them or they asked him to come has no bearing on what he spoke with them about when he went there, so this part is irrelevant and only seeks to discredit him for biased reasons IMO.

I disagree. I think it's very relevant. He has been an outspoken opponent of the hunh and then he asks to speak to the rules committee about implementing a rule that directly impacts other teams ability to run an offense that he is on record as being opposed to. Coincidence?

Also, since he was supporting a rule that could impact many other teams and therefore many other fans, I'd say that yes, he does need to explain himself.

The fact that it took him so long to speak about his appearance before that committee makes it look like he was trying to figure out how to make himself look better given all of the criticism that he's received.

His reasons make sense to me and would even if I was not an Alabama fan. He made good points and used the speed of the game in the NFL as a reference point, incorporating a recent defector that runs the HUHN at the NFL level as an example. He has done some homework on the subject apparently and stated plainly that it warrants a study and consideration. He didnt say anything about wanting the rule implemented nor is he the originator of the rule, he just thinks it warrants a look into for a few sound reasons.

I don't disagree that he has some solid points, but that doesn't mean that rules should be changed. If all he wants is for this to be studied and discussed, then that is what he should have said rather than going before the committee to look for the rule to be changed.

College football is not the NFL. It is it's own sport and doesn't have to mirror everything the NFL does. I agree that the hunh should be looked and studied for everything from potential injury issues to overall effect on the game. However, no rules should be changed until this has been studied and both sides have had the chance to present their case.

Throughout it's history, football has changed. Every time it does, there are those who complain and say "it's not real football anymore" or "it's ruining the sport". Yet, coaches and players (at least those who want to continue to participate) adapt to those changes, the sport moves on and it's popularity continues to grow. If Saban is as great a coach as he seems to be (and he is) he will adapt to it as well.

 

[trojanfan12]

I dont think that is what they meant by the question at all. But why does a team want to make this about scheming and the element of surprise and not about your best against our best. Personally i can accept losing if a team lines up and whips us, but to lose to a slight of hand trick or lining up 4.5 speedsters against linebackers is a mismatch and not playing your best against our best. Its deception and not necessarily seeing who the best team is, but who is better at getting back to the line with the fastest players, not best players necessarily.

Actually, the hunh brings football back to my best vs. your best. All of this "specialization" and having certain "packages and players" for certain situations is not how football was originally played.

Not sure how old you are, but when I played in high school and college there wasn't near as much substitution as there is now. Some players only got subbed out for if they were hurt.

By speeding up the game, the hunh actually forces "my best 11 vs. your best 11" since the offense isn't substituting either. It seems to me, if you are truly interested in my best vs. your best, then you should be in favor of the hunh.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Gawd damn "smart" people ^^^ make me wanna puke...Good point TF...ya used up trojan...

 

[trojanfan12]

Last I checked, the AD is responsible for scheduling the teams.

Saban doesn't have enough influence with his AD to tell him to stop scheduling FCS and Sun Belt level teams because of player safety?

Not trying to be an asshat here, but it seems to me that some ridiculously overmatched FCS or low level FBS school would have more potential for injuries playing 'Bama than 'Bama does playing an hunh team.

 

[Bamabino]

Saban haters be like,









Saban just a blew a month's worth of butthurt out of the water.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Actually, the hunh brings football back to my best vs. your best. All of this "specialization" and having certain "packages and players" for certain situations is not how football was originally played.

Not sure how old you are, but when I played in high school and college there wasn't near as much substitution as there is now. Some players only got subbed out for if they were hurt.

By speeding up the game, the hunh actually forces "my best 11 vs. your best 11" since the offense isn't substituting either. It seems to me, if you are truly interested in my best vs. your best, then you should be in favor of the hunh.

+1

 

[trojanfan12]

Saban haters be like,









Saban just a blew a month's worth of butthurt out of the water.

'Bama fans be like, Wow we have no answer for the logic that is being presented so we'll just say everyone is butthurt and jealous. How do we know this? Cuz Uncle Nick said so, that's how!!

 

[Bamabino]

I have yet to see logic. Stats show HUNH teams don't snap the ball until at least the 27-28 second mark. The game has become specialized. Down and distance packages are an integral part of the strategy. Football is the only game where the offense is given an unfair advantage over the defense concerning substitutions. I suppose you'd tell a baseball coach he couldn't bring in his best defensive shortstop, his best outfield arm and his closer in the bottom of the ninth. Or tell a basketball coach he can't bring in his best shot blocker/defender in the waning seconds of the game on defensive possessions.

 

[Codaxx]

I dont think that is what they meant by the question at all. But why does a team want to make this about scheming and the element of surprise and not about your best against our best. Personally i can accept losing if a team lines up and whips us, but to lose to a slight of hand trick or lining up 4.5 speedsters against linebackers is a mismatch and not playing your best against our best. Its deception and not necessarily seeing who the best team is, but who is better at getting back to the line with the fastest players, not best players necessarily.

How come when a defense zone blitzes a team into tge dark ages its hard nosed football, but if an offense confuses a defense its "trickeration"?

 

[trojanfan12]

I have yet to see logic. Stats show HUNH teams don't snap the ball until at least the 27-28 second mark. The game has become specialized. Down and distance packages are an integral part of the strategy. Football is the only game where the offense is given an unfair advantage over the defense concerning substitutions. I suppose you'd tell a baseball coach he couldn't bring in his best defensive shortstop, his best outfield arm and his closer in the bottom of the ninth. Or tell a basketball coach he can't bring in his best shot blocker/defender in the waning seconds of the game on defensive possessions.

What advantage? If the offense substitutes, the defense gets to as well. The defense can also substitute when the offense doesn't, they just have to be organized and quick about it.

So, your okay with football becoming "specialized" to create an advantage for the defense, but if the offense figures out a way to neutralize that and make it a true 11 on 11 game, we need a rule change.

Here's a thought: Why not adapt like most other defenses in college football are doing instead of crying that it's unfair?

 

[Bamabino]

What advantage? If the offense substitutes, the defense gets to as well. The defense can also substitute when the offense doesn't, they just have to be organized and quick about it.

So, your okay with football becoming "specialized" to create an advantage for the defense, but if the offense figures out a way to neutralize that and make it a true 11 on 11 game, we need a rule change.

Here's a thought: Why not adapt like most other defenses in college football are doing instead of crying that it's unfair?

I fail to see where a specialized package for down and distance situations is a "defensive advantage." It's still 11 on 11.

 

[trojanfan12]

I fail to see where a specialized package for down and distance situations is a "defensive advantage." It's still 11 on 11.

So is the hunh. As I just posted on another thread. There is nothing stopping defenses from subbing for down and distance. They have to be quick and organized though.

I have watched USC successfully substitute vs. the hunh without the offense subbing. They had guys ready and as soon as the play was over, the guy going in sprints on to the field and the guy coming out sprints off. It really isn't that difficult. They already know who they want in based on what the down and distance is.

Teams like LSU, Auburn, USC and Stanford have all beaten Oregon (arguably the best hunh out there) and other hunh teams by dominating the LOS and being organized and quick when subbing.

 

[Codaxx]

I have to say Muschamp had tge best comnents on this. He said every coach is arguing whats best for his team.

 

[HuskerOC]

What advantage? If the offense substitutes, the defense gets to as well. The defense can also substitute when the offense doesn't, they just have to be organized and quick about it.

So, your okay with football becoming "specialized" to create an advantage for the defense, but if the offense figures out a way to neutralize that and make it a true 11 on 11 game, we need a rule change.

Here's a thought: Why not adapt like most other defenses in college football are doing instead of crying that it's unfair?

Nobody but proponents AGAINST the 10 second rule are crying it is unfair.

It is a proposed rule change, but it has gotten a number of fans panties in a bunch.

What is sad, is that statistics have shown that it would only affect 3 to 4 plays of even the most high octane up tempo offenses, yet here we are with proponents AGAINST the proposed rule change crying a river why it shouldn't be changed.

Fair enough. Have the same rules in place, however, I'll take away offenses from being able to block down field for passes thrown behind the line of scrimmage. Seem fair?

 

[MarkOU]

Are we dealing with like National Secruity or something? Do you need Top Secret clearance to deal with "all the facts".

Kinda late to be talking about facts. If safety is your real motive, you start with the facts Nick not wait till your ideal is shot down and pissed all over by the media and your fellow coaches across the nation.

 

[potzer25]

Nobody but proponents AGAINST the 10 second rule are crying it is unfair.

It is a proposed rule change, but it has gotten a number of fans panties in a bunch.

What is sad, is that statistics have shown that it would only affect 3 to 4 plays of even the most high octane up tempo offenses, yet here we are with proponents AGAINST the proposed rule change crying a river why it shouldn't be changed.

Fair enough. Have the same rules in place, however, I'll take away offenses from being able to block down field for passes thrown behind the line of scrimmage. Seem fair?

I have yet to see logic. Stats show HUNH teams don't snap the ball until at least the 27-28 second mark. The game has become specialized. Down and distance packages are an integral part of the strategy. Football is the only game where the offense is given an unfair advantage over the defense concerning substitutions. I suppose you'd tell a baseball coach he couldn't bring in his best defensive shortstop, his best outfield arm and his closer in the bottom of the ninth. Or tell a basketball coach he can't bring in his best shot blocker/defender in the waning seconds of the game on defensive possessions.

I see people still don't understand what is happening. The 10 second rule does nothing but allow defenses a guaranteed substitution first. The facts that few plays would be impacted by this argues against the reason for implementing it: it does not reduce the number of plays - which is what was suggested could result in injury.

Currently the defense is guaranteed a substitution if the offense subs first. With the 10 second rule, if the defense subs during the first 10 seconds and then the offense subs out two players, does the defense get ANOTHER substitution? Why? The defense already has the advantage of substituting LAST - that is an advantage for the defense.

 

[trojanfan12]

Nobody but proponents AGAINST the 10 second rule are crying it is unfair.

It is a proposed rule change, but it has gotten a number of fans panties in a bunch.

What is sad, is that statistics have shown that it would only affect 3 to 4 plays of even the most high octane up tempo offenses, yet here we are with proponents AGAINST the proposed rule change crying a river why it shouldn't be changed.

Fair enough. Have the same rules in place, however, I'll take away offenses from being able to block down field for passes thrown behind the line of scrimmage. Seem fair?

Uh, actually it is the folks who are in favor of the 10 second rule that are crying. The whole point of the rule is based on the hunh being "unfair".

Pretty funny that whole rule came up because those against the hunh claimed it was "unfair" and now those same folks want to say it's those against the rule saying it's "unfair".

How have you missed that?