Saban & Bielema behind the kill uptempo offense rule

[romeo212000]

Remember, it's not as if the offense gets to make all of the substitutions that they want and the defense can't make any. If the offense substitutes, the defense gets to as well. If the offense does not substitute, the defense still can, but as I said, they have to be more organized and quick about it.

Don't know how many times I've said this. Watch teams adept at defending the hurry up no huddle like USC, Oklahoma, Texas and so forth. Defensive substitutions can be made on defense, but you've got to be quick, organized, and have everyone on the same page.

 

[BamaTee1]

I actually wouldn't be opposed to adding a timeout, but don't let it carry over.

Whatever number they settled on, and if or if not they could be carried over, does seem like a much better solution to address all of this!

 

[BamaTee1]

Timeouts are meant for all kinds of strategic reasons. The game is changing so why wouldn't it make sense to give teams more of them? It's not like they knew the perfect number when they decided.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

I don't even know if adding a timeout is necessary. Coaches just need to adapt to how they use them. Typically they use them for offense. Maybe that needs to change. I wouldn't have a problem adding a timeout though.

 

[BamaTee1]

I don't even know if adding a timeout is necessary. Coaches just need to adapt to how they use them. Typically they use them for offense. Maybe that needs to change. I wouldn't have a problem adding a timeout though.

It must be a good solution. It's the closest we've ever come to agreeing!!!

 

[trojanfan12]

I see no issue with adding a timeout.

 

[Camfantasy]

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

It can't be anything but a defensive advantage. This whole thread is pretty much about fairness to the defense being able to substitute whenever they want (an argument I will listen to). The only data toward player safety being presented is on the side of it being more dangerous to run a slow down power offense. If you are being honest with yourself that makes sense too. It is a more physical brand of football with the play being focused on the middle of the field where it is congested. The spread focuses on the sidelines were WR's and DB's are less likely to make the huge hits because of already existing player safety rules. Player safety is an obvious farce on this topic. And the reason so many of us are irritated by Saban and fat hog with hot wife getting such a say at that meeting. They have a vested biased opinion on it. Why not doctors instead? Or league commissioners? You know, someone who could speak on behalf of all parties...

Really, it couldnt possibly be anything else? Bad statement in my opinion.

What is taking place is the comments to get the committee to do a study with all the correct evidence, not just the words and information from a website that some guys just found on the internet. Actually does anyone know anything about the credentials of the guy who posted this information on his website and how accurate any of the data is? Realistic demands are that an NCAA committee be designed to do a study and data be accumulated to support or deny the creation of a rule. That is all that is happening at this point and because one of the biggest names in college football happens to be in favor of looking into this, many like yourself have become butthurt because it you think its about possibly allowing a defense to have players on the field to stop the pass versus the run and vice versa. god forbid that a team be allowed to have its best players on the field against your best players to see who is better.

Look at the committee and you will see they allowed both sides to present arguments and it will go into a vote to see if a study needs to be done. They wont create the rule based on a few slanted comments one way or the other.

 

[potzer25]

Look at the committee and you will see they allowed both sides to present arguments and it will go into a vote to see if a study needs to be done. They wont create the rule based on a few slanted comments one way or the other.

Oh yea. We forgot to discuss all the coaches that favor an uptempo offense that were there. Since it was zero that won't take long. It's NOT typical for non-committee members to be at that meeting. Which makes it even more obvious...

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

god forbid that a team be allowed to have its best players on the field against your best players to see who is better

Why is the defense playing players OTHER than their best to start a series? Why would their best players be sitting on the bench, waiting to come in?

 

[Codaxx]

More and more and more teams are going to the HUNH. However, as I stated above about the truth, the issue is the issue regardless to how Alabama is doing. I've always said a strategic decision is either good or bad before the result is known. Example: 2nd quarter, team is on their own 30 and it's 4th and short. The other team is winning 13-3 and the coach decides to go for it. It doesn't matter if he gets it or not it's flat out stupid. He can't win the game on that decision but he could lose it. The issue is the issue regardless of results! It's people like you who have the power to get in Saban's mind and KNOW why he is saying it should be looked into! He didn't say anything about it after any loss?

That is not true at all. Sometimes it is the right rhibg to go for it. Say your punter is poor and you net 30 yards. Not a huge difference in expected pts getting it on your 40 or there 30. If you think you are greater than 60 to get it, than go for it

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Why is the defense playing players OTHER than their best to start a series? Why would their best players be sitting on the bench, waiting to come in?

Watch football much? I would think from an Oregon Fans perspective you could see that your starting offense doesnt have to sub much to run, pass, or whatever, but defenses are not that way, they defend the run differently than the pass and use different personnel so that creates the need for subbing based on situations. Offenses dont necessarily have to do this, thought being an Oregon fan you would know this, guess not.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

Oh yea. We forgot to discuss all the coaches that favor an uptempo offense that were there. Since it was zero that won't take long. It's NOT typical for non-committee members to be at that meeting. Which makes it even more obvious...

Guess the committee members dont count huh? Both sides of the coin have had representation over the two years they have had meetings on this subject, but you knew that right?

 

[Wild Turkey]

Guess the committee members dont count huh? Both sides of the coin have had representation over the two years they have had meetings on this subject, but you knew that right?

I think what is bothering a lot of people is that Bielema represented that the AFCA was in favor of the rule but coaches all over the country are saying it was never brought up. I question the "two years they have had meetings" because many of the coaches committing have stated this "came out of left field". One would think if an open discussion was taking place the word would be out there.

I'm not saying you're wrong but there does appear to be some misrepresentation and communication issues going on and I don't think that can be refuted.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

I think what is bothering a lot of people is that Bielema represented that the AFCA was in favor of the rule but coaches all over the country are saying it was never brought up. I question the "two years they have had meetings" because many of the coaches committing have stated this "came out of left field". One would think if an open discussion was taking place the word would be out there.

I'm not saying you're wrong but there does appear to be some misrepresentation and communication issues going on and I don't think that can be refuted.

In several articles i have read it stated that the discussion of this possible study and rule creation has taken place this year and at last years meeting as well. Seems that it has not come out of left field to the writers who wrote that, not sure why coaches like Rich Rod and Briles seem to think they have been blindsided, but this has been discussed for more than just this session, according to several articles. I saw the comments of RR and AB and a few other high profile HUHN coaches and it almost seemed like they were whining because they didnt know it was being discussed, as if the NCAA is trying to hide it from them. Thats laughable at best.

 

[BamaTee1]

That is not true at all. Sometimes it is the right rhibg to go for it. Say your punter is poor and you net 30 yards. Not a huge difference in expected pts getting it on your 40 or there 30. If you think you are greater than 60 to get it, than go for it

I really would love to coach against you some day! You don't think the odds are drastically different with a team taking over on the opponents 30 as opposed to their own 40 in scoring?

 

[BamaTee1]

Oh yea and you're making the assumption you already know your kicker is going to kick it 30 yards. If that's the case you might want to have try outs and let a walk on punt because you got one shitty kicker!

 

[Codaxx]

Oh yea and you're making the assumption you already know your kicker is going to kick it 30 yards. If that's the case you might want to have try outs and let a walk on punt because you got one shitty kicker!

You sure you want to open up that box?

 

[Codaxx]

I really would love to coach against you some day! You don't think the odds are drastically different with a team taking over on the opponents 30 as opposed to their own 40 in scoring?

I actually saw one. It probably goes from about 5 pts to about 4. I would guess 1-1.5 more expected pts. Scoring gets much harder in the redzone. People underestimate that

 

[BamaTee1]

I actually saw one. It probably goes from about 5 pts to about 4. I would guess 1-1.5 more expected pts. Scoring gets much harder in the redzone. People underestimate that

But if you don't get it you have almost given up an automatic 3(except if Alabama) and you can't underestimate the momentum the defensive team gets from stopping them. If the offense gets it, woopty do! They are now on their own 31 and might be kicking in 3 more plays. Bad decision no matter what.

Ask LSU about going for it in 2012. They outplayed Alabama the entire game but none of his gambles paid off including some similar to this! That was the drive when Yeldon takes a screen to the house!