Saban & Bielema behind the kill uptempo offense rule

[uncfan103]

I'm a fan of Fedora, but no. 1 is silly. We can probably come up with about 10 more of those.

No. 2 doesn't make sense. Assuming safety is an issue, and I am not sure it is, they aren't saying they can make it where there are no injuries ... but they are saying they can reduce the likelihood of injuries by having this rule for 56 of the 60 minute game. It's a balance between safety and giving the O the last 2 minutes to run as they wish.

Again, I am shocked that those teams that run the HUNH offenses are apoplectic about this. :rollseyes: Aside from the safety angle, which is questionable, this is simply a case where the coaches/teams are trying to protect/advance their best interests.

Why is number one silly? When Elon plays Georgia Tech and Chattanooga plays Alabama all I hear about are the safety risks which are a result of one team having bigger, stronger, faster players. The reason hs athletes can't go straight to the NFL is a safety issue because they're playing against bigger, stronger, faster players. Why allow some college teams to have way more bigger, stronger, faster, and fresher players in the game than their opponents if player safety is that important to the rule makers that they're willing to change the rules entirely?

 

[uncfan103]

I'm a fan of Fedora, but no. 1 is silly. We can probably come up with about 10 more of those.

No. 2 doesn't make sense. Assuming safety is an issue, and I am not sure it is, they aren't saying they can make it where there are no injuries ... but they are saying they can reduce the likelihood of injuries by having this rule for 56 of the 60 minute game. It's a balance between safety and giving the O the last 2 minutes to run as they wish.

Again, I am shocked that those teams that run the HUNH offenses are apoplectic about this. :rollseyes: Aside from the safety angle, which is questionable, this is simply a case where the coaches/teams are trying to protect/advance their best interests.

The rule isn't meant to make HUNH offenses run fewer plays. If that was the case, then maybe I'd agree with you about it being a safety issue. But they said they made the decision because the ball isn't snapped in the first ten seconds anyway. So...if the ball is not snapped in the ten seconds in a regular game why are we expecting the new substitution rule to create fewer plays and less injuries?

 

[BamaFanAlways]

Only studies have shown that tempo is not the driving factor. Couple are in this thread.
Data is data. Who and why it is collected is irrelevant
Date is data. That is always correct.

Are these not your words?

And all are incorrect. NO Studies have been done. Who and why it is collected is very relevant. Data is not always data, sometimes it is garbage.

Calling me a girl doesn't make any of those points disappear.
(and you say you're not upset) LOL

 

[HuskerOC]

Billion dollar law suite happened and people that have been seriously harmed by the sports of football. Pretty easy to understand why the interest in player safety. Not to mention 100mm+ revenue programs like Texas in college. Whether or not the sport is safe, they are going to do their best to make sure that they look like they are doing their best to make it look safe to protect the money of the sport

And the payout from the NFL was nothing but a blip on the radar.

These guys know they are playing a very physical and very tough game that will have negative effects on their bodies for a very long time. If not immediately.

The price of glory is very painful for many. Millions are paid to those that make it to their end goal, and for 10,000 of these kids each and every year, that risk is well worth the reward coming from the high school ranks.

Who are we gonna pay? And how much? And why?

 

[Codaxx]

Only studies have shown that tempo is not the driving factor. Couple are in this thread.
Data is data. Who and why it is collected is irrelevant
Date is data. That is always correct.

Are these not your words?

And all are incorrect. NO Studies have been done. Who and why it is collected is very relevant. Data is not always data, sometimes it is garbage.

Calling me a girl doesn't make any of those points disappear.
(and you say you're not upset) LOL

Data is data, that is always correct. That is much different than "data is always correct". I actually said arguing with someone who shares your opinion is great practice to become a wife. It was a joke. Getting the feeling you take this quite seriously.

 

[potzer25]

The rule isn't meant to make HUNH offenses run fewer plays. If that was the case, then maybe I'd agree with you about it being a safety issue. But they said they made the decision because the ball isn't snapped in the first ten seconds anyway. So...if the ball is not snapped in the ten seconds in a regular game why are we expecting the new substitution rule to create fewer plays and less injuries?

because the player safety reason is BS. clearly.

 

[BamaFanAlways]

I said data is data, not data is always correct. Not sure what gave you the idea that I was upset I actually said the studies require more work on the subject. Basically you are arguing with someone of the same opinion for the sake of arguing. I hope you are a girl, because you are on your way to becoming an excellent wife.

Data is data, that is always correct. That is much different than "data is always correct". I actually said arguing with someone who shares your opinion is great practice to become a wife. It was a joke. Getting the feeling you take this quite seriously.

Nah, just pointing out that you have flaws in your argument.
You said studies had been done proving your point. They haven't.
You said who collects the data and why is irrelevant. Also incorrect.
Data is data... bad data is still data, I guess is what you're saying. That's is something from a semantics point I can agree on. (See Bill Clinton and the definition of 'is')

I hope you are practicing to be a politician, because you certainly have the qualities for it.

 

[WhiteMamba]

Whitemamba ... how often do you see the Oregon O go an entire drive without subbing? My guess is it is often. He should know.

very often they will go a full drive without subbing. mainly because some drives are 4 or 5 plays. when they do sub they have been known to be sneaky. downfield wrs will go off of field and they get another wr on at the line of scrimmage. tricky tricky.

 

[LawDawg]

Only studies have shown that tempo is not the driving factor. Couple are in this thread. I don't think anyone is pretending the NCAA does not make rules to protect player safety. I think everyone is calling BS to people pretending this is a player safety issue

I disagree. All I've seen is 1 years worth of data, that no one has torn into. Too small a sample size for it to have any significant meaning. Also, the argument that the faster the game, the more snaps, the more injuries simply makes sense. Until someone seriously studies this, no one knows at any level or certainty. For that reason, it is bad that it is being approached as a safety issue.

 

[outofyourmind]

If more snaps leads to more injuries, just eliminate the 4th quarter.
That ought to help out with that shit.

 

[LawDawg]

Data is data. That is always correct. The question is if the data is sufficient, meaningful, and/or being interpreted correctly. No need to start with the silly examples.

No way ... the data you have presented is simply too small a sample size. I thought at one point you agreed with me on that. Data isn't valid until the methodology is reviewed, and you have enough data to prove causation. Correlation <> causation. Should that data be validated, and should there be several years worth of it, then the numbers might carry the day. We just don't know right now. What we do know is that if the NCAA passes this without getting better data either way, that is ridiculous. Which means it is about par for the course for the NCAA.

 

[LawDawg]

Why is number one silly? When Elon plays Georgia Tech and Chattanooga plays Alabama all I hear about are the safety risks which are a result of one team having bigger, stronger, faster players. The reason hs athletes can't go straight to the NFL is a safety issue because they're playing against bigger, stronger, faster players. Why allow some college teams to have way more bigger, stronger, faster, and fresher players in the game than their opponents if player safety is that important to the rule makers that they're willing to change the rules entirely?

Because we can come up with a bunch of other scenarios for why there are differences between programs, many of which could cause injuries. Unless your argument is that we should find some magic pixie dust and make it so that all teams are exactly equal, there will always be disparities. Where you can adjust for them without ruining the game, you should. I think this rule would do that, but respect that others feel differently. But, saying we should only allow 2 five stars per team, or limit the size of lineman, etc., etc., is silly. Hence, my saying it is silly.

 

[LawDawg]

The rule isn't meant to make HUNH offenses run fewer plays. If that was the case, then maybe I'd agree with you about it being a safety issue. But they said they made the decision because the ball isn't snapped in the first ten seconds anyway. So...if the ball is not snapped in the ten seconds in a regular game why are we expecting the new substitution rule to create fewer plays and less injuries?

Where did I advocated for running fewer plays? I've been saying it won't change the pace. Others have argued that running more plays may result in more injuries, but I've seen no data to support that. I am confident in years to come we will see that data one way or the other. The injury debate as currently framed is that tired D lineman are more prone to injury. At least that is how I understand it.

 

[LawDawg]

very often they will go a full drive without subbing. mainly because some drives are 4 or 5 plays. when they do sub they have been known to be sneaky. downfield wrs will go off of field and they get another wr on at the line of scrimmage. tricky tricky.

That's what I thought. Those arguing that the real HUNH teams sub often are mistaken. Since I've gotten to know some of you Oregon folks, and got the PAC channel, I've watched my fair share of Duck football.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

You miss the point ... if all a team had to do was substitute 2 plays earlier, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The problem is that you can't substitute 2 plays earlier because the O runs up the LOS right after the play and will snap the ball if the player is trying to get off. Penalty.

So these finely tuned athletes can't get off the field in 8 seconds?

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

Whitemamba ... how often do you see the Oregon O go an entire drive without subbing? My guess is it is often. He should know.

To be fair, an entire Oregon drive is often 5 plays or less.

For the extended drives, substitutions are quite common.

 

[potzer25]

Where did I advocated for running fewer plays? I've been saying it won't change the pace. Others have argued that running more plays may result in more injuries, but I've seen no data to support that. I am confident in years to come we will see that data one way or the other. The injury debate as currently framed is that tired D lineman are more prone to injury. At least that is how I understand it.

Where is this tired d linemen argument? The only reason for the rule put forth is more plays = more injuries.

 

[LawDawg]

So these finely tuned athletes can't get off the field in 8 seconds?

Correct ... if it were otherwise, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[LawDawg]

Where is this tired d linemen argument? The only reason for the rule put forth is more plays = more injuries.

You aren't keeping up with current events. The entire rationale advanced by those in favor of this - Saban leading the way - is that tired D players are more inclined to get injured.

"What you don't want is that tired defensive player who is a liability in the game and you can't get him off the field," Louisiana-Monroe coach Todd Berry, a rules committee member, told CBSSports.com. "He's gonna get injured. That's what's driving this thing."

There is widespread agreement that fatigued players can cause breakdowns in technique. Those mistakes can make a player more susceptible to lunging with his head or being out of position and sustain a high-impact hit to the head.

The two most outspoken proponents of this measure have been Nick Saban, head coach of the Alabama Crimson Tide, and Bret Bielema, head coach of the Arkansas Razorbacks. Both coaches spoke out against the trend towards fast-paced offenses last season, citing player safety. Both claim that tired players are more likely to be injured than fresh players.

Now you are all caught up. You're welcome.

 

[RegentDenali]

To be fair, an entire Oregon drive is often 5 plays or less.

For the extended drives, substitutions are quite common.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with Saban wanting them to ban up tempo offenses. It's all about player safety.