NCAA Rules Committee proposes a rule to kill the hurry-up offense

[HSC-Sooner]

https://twitter.com/schadjoe/status/433724791208812544

This is all in the interest of player safety they say.

[Widescreen]

Good old Saban.

[picasso]

No tackling is the only way to make it safe.

[SoonerMarkVA]

What a load.

[BoulderSooner79]

Imagine a team first and goal and down by 6. Play clock starts at 40, game clock at 10sec and running. Offense stands there twiddling thumbs until the game is over. Fans mad.

Obviously, not thought through yet and they would probably have special 2 minute rules or something. But it would be a big change even for teams that don't use the hurry up as a strategy.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Imagine a team first and goal and down by 6. Play clock starts at 40, game clock at 10sec and running. Offense stands there twiddling thumbs until the game is over. Fans mad.

Obviously, not thought through yet and they would probably have special 2 minute rules or something. But it would be a big change even for teams that don't use the hurry up as a strategy.

The proposed rule doesn't apply to the last 2 minutes in each half. The problem is that it makes it much harder to come from behind in the 2nd half because a team can run clock on offense AND defense.

[SoonerorLater]

The proposed rule doesn't apply to the last 2 minutes in each half. The problem is that it makes it much harder to come from behind in the 2nd half because a team can run clock on offense AND defense.

This one I hope they have the good sense to pass on. So the offense is required to burn 10 seconds EVERY play of the game (ex-last 2min) so the defense can substitute if they so fancy? If you run only 35 plays in a half you have 5.8 minutes baked in the cake doing nothing but waiting for the defense. Stupid idea being passed off as player safety.

[8timechamps]

There is little chance this rule gets passed. Coaches are already coming out against it.

IF it does somehow make it through, it would provide an advantage to the defense. The fact that their associating this proposal with "safety" is an absolute joke.

[BoulderSooner79]

The proposed rule doesn't apply to the last 2 minutes in each half. The problem is that it makes it much harder to come from behind in the 2nd half because a team can run clock on offense AND defense.

Yep. I've see teams go hurry up with 5+ minutes to play because of the score. Many games would effectively be over much earlier then they are now. Just imagine extending the excitement of the kneel down series to earlier in the game. I guess the up side is that the traffic exiting the stadium would be spread out a bit more.

[Collier11]

It will never pass, ever. And I saw a quote that makes perfect sense of the stupidity of the NCAA, he said "if they truly cared about # of plays ran and overall player safety they wouldn't have an overtime set up that can go on forever"

[fadada1]

So why not have 2 clocks then. One clock, say 50 seconds, counts down when you can call the play, huddle, scratch yourself, etc... The second clock will be a 10 second clock in which the ball must be snapped.

You know, I like Saban and his style, but if he's the one leading this, he's a complete dumbass. Deal with it and condition your defense better.

[dennis580]

https://twitter.com/schadjoe/status/433724791208812544

This is all in the interest of player safety they say.

Um that is totally false. It would slow down hurry up offenses just a little bit. Mostly it would have no effect at all as few plays that are snapped that fast. I'm all for it it would make things a little fairer for defenses, but still wouldn't have much impact.

[dennis580]

Imagine a team first and goal and down by 6. Play clock starts at 40, game clock at 10sec and running. Offense stands there twiddling thumbs until the game is over. Fans mad.

Obviously, not thought through yet and they would probably have special 2 minute rules or something. But it would be a big change even for teams that don't use the hurry up as a strategy.

They already said the rule will not be in effect in the last 2 minutes of each half.

[BoulderSooner79]

They already said the rule will not be in effect in the last 2 minutes of each half.

Yes, mentioned above. But 2 minutes is not enough in many games to make a difference - such as when a team is down more than 1 score. Coaches would have pre-printed tables showing when their lead was safe given the time left and when they could go into super safe mode. Sounds like this one is unlikely to pass, fortunately.

[jkjsooner]

If the guys can't handle the speed adjust and get smaller players. It's as easy as that.

Hurry up offenses are nothing new. Wilkinson used it a lot and that was in an era where guys played both ways.

Arguably, one reason football is so dangerous is because the rules allow a 350 lbs guy to play. This is just a step towards making it easier on them.

I'd argue if they really wanted to make it safer go back to the way it was in the '50s. You'd definitely have smaller players.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Yep. I've see teams go hurry up with 5+ minutes to play because of the score. Many games would effectively be over much earlier then they are now. Just imagine extending the excitement of the kneel down series to earlier in the game. I guess the up side is that the traffic exiting the stadium would be spread out a bit more.

Yep. The thing that sets college football apart from the pros is the wild point swings. Anything that can cause more wild finishes is in their best interest (look at this year with the 2 Auburn finishes).

[starclassic tama]

ridiculous rule proposal. if they want a quick and easy way to reduce the overall numbers of plays, get rid of the stupid clock stopping with the chain gang. that would cut down total game time by about 30 minutes alone.

[KantoSooner]

Hear, hear on the comments relative to hurry up being GOOD for the game. If your defense can't handle the pace, get defenders who are better conditioned. If that means you can't play 400 lb nose tackles, well, tell Tuffy to push back from the breakfast table. NO ONE is 'naturally' as heavy as some of the players today. They are like sumo wrestlers. Rules that put them at a disadvantage because they are unable to sustain an athletic game pace are good for the sport and good for the players. A major cause of injury is the enormous size of the players. A faster game favors fit athletes over refrigerators.

I stand ready to applaud the first 350 lb DT who can run with the secondary. But I've been waiting to clap for that guy for many years now.

[BoulderSooner79]

Hear, hear on the comments relative to hurry up being GOOD for the game. If your defense can't handle the pace, get defenders who are better conditioned. If that means you can't play 400 lb nose tackles, well, tell Tuffy to push back from the breakfast table. NO ONE is 'naturally' as heavy as some of the players today. They are like sumo wrestlers. Rules that put them at a disadvantage because they are unable to sustain an athletic game pace are good for the sport and good for the players. A major cause of injury is the enormous size of the players. A faster game favors fit athletes over refrigerators.

I stand ready to applaud the first 350 lb DT who can run with the secondary. But I've been waiting to clap for that guy for many years now.

I've pondered that one myself. There are very few humans that can be in top health and carry over 300lbs. And the system we have encourages players to reach that level of mass in HS! This cannot be a good thing for the players.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I've pondered that one myself. There are very few humans that can be in top health and carry over 300lbs. And the system we have encourages players to reach that level of mass in HS! This cannot be a good thing for the players.

You have no idea. Muscle mass is severely limited by frame size. There is only so much lean muscle mass that a frame can naturally handle without a huge offsetting gain in fat. If you want to know more than you ever wanted to on the subject try here -> http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html. Basically, all of the guys that have done research on clean body builders shows that there is a definite ratio between wrist size, height and weight at a certain body fat % (general calculator here -> http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html). There is also a finite amount of gains that you can get before it starts to get much much harder to add lean body mass.

So in High School, most kids add fat for weight because LBM takes too long OR they take steroids to upset their natural body chemistry and add more LBM than normal.

[fadada1]

ridiculous rule proposal. if they want a quick and easy way to reduce the overall numbers of plays, get rid of the stupid clock stopping with the chain gang. that would cut down total game time by about 30 minutes alone.
not a bad thought. while i like the play stoppage, as opposed to the nfl, there might be some benefit to the defense (in some ways).

you really want to make the game safer, pull the stinkin' face mask off the helmets. we'll see how many guys want to have their faces rearranged whilst leading with their head. keep the helmet... take off the face mask. you'll have one season of everyone getting broken noses and losing teeth... they'll learn.

[stoopified]

I'll Nick and all the other SEC coaces with the exception of Sumlin are behind this.I don't how many times I heard Saban and his cronies crying about how these up-tempo spread offenses being DANGEROUS to player safety.The SEC stance and wording in this proposal is damn near idenrical. To Saban's credit he did cover his bases bring in Kiffin to try to open up his offense.

[jkjsooner]

You have no idea. Muscle mass is severely limited by frame size. There is only so much lean muscle mass that a frame can naturally handle without a huge offsetting gain in fat. If you want to know more than you ever wanted to on the subject try here -> http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html. Basically, all of the guys that have done research on clean body builders shows that there is a definite ratio between wrist size, height and weight at a certain body fat % (general calculator here -> http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html). There is also a finite amount of gains that you can get before it starts to get much much harder to add lean body mass.

So in High School, most kids add fat for weight because LBM takes too long OR they take steroids to upset their natural body chemistry and add more LBM than normal.

Nothing you said really goes against anything we've said. The fact is that many of these players would have to slim down to play rugby or another sport with lots of continued running.

Even your average linebacker would have to slim down a bit.

As far as general health, the average DT is not at the optimum weight.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Nothing you said really goes against anything we've said. The fact is that many of these players would have to slim down to play rugby or another sport with lots of continued running.

Even your average linebacker would have to slim down a bit.

As far as general health, the average DT is not at the optimum weight.

I wasn't really trying to contradict anyone, it was more of an offseason time killer. Lyle McDonald has like 3 months worth of reading on that site ;)

[SoonerForLife92]

This is completely idiotic. College football implements more and more rules year to year to "protect player safety". What a load of ****. This game is turning into to something that is no longer football.

Even if this rule really was to promote player safety, like these other ridiculous rules they have come up with... No one plays the physical and tough game of football for safety.

[Collier11]

I would rather see a 17-14 game than a 60-50 game in football, but I want that to happen naturally with the regular evolutions of the game, not some dumb *** rule that is hidden behind safety but is purely for the coaches who whine about it

[HSC-Sooner]

Here's more behind the scenes behind the discussion of this rule. Whatever the case it may be, it's all fishy.

http://footballscoop.com/news/12562-bret-bielema-10-second-rule

[soonergirlNeugene]

This rule is really popular over on the bama boards. I SO surprise.

[soonergirlNeugene]

Yahoo Sports has an article up saying that someone on the rules committee wasn't happy with the meager amount of evidence offered in support of the proposed rule. Sounds like this one will be DOA. Now Bama can increase their original research output to improve their rating and do it in support of the football team.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/ncaa-rules-committe-member-says-not-really-much-214842837--ncaaf.html

[SoonerForLife92]

Yahoo Sports has an article up saying that someone on the rules committee wasn't happy with the meager amount of evidence offered in support of the proposed rule. Sounds like this one will be DOA. Now Bama can increase their original research output to improve their rating and do it in support of the football team.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/ncaa-rules-committe-member-says-not-really-much-214842837--ncaaf.html

Very glad to see this. I am also happy most of the coaches that were asked about the rule, responded with either how ridiculous it was or asking their own question of "how is it hazardous to safety? I have never seen any evidence supporting that."

Saban is such a baby lately and I am losing more and more respect for him each season.

What I love about college football is the variety of offenses and that the defenses have to come up with a way to stop them.

I love that there are teams like Bama that can still play old school and shut down high pace offenses (not so much this year). We didn't even run a REALLY fast paced offense most of the year, we just did it against bama because we knew we wouldn't have to run the clock to counter a fast pace and they could stop our run game.

Wow seriously I wish Stoops could have cried for rule changes after he lost 3 national championships... OH WAIT no I don't because he took it like a man and adapted.

Do what WE did and adapt your defense/gameplan to stop the fast paced offense...

[KantoSooner]

"The thing that's most shameful about this is it's a clear manipulation through self-interest by people who don't want to coach within the parameters where strategy and ingenuity has taken the game," said Washington State coach Mike Leach. "So now they want to manipulate the rules, and in needing an excuse to do this, they try to hide behind player safety. It's ridiculous."

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20140213/rule-change-no-huddle-ncaa/#ixzz2tJQzcx79

In The Pirate we trust.

[Widescreen]

"The thing that's most shameful about this is it's a clear manipulation through self-interest by people who don't want to coach within the parameters where strategy and ingenuity has taken the game," said Washington State coach Mike Leach. "So now they want to manipulate the rules, and in needing an excuse to do this, they try to hide behind player safety. It's ridiculous."

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20140213/rule-change-no-huddle-ncaa/#ixzz2tJQzcx79

In The Pirate we trust.

Wow, tell it like it is, Mike! Love it.

[PrideMom]

Just heard Pat Jones really lamblast it! He said it was stupid, and the people that wanted to put in the new rule against hurry-up offense should just give up coaching, or get better players.......He likened it to the wish-bone, etc.......

[dennis580]

Yahoo Sports has an article up saying that someone on the rules committee wasn't happy with the meager amount of evidence offered in support of the proposed rule. Sounds like this one will be DOA. Now Bama can increase their original research output to improve their rating and do it in support of the football team.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/ncaa-rules-committe-member-says-not-really-much-214842837--ncaaf.html

Didn't sound DOA to me. Sounded more like 50/50 on if it will pass by the article. Anyway I guess I am about the only Sooner fan that is for this rule.

[SoonerorLater]

I don't mind so much guys like Saban trying to get the rules changed but the absolute dishonesty of hiding behind player safety is pretty apalling. I have heard the theory advanced that it's just "common sense" that the more plays that you run the greater the chance of injury you have across the board. I can superficially accept this but what the proponents like Saban don't say is that this would have little affect on the number of plays ran. The vast majority on plays are never snapped before the 10 second mark has passed anyway. All this rule would do is ensure the predictability of the snap for the defense. In other words just the threat of being able to snap the ball achieves the same goal as actually snapping the ball a lot of times.

If they really were concerned about the number of plays there are much better ways to cut down the number other than this thinly veiled attempt to dismantle these pesky hurry-up offenses. How about this? Cut out that 12th game against Nobody State? Saban could run less snaps in practice. Somebody almost always gets hurt pre-season in practice. Concerned about gameday fatigue? How about running a platoon defense on alternating possessions? That way Saban could cut his players exposure by almost half.

You think Saban is concerned enough about player safety to do any of these things that are completely within his control? Me either. What a whiny disingenuous putz.

[BoulderSooner79]

^Agree with all of this. Player safety may have been part of Saban's concern, but it was at the very bottom of the list.

But just because Saban and supporters are disingenuous about their motives, doesn't mean the issue shouldn't be looked at. Is this the way the CFB world wants the game played? It certainly does look different than it did 10-15 years ago. There are certainly parts of the no-huddle I like and dislike. But the proposal put forward is just too flawed without clear goals or enough consideration of the side effects. Not ready for prime time.

[EatLeadCommie]

I don't mind so much guys like Saban trying to get the rules changed but the absolute dishonesty of hiding behind player safety is pretty apalling. I have heard the theory advanced that it's just "common sense" that the more plays that you run the greater the chance of injury you have across the board. I can superficially accept this but what the proponents like Saban don't say is that this would have little affect on the number of plays ran. The vast majority on plays are never snapped before the 10 second mark has passed anyway. All this rule would do is ensure the predictability of the snap for the defense. In other words just the threat of being able to snap the ball achieves the same goal as actually snapping the ball a lot of times.

This. Defenses are going to be able to predict snap counts in certain situations with a rule like this. It is absurd. What Leach said is spot on.

[SoonerorLater]

^Agree with all of this. Player safety may have been part of Saban's concern, but it was at the very bottom of the list.

I don't think player safety factors into this at all for Saban. Has Nick Saban ever been known as a NCAA football safety activist? Does he have a long history of advocating rules and changes to protect players? Just for grins I googled "Nick Saban player safety" Apparently this is the only rule change Saban feels that will make todays football players truly safe.

[Mazeppa]

Nick Saban introduces rule change that does not allow a team to return a missed field goal attempt. “I have fat slow players on the field during a field goal attempt and it's not safe for them to be out there running around trying to catch a fleet footed player returning a missed field goal.
Another rule he is proposing is to make defenses count one thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three, before rushing the quarterback. Reducing injury to the quarterback.
“I'm sure the rules committee will do the right thing for Alabama football and make these proposals rule this year.” Coach Saban said.

[soonergirlNeugene]

Apparently Nick thinks its in the best interests of player safety to play Georgia State, Colorado State, and Chattanooga all in the same season. Have those 3 schools combined ever landed a single 5 or even 4 star recruit? How safe is it to make an industry out of paying schools like that to line up and be annihilated vs cfb's top recruits for the past 4 years? That is as blatant of an example of placing dollars above player safety as any and Bama has been one of the worst offenders.

[oupride]

Unbelievable. Thanks for the info.

[shytnik]

Apparently Nick thinks its in the best interests of player safety to play Georgia State, Colorado State, and Chattanooga all in the same season. Have those 3 schools combined ever landed a single 5 or even 4 star recruit? How safe is it to make an industry out of paying schools like that to line up and be annihilated vs cfb's top recruits for the past 4 years? That is as blatant of an example of placing dollars above player safety as any and Bama has been one of the worst offenders. That is spot on. The thing I don't understand is that no one has mentioned, if the offense substitutes a player, the defense is allowed time to substitute as well. So if they are saying a defender gets fatigued and his form and ability break down, so would the offensive player, who would have had to be on the field for just as many plays as the defender. There is no validity to this claim what-so-ever. I played both sides in high school and was on the field for EVERY play, including special teams. I only played defense in college, and it was a different game in the late 80's, but I simply don't buy player safety to this what-so-ever.

[stoopified]

If Saban and his ilk are truly concerned about player safety,how about limiting players to a maximum of 275 pounds? Do away with facemasks? Use foam rubber helmets? That makes as much difference to player safety as this self serving SEC sponsered rule.

[Therealsouthsider]

....The final word goes to Colorado School of Mines innovator Bob Stitt: "The only thing risking injury in an up tempo football game is the defense's pride! Nut up, it's football!"

ss

[soonergirlNeugene]

If Saban and his ilk are truly concerned about player safety,how about limiting players to a maximum of 275 pounds? Do away with facemasks? Use foam rubber helmets? That makes as much difference to player safety as this self serving SEC sponsered rule.

Idk that we can go pinning this one on the SEC. Maybe the older powers, but bringing in AtM and Mizzou has sparked a transition among other programs. See Malzahn over at Albarn and his criticism of this proposed rule.

[jkjsooner]

Maybe Saban could learn something from a legend. And this is also directed at all those who think that the HUNH offense is some type of new creation...


Wilkinson, who died in 1994 at 77, shared his reasoning for the fastest offensive pace possible on the gridiron in a 1983 interview for a book about the Orange Bowl: “There’s no reason in my view to let defenses go into a huddle and call a play against you. The so-called ‘hurry-up’ offense that everybody does in the last two minutes – there’s no reason not to do that for 60 minutes. You’ve got to be in better shape – that’s why we won anyway; we were in better shape than our opponents.”

[OU_Sooners75]

Not many, if any, HUNH offenses snap the ball before 10 seconds has gone off the 40 second play clock.

I forget where the report was, but i read an Alabama newspaper site that stated even Baylor and Oregon rarely snap the ball within 10 seconds of the 40 second time clock starting.

1. The 40 second time clock starts when they set ball. Not on a whistle. The refs no longer start the play clock. The only time the refs start the play clock is after change of possession and a time out. And when they do, it is a 25 second time clock, not 40.

2. The majority of the people on the rules committee where at a school that had offenses that had significantly less offensive plays per game than the national average.

3. Everyone knows that the Rules committee would never had even looked at this rule, from Saban, had they not included player safety. Which there is no evidence at all showing there is any player safety issues while going against a offense that plays a HUHN.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Not many, if any, HUNH offenses snap the ball before 10 seconds has gone off the 40 second play clock.

I forget where the report was, but i read an Alabama newspaper site that stated even Baylor and Oregon rarely snap the ball within 10 seconds of the 40 second time clock starting.

1. The 40 second time clock starts when they set ball. Not on a whistle. The refs no longer start the play clock. The only time the refs start the play clock is after change of possession and a time out. And when they do, it is a 25 second time clock, not 40.

2. The majority of the people on the rules committee where at a school that had offenses that had significantly less offensive plays per game than the national average.

3. Everyone knows that the Rules committee would never had even looked at this rule, from Saban, had they not included player safety. Which there is no evidence at all showing there is any player safety issues while going against a offense that plays a HUHN.

I don't think it is a particularly large percentage of total plays. When it does occur though it tends to have a significant impact on the game. For example, when we go quick we are snapping the ball before the umpire has gotten more than 5 yards away from the ball after he sets it. I know those guys are slow, but they aren't 10 second 10 yard dash slow.

The reality of this rule would be that the umpire would sit on top of the ball for 10 seconds and then move away which would in effect push any sub 10s to 15s or so.

[jkjsooner]

Not many, if any, HUNH offenses snap the ball before 10 seconds has gone off the 40 second play clock.


The argument is that these offenses threaten to snap the ball before 10 seconds. As long as they line up ready to snap the defense can't substitute.

[Jacie]

Larry Fedora takes subtle jab at Saban in ripping defensive sub proposal

Posted by John Taylor on February 14, 2014
Larry Fedora
AP

To say a new proposal that would essentially put a restrictor plate on up-tempo offenses has gone over like flatulence in church would be an understatement.

The proposal — and it’s just that at the moment — has been almost unanimously assailed by those who cover the sport and, more importantly, those coaching in the sport who’d be directly impacted if the proposal is implemented. Oklahoma State’s Mike Gundy rightly ripped into the proposal. Arizona’s Rich Rodriguez was none too pleased with it, and neither was Washington State’s Mike Leach among myriad others.

Most scoff in the general direction of the NCAA Football Rules Committee hiding behind the “player safety” argument, with no data to back up the contention at that. Leach, with all swords swinging, called the entire charade “disgusting… insulting that they are hiding behind player safety just because somebody wants an advantage.”

You can add Larry Fedora to the growing chorus of those questioning the rationale behind the proposal. The North Carolina head coach, who would be one of many impacted by the rule that would call a delay of game (?!?) penalty on any team that snaps the ball before 10 seconds have run off the play clock, said the committee is “questioning our intelligence with trying to push this under player safety.” He also took direct — and rightful — aim at the rule allowing defensive substitutions not applying in the last two minutes of the half or the game.

“Now if you’re just going under the assumption that if you play more plays you have more chance for injury – I agree with that,” Fedora said in a phone interview with the Raleigh News & Observer. “But if you’re going to say this is under player safety, but we’re going to do it in the last two minutes of the game, well then are we saying we’re not concerned with player safety in the last two minutes of the game? I mean, come on. I just don’t get that.”

Arkansas’ Bret Bielema and Alabama’s Nick Saban, longtime opponents of up-tempo offenses, had a seat — but not a vote — at the table of the committee that forwarded the proposal to the NCAA Rules Oversight Panel. In discussing his disgust over the proposed rule change, Fedora took a not-so-thinly-veiled jab at Saban and his collection of recruiting talent.

“I think you’ve got more chance of players getting hurt if the opposing team has too many five-star players on it,” Fedora said. “So let’s just say one team can only sign two five-star players on its team. How about that?”

Earlier this month, the Tide once again claimed the mythical recruiting national championship with a class that featured a whopping six players rated as five-star recruits by Rivals.com.

The oversight panel will consider the rules committee’s recommendation and make a ruling on March 6. Leach has been quoted as saying he “doubts it will pass.”

Here’s to hoping to some of Leach’s and the other coaches’ common sense rubs off on the panel and the beginning of next month is the last we hear of this absurd proposal.

[8timechamps]

Just read an article over on ESPN saying the Chairman is backing off the new rule proposal.

It appears, in this case, the NCAA including the obligatory "for player safety" came back and bit them in the ***. Since there is no data supporting their position, they have nothing to fall back on this time. As expected, this will fade away, as it should.

[BoulderSooner79]

Just read an article over on ESPN saying the Chairman is backing off the new rule proposal.

It appears, in this case, the NCAA including the obligatory "for player safety" came back and bit them in the ***. Since there is no data supporting their position, they have nothing to fall back on this time. As expected, this will fade away, as it should.

Fade away for good, or just until a later review cycle? Saban's initial comments against hurry-up were directed at how it is negatively impacting the game - nothing to do with player safety. I thought the player safety thing came up because that's the only type of rule change that could be considered during this cycle.

[jiminy]

I think the defense should be able to tag team during the play. So, a player could go to the sideline during a play to tag another to come in. The defense gets to substitute, the offense gets a momentary advantage, all players are safe, everybody happy happy happy. MIght have to add a ref. Am I kidding? Only if you think it's a terrible idea...

[8timechamps]

Fade away for good, or just until a later review cycle? Saban's initial comments against hurry-up were directed at how it is negatively impacting the game - nothing to do with player safety. I thought the player safety thing came up because that's the only type of rule change that could be considered during this cycle.

Probably just this cycle (I didn't read the entire article, so I'm just guessing). However, the ONLY way I foresee this kind of change ever gaining momentum is if there is truly a player safety issue. I think even the NCAA knows that to be the case, and why they initially claimed it as a reason to introduce the proposal.

The push-back in the coaching ranks is more than enough to keep it from ever passing. That doesn't even address the fan outcry, which would be very big.

[8timechamps]

I think the defense should be able to tag team during the play. So, a player could go to the sideline during a play to tag another to come in. The defense gets to substitute, the offense gets a momentary advantage, all players are safe, everybody happy happy happy. MIght have to add a ref. Am I kidding? Only if you think it's a terrible idea...

Good idea. I was going to propose a rule that would require all FBS (Division 1) teams to ONLY schedule other FBS teams, thus doing away with the cupcake FCS/FBS games. After all, the kids that play for FCS teams don't have the advantage of large, well funded training staffs. The FCS teams also have fewer scholarships. So, there's a safety issue there.

Of course I'm not being serious, but my proposal would hold more water than the current one...and that's to say that my proposal is asinine.

[SoonerForLife92]

Good idea. I was going to propose a rule that would require all FBS (Division 1) teams to ONLY schedule other FBS teams, thus doing away with the cupcake FCS/FBS games. After all, the kids that play for FCS teams don't have the advantage of large, well funded training staffs. The FCS teams also have fewer scholarships. So, there's a safety issue there.

Of course I'm not being serious, but my proposal would hold more water than the current one...and that's to say that my proposal is asinine.

I actually would love that rule lets do that instead

[KantoSooner]

We know that excessive size is dangerous to both the player himself and the opponents. Why not limit players to a range of 150 lbs to 250 lbs. That way nobody would be too overpowered.
And the speed of some of these men! Horrific impacts are the root cause of so many injuries! how about we bind players ankles with bungies so that they can't go so fast? It would place a premium on positioning, reaction andd the mental aspects of the game. And would reduce injuries dramatically (I have no evidence of this, which is to say exactly the same evidence that the SEC puts forth in arguing against the no huddle.) And those at home could just speed up the video and see the game in apparently the same speed we see it in today. Or you could play it at the new speed and have time to go take a leak during a break away for a touchdown....without missing any action.

[OU_Sooners75]

I don't think it is a particularly large percentage of total plays. When it does occur though it tends to have a significant impact on the game. For example, when we go quick we are snapping the ball before the umpire has gotten more than 5 yards away from the ball after he sets it. I know those guys are slow, but they aren't 10 second 10 yard dash slow.

The reality of this rule would be that the umpire would sit on top of the ball for 10 seconds and then move away which would in effect push any sub 10s to 15s or so.


Is there anything you think you don't know?

1. Who the F*ck said anything about the refs getting out of the way?
2. Since you went off and said something about the refs, the Big 12 brought in another ref to help set the ball so they wouldn't be impeding the pace of the game. So if the Big 12 can do it, so can the rest of the nation.
3. The umpire only needs to be 5-8 yards off the ball. His primary job is watching the linemen get after it.

[OU_Sooners75]

The argument is that these offenses threaten to snap the ball before 10 seconds. As long as they line up ready to snap the defense can't substitute.

WGAS? If the offense substitutes, then the defense has a chance as well.

If the defense wants to sub without the offense substituting, then they need to have a group ready to go in, and let those on the field know they are coming out after the next play.

Really not hard to do.


If a defensive coach is worried about being tired and out of shape...then get your players in shape.

That or stop getting the fat slow guys.

[jkjsooner]

WGAS? If the offense substitutes, then the defense has a chance as well.


I'm in agreement with you. I don't like the rule change.

What I was pointing out is that the assertion that the rule change wouldn't make any difference because even HUNH don't generally snap the ball in the first 10 seconds is false. My point was that whether or not they snap the ball, the offense can force the defense into keeping their current personnel by lining up over the ball quickly.

I don't see this as a problem. It's the way football has been played and teams have run hurry up offenses for at least 50 years.

[Salt City Sooner]

I was pretty sure that Arkansas couldn't hire a coach who could "out-disgusting" Petrino, but I'll be danged if I don't think they hauled off and did it. Bielema's now using the death of that Cal player a couple of weeks ago (who collapsed during off-season training, had nothing to do with game play) to further his agenda:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10493055/bret-bielema-arkansas-razorbacks-expects-slow-proposal-pass

[swardboy]

Fat Bret will probably start coaching up the kids to fall like flies when the uptempo gets to hot to handle. No referee is going to allow an "injured" player to lay on the ground and keep the ball in play. Arkansas fans should be embarrassed.

[olevetonahill]

Fat Bret will probably start coaching up the kids to fall like flies when the uptempo gets to hot to handle. No referee is going to allow an "injured" player to lay on the ground and keep the ball in play. Arkansas fans should be embarrassed.

Now hes even talkin about how Obammy wouldnt let "HIS SON" play football.
Course he wouldnt Ya fat assed idiot. Zimmerman Killed Obammy's son.

[Mazeppa]

He's Bobs take on the proposal:

http://fansided.com/2014/02/21/bob-stoops-says-theres-evidence-uptempo-offenses-unsafe/

[swardboy]

"The offense is capable of operating without substitution, in all downs and distances."

Oh, snap!

[8timechamps]

I was pretty sure that Arkansas couldn't hire a coach who could "out-disgusting" Petrino, but I'll be danged if I don't think they hauled off and did it. Bielema's now using the death of that Cal player a couple of weeks ago (who collapsed during off-season training, had nothing to do with game play) to further his agenda:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10493055/bret-bielema-arkansas-razorbacks-expects-slow-proposal-pass

I'm enjoying the self-destruction of Bielema.

Remember when his wife was tweeting about Wisconsin losing, just before Arkansas laid an egg? Karma.

This latest comment is just icing on the "Brett Bielema ****** Bag" cake.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So really, why did Bielema leave the Badger/cheese state for the piggy? I figure it HAD to be about money. I would think recruiting would be easier at Badger U, with a larger in-state population to choose from. Well, the weather would be nicer in pigville than in badgerton, but that's not too big of a deal...or is it?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Fat Bret will probably start coaching up the kids to fall like flies when the uptempo gets to hot to handle. No referee is going to allow an "injured" player to lay on the ground and keep the ball in play. Arkansas fans should be embarrassed.It didn't seem to embarrass aTm a couple yrs ago, or FU when we played that homer game with them in the Orange Bowl for the NC after the '08 season. Pig will prolly enjoy the acting experience it gives their defense.

[TheUnnamedSooner]

So what are the chances this thing passes come March 6?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Kingsbury at TTech speaks out:

http://msn.foxsports.com/southwest/story/kliff-kingsbury-takes-verbal-shot-at-nick-saban-022314

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Good idea. I was going to propose a rule that would require all FBS (Division 1) teams to ONLY schedule other FBS teams, thus doing away with the cupcake FCS/FBS games. After all, the kids that play for FCS teams don't have the advantage of large, well funded training staffs. The FCS teams also have fewer scholarships. So, there's a safety issue there.

Of course I'm not being serious, but my proposal would hold more water than the current one...and that's to say that my proposal is asinine.haha...take THAT St. Nick!!!

[picasso]

So what are the chances this thing passes come March 6?

Pat Jones said last week he's heard it may not even be voted on. It's that much of a turd.

[Mazeppa]

Looks like it's not happening this year

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jeremy-fowler/24460876/officials-on-substitution-proposal----lets-wait-until-next-year

[Mazeppa]

Posted February 26, 2014 sports illustrated
Poll: 93 of 128 FBS coaches oppose slowdown rule*proposal
NCAAF
By Scooby Axson

Oregon’s Marcus Mariota operates the team’s high-powered, up-tempo offense.
Less than 20 percent of FBS head coaches support a rule that would slow down games, according to an ESPN survey.

Of the 128 FBS coaches surveyed, 25 supported the idea and only 11 of those were coaches in the five “power” conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, SEC and Notre Dame).
Overall, 93 coaches were opposed to a rule change, nine coaches (seven percent) were undecided and one coach did not participate in the survey.
The new rule proposal would ban teams from hiking the ball until at least 10 seconds is run off the 40-second play clock, allowing defenses time to substitute. If an offense snaps the ball before the play clock hits 30, the team would be penalized five yards for delay of game.
An exception would be in the final two minutes of each half or if the play clock began at 25 seconds.

[olevetonahill]

Ole Nicky says "Wernt Me"

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/01/saban-i-had-nothing-to-do-with-idea-of-the-10-second-rule/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs

[8timechamps]

So what are the chances this thing passes come March 6?

Nil.

An ESPN reporter recently polled 128 D1 head coaches (asking if they favored or opposed the proposal), 103 were opposed. This thing is never going to become reality.

[Wishboned]

Saban compares up tempo offenses to smoking.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1981865-nick-saban-uses-cigarette-analogy-to-defend-10-second-rule


labama head coach Nick Saban continues to lobby for the passage of a new rule that would slow down NCAA offenses—facetiously dubbed the "Saban Rule" by South Carolina's Steve Spurrier—in the days leading up to Thursday's meeting of the NCAA Football Rules Committee.

The new rule would disallow teams from snapping the ball during the first 10 seconds of the play clock, affording a five-yard delay of game penalty on those who did. Theoretically, the rule would be done to make college football safer, but opponents of the proposal, like Auburn head coach Gus Malzahn, have pointed out that "there's absolutely zero documented evidence that is hazardous on the pace of play, only opinions," according to David Ching of ESPN.com.

To that, Saban responded on Tuesday with a plea for common sense. Even if there's no hard data, he implied, invoking a metaphor about cigarettes, logic dictates that up-tempo offenses are more dangerous than methodical ones.

His exact words, per Chris Low of ESPN.com:

The fastball guys (up-tempo coaches) say there's no data out there, and I guess you have to use some logic. What's the logic? If you smoke one cigarette, do you have the same chances of getting cancer if you smoke 20? I guess there's no study that specifically says that. But logically, we would say, 'Yeah, there probably is.'

When Saban puts it like that, his argument is hard to find fault with.

The more plays per game, the more chances a player has of getting hurt—especially if he's exhausted, gasping for air, slouching his head and using improper technique. He's at risk.

The problem is Saban's motive. It's difficult to suss out where he is being sincere from where he is employing rhetoric. As Texas Tech head coach Kliff Kingsbury pointed out, per Luke Zimmerman of SB Nation, it might not be a coincidence that Saban's last three losses have come against teams playing at a higher tempo:


Most of the college football populace is against Saban's proposal. According to an anonymous survey conducted by Brett McMurphy of ESPN.com, only 25 of 128 FBS head coaches are in favor of its passage and only 11 of those 25 come from "power conferences."

The rule is tentatively expected not to pass at Thursday's meeting, but stranger things have happened. As a lobbyist, Saban has always wielded a certain amount of power over his peers. The meeting is worth keeping a close eye on.

No matter how the voting goes, however, this story will not disappear.

[LakeRat]

Not many, if any, HUNH offenses snap the ball before 10 seconds has gone off the 40 second play clock.

I forget where the report was, but i read an Alabama newspaper site that stated even Baylor and Oregon rarely snap the ball within 10 seconds of the 40 second time clock starting.

1. The 40 second time clock starts when they set ball. Not on a whistle. The refs no longer start the play clock. The only time the refs start the play clock is after change of possession and a time out. And when they do, it is a 25 second time clock, not 40.

2. The majority of the people on the rules committee where at a school that had offenses that had significantly less offensive plays per game than the national average.

3. Everyone knows that the Rules committee would never had even looked at this rule, from Saban, had they not included player safety. Which there is no evidence at all showing there is any player safety issues while going against a offense that plays a HUHN.

This isn't accurate. The 40 second clock starts at the end of the prior play.

[picasso]

Pat Jones was right. By and large.

[DMSooner]

Fat Bret will probably start coaching up the kids to fall like flies when the uptempo gets to hot to handle. No referee is going to allow an "injured" player to lay on the ground and keep the ball in play. Arkansas fans should be embarrassed.

Arkansas fans should be embarrassed about a number of things, but they aren't...I lived there fr 6 years

[soonerloyal]

What this boils down to...

Saban: "WAAAHHHHHH! OTHER TEAMS GET TO ADJUST THEIR PLAYS TO BEAT US! IT'S NOT FAIR! IF YOU DON'T LET US MAKE THE RULES WE'LL THROW A TANTRUM!! WAAAHHHHHH!"

Somebody swat him on the *** & put him in a corner.

[Mazeppa]

10 second proposal won't be voted on.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/report--10-second-defensive-substitution-proposal-withdrawn--won-t-be-voted-on-205034189.html

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

IMO they won't stop trying to get the change done. Look for it to be brought up again, and prolly by next year, if not sooner.

[soonergirlNeugene]

Now I'm not a fan of RichRod, but his Speed parody video was pretty funny.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNPdi5hRLy8

[Scott D]

IMO they won't stop trying to get the change done. Look for it to be brought up again, and prolly by next year, if not sooner.

It can't be brought up again until next year's meetings.

[BoulderSooner79]

IMO they won't stop trying to get the change done. Look for it to be brought up again, and prolly by next year, if not sooner.

Agreed - Nick won't give up that easily. Isn't next year open for more general discussion (i.e. not just safety related)?

That also gives the backers more time to think of other ways to change the rules to accomplish the goal. I'm not totally against the idea of reducing the number of plays, but IMO, it must keep the ability for the offense to stop the defense from substituting. It takes good coaching and team discipline to be able to execute a series effectively without huddling or substituting and an offense should be rewarded for that capability.

[SoCalBigRed]

The push-back in the coaching ranks is more than enough to keep it from ever passing. That doesn't even address the fan outcry, which would be very big.

Yep.

Its DOA, won't ever pass. Those hoping for it, wishing for it... give it up. Isn't ever going to happen.

As someone pointed out, Coach Stoops learned the same lesson these two dolts Saban and Bielema are now. We kicked everyone's butt, then they started to adjust, while we stayed stagnant and suddenly role reversals. We got laughed at 3 times, on the national stage, because we tried to do it our way and got embarrassed.

So cry me a river, people want time for their defenses to adjust to faster, more athletic paces of games. Do what OU had to do.... shed those 350 pnd out-of-shape behemoths and adjust.