Bielema thinks the "10 second" proposal will pass. Gonna be interesting to see

[Saltydog]

what transpires.


http://sports.yahoo.com/news/bielema-says-expects-slow-down-proposal-pass-005524287--spt.html

[jimbo352]

I'm starting to think it won't pass.... There has been a ton of bad press for Saban/Bielema/rules committee. I think they will turn down the proposal, and release a statement saying they're pushing it back a year to gather more evidence. I think there needs to be a rule that allows the defense to sub, but they're thrying to pass it as a safety rule. It will be hard to pass this new rule with zero evidence of it being a safety concern.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Bielema is completely full of it. Death is all the evidence he needs? He asks how he is supposed to get an injured player off the field? Last I checked, if a player is laying on the field injured, you don't have to take a timeout to stop play to get them out. And if they are really injured, then they should absolutely lay down on the field or make it known they are injured.

He says that all safety driven rules pass, so he expects this one to pass. But, they have no studies showing why its a safety issue.

[maroonmania]

I'm starting to think it won't pass.... There has been a ton of bad press for Saban/Bielema/rules committee. I think they will turn down the proposal, and release a statement saying they're pushing it back a year to gather more evidence. I think there needs to be a rule that allows the defense to sub, but they're thrying to pass it as a safety rule. It will be hard to pass this new rule with zero evidence of it being a safety concern.

To each his own but I personally just like the game better when the offense has to beat the defense because they have to execute and not because they basically catch the defense unable to set up and essentially left in chaos. In my mind its no different than snapping the ball on the playground before the other team is lined up and beating them because they weren't ready, not because you were better. But hey, that's just me. On the safety issue, I'm not as concerned about that part, but just playing devil's advocate isn't it common sense that the MORE plays you have in a football game and the more fatigue teams get due to that situation the more injuries that are likely? I mean just by law of averages if there 150 plays in one game and 120 in another it would seem the game that had more plays, and therefore more instances of contact, would be more statisticly likely to produce injuries. Not a lot of high tech data needed to figure that out.

[dawgs]

To each his own but I personally just like the game better when the offense has to beat the defense because they have to execute and not because they basically catch the defense unable to set up and essentially left in chaos. In my mind its no different than snapping the ball on the playground before the other team is lined up and beating them because they weren't ready, not because you were better. But hey, that's just me. On the safety issue, I'm not as concerned about that part, but just playing devil's advocate isn't it common sense that the MORE plays you have in a football game and the more fatigue teams get due to that situation the more injuries that are likely? I mean just by law of averages if there 150 plays in one game and 120 in another it would seem the game that had more plays, and therefore more instances of contact, would be more statisticly likely to produce injuries. Not a lot of high tech data needed to figure that out.

HUNH is execution. it may not be your preferred form of execution, but it's execution. this idea that it's not "real" football is asinine. football is the most constantly changing of all the sports, this is just the most recent change. the HUNH will never go completely away and elements will always hang around moving forward, but in a few years there will be another major development in the evolution of football. hell, i wish we would run more HUNH. it'd help us against bama and lsu for sure.

also, for injury discussion...

http://cfbmatrix.com/pace-play-2009-2012/

no you "common sense" assumption is pretty much wrong.

there's a lot of middle ground here to allow for subs without changing the rules to limit the offense. they could waive the 12 men on the field rule when it's clear the defensive player is not involved in the play and is only a step or 2 from getting off the field when the ball is snapped (though there might have to be something done about trick plays that have involved this, but you see that like once a season MAYBE), and as someone on here suggested when this 1st broke, they could extend the players' box down the sidelines or allowing defensive subs to move further down the sideline so that subs are easier to make in the redzone. i'm fine with both of those, but i'm not fine with this proposed 10 second rule.

[Bullmutt]

^^ "they could waive the 12 men on the field rule when it's clear the defensive player is not involved in the play and is only a step or 2 from getting off the field when the ball is snapped"^^

This

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

What about an offense that stays on the field for 18 straight plays. You know like Bama's offense, which is designed to wear defenses down. Can we ban that too, because its obviously not fair to have tired defenders on the field?

[dawgs]

What about an offense that stays on the field for 18 straight plays. You know like Bama's offense, which is designed to wear defenses down. Can we ban that too, because its obviously not fair to have tired defenders on the field?

but they allow for the D to get 30+ second water breaks in between plays**

i find this interesting: http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/points-per-play

at least half of the top 10 are not HUNH offenses (f$u, bama, lsu, k-state, tosu). so to say the pendulum has swung so far out of balance that it needs to be corrected is just wrong too. more points does not mean the competitive balance is out of whack. per play statistics are a far more telling number than per game statistics.

[jimbo352]

To each his own but I personally just like the game better when the offense has to beat the defense because they have to execute and not because they basically catch the defense unable to set up and essentially left in chaos. In my mind its no different than snapping the ball on the playground before the other team is lined up and beating them because they weren't ready, not because you were better. But hey, that's just me. On the safety issue, I'm not as concerned about that part, but just playing devil's advocate isn't it common sense that the MORE plays you have in a football game and the more fatigue teams get due to that situation the more injuries that are likely? I mean just by law of averages if there 150 plays in one game and 120 in another it would seem the game that had more plays, and therefore more instances of contact, would be more statisticly likely to produce injuries. Not a lot of high tech data needed to figure that out.

Just to play devils advocate... Common sense tells me I'd rather be chased/tackled by a tired/slowed Chris Jones, and not a fresh/rested Chris Jones... Common sense tells me that the size and speed combination of Bama/LSU's DL/LB group cause more injuries than the speed/fatigue issues of the HUNH... If safety is really what people are worried about... Restricting the size of defensive lineman, linebackers, and offensive lineman would drastically reduce the number of injuries in football.

[dawgs]

Just to play devils advocate... Common sense tells me I'd rather be chased/tackled by a tired/slowed Chris Jones, and not a fresh/rested Chris Jones... Common sense tells me that the size and speed combination of Bama/LSU's DL/LB group cause more injuries than the speed/fatigue issues of the HUNH... If safety is really what people are worried about... Restricting the size of defensive lineman, linebackers, and offensive lineman would drastically reduce the number of injuries in football.

difference between your common sense and his common sense is that numbers back you up.

also to stay along the "common sense" lines, imo, common sense says a guy getting dragged down in space is less likely to result in an injury than just plowing the RB into the back of 6-8 blockers blocking 7-8 defenders with bodies rolling onto ankles and knees.

[jimbo352]

difference between your common sense and his common sense is that numbers back you up.

also to stay along the "common sense" lines, imo, common sense says a guy getting dragged down in space is less likely to result in an injury than just plowing the RB into the back of 6-8 blockers blocking 7-8 defenders with bodies rolling onto ankles and knees.

lets not forget about Beilema's preference of BIG offensive lineman, and the natural deterioration of their knees and ankles do to the sheer weight they carry(weight he, as well as many other coaches, encourage them to put on)


I could go on and on... The game of football isn't safe... I find it comical that coaches like Saban and Beilema(who are big time smash mouth football guys), are crying about the HUNH being dangerous..... It's laughable...

[maroonmania]

HUNH is execution. it may not be your preferred form of execution, but it's execution. this idea that it's not "real" football is asinine. football is the most constantly changing of all the sports, this is just the most recent change. the HUNH will never go completely away and elements will always hang around moving forward, but in a few years there will be another major development in the evolution of football. hell, i wish we would run more HUNH. it'd help us against bama and lsu for sure.

also, for injury discussion...

http://cfbmatrix.com/pace-play-2009-2012/

no you "common sense" assumption is pretty much wrong.

there's a lot of middle ground here to allow for subs without changing the rules to limit the offense. they could waive the 12 men on the field rule when it's clear the defensive player is not involved in the play and is only a step or 2 from getting off the field when the ball is snapped (though there might have to be something done about trick plays that have involved this, but you see that like once a season MAYBE), and as someone on here suggested when this 1st broke, they could extend the players' box down the sidelines or allowing defensive subs to move further down the sideline so that subs are easier to make in the redzone. i'm fine with both of those, but i'm not fine with this proposed 10 second rule.

HUNH just says I can be READY to execute before you and I'm going to take advantage of that. JMO, but I don't care for that. And like I said, the safety issue doesn't really concern me one way or the other because its not a big factor in this and I really don't care to read a bunch of links on somebody's info on it. Still makes sense to me that if you up the number of plays (or opportunities to be injured) that injuries are more likely because I've actually never seen someone injured in between plays or in a huddle but whatever.

[dawgs]

HUNH just says I can be READY to execute before you and I'm going to take advantage of that. JMO, but I don't care for that. And like I said, the safety issue doesn't really concern me one way or the other because its not a big factor in this and I really don't care to read a bunch of links on somebody's info on it. Still makes sense to me that if you up the number of plays (or opportunities to be injured) that injuries are more likely because I've actually never seen someone injured in between plays or in a huddle but whatever.

if I jump off a 5 foot ledge 20 times I probably won't get hurt, but if I jump off a 20 foot ledge 1 time, I'm more likely to get hurt.

[jimbo352]

HUNH just says I can be READY to execute before you and I'm going to take advantage of that. JMO, but I don't care for that. And like I said, the safety issue doesn't really concern me one way or the other because its not a big factor in this and I really don't care to read a bunch of links on somebody's info on it. Still makes sense to me that if you up the number of plays (or opportunities to be injured) that injuries are more likely because I've actually never seen someone injured in between plays or in a huddle but whatever.

That's kind of the point though... The coaches pushing this rule say it is a safety issue... That's how this rule is being pushed, so it all seems like BS. If they'd be honest and say it was about having a fair opportunity to sub players and compete, I'd listen...

[maroonmania]

if I jump off a 5 foot ledge 20 times I probably won't get hurt, but if I jump off a 20 foot ledge 1 time, I'm more likely to get hurt.

So if I run a hurry up play its only a 5 foot ledge but if there is a normal time interval between plays its a 20 foot ledge? Well, I guess if the defense is not allowed to get into position to defend the play and make a solid hit you could look at it that way.

[dawgs]

So if I run a hurry up play its only a 5 foot ledge but if there is a normal time interval between plays its a 20 foot ledge? Well, I guess if the defense is not allowed to get into position to defend the play and make a solid hit you could look at it that way.

i'm just saying that the number of plays aren't necessarily the telling factor here.

make it a 5 foot ledge 10 times and a 10 foot ledge 5 times if it's the number disparity that you're getting hung up on instead of actually seeing my general point. please don't pull a blacklistedbully here.

[DownwardDawg]

lets not forget about Beilema's preference of BIG offensive lineman, and the natural deterioration of their knees and ankles do to the sheer weight they carry(weight he, as well as many other coaches, encourage them to put on)


I could go on and on... The game of football isn't safe... I find it comical that coaches like Saban and Beilema(who are big time smash mouth football guys), are crying about the HUNH being dangerous..... It's laughable...

I must be the only person on this board that saw the big interview with the neurologist on this subject. This has nothing to do with Saban and Beilema.

[jimbo352]

I must be the only person on this board that saw the big interview with the neurologist on this subject. This has nothing to do with Saban and Beilema.

do share.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Well, I guess if the defense is not allowed to get into position to defend the play and make a solid hit you could look at it that way.

why can't the defense get in position? if a WR can get back to the line and line up, why is it so much harder for a defender to travel a lesser distance to also be set up?

[dawgs]

I must be the only person on this board that saw the big interview with the neurologist on this subject. This has nothing to do with Saban and Beilema.

i just have trouble believing even a brilliant scientist can ascertain anything about a player's head from 20+ yards away when the player is lining up and moving around normally. at least not anything of substance that they can gather in 11 seconds of observation instead of 8 seconds of observation. they should probably stop the play for 30+ seconds to allow full observation if they actually can tell anything from the sidelines that isn't already obvious to anyone with eyes.

we can all see when a guy is acting hurt or slow to get up or shaking the cobwebs out of his head. in those instances, coaches should preach to their kids that they need to stay down and implement an environment where a player won't be called a ***** or something by teammates or the assistants for staying down.

i do think there should be a min number of plays a player must sit out when he stops play for injury. if a guy thinks he might be injured, it should take at least 4-5 plays for the trainers/doctors to clear him and give him the clearance to return to the field. none of this bullshit where i guy sprints back on the field 20 seconds after he was laid out like he'd been hit by a truck.