By any chance have you ever coached a team that went against this type of offense and then seen the results that occur the following week as a result? Or, are you doing like most people... simply looking at the number of times guys get listed on the injury report. I've coached in the past against hurry-up offenses and I can tell you the "safety factor" isn't just something that is related to the games on Saturday - it's about what happens on Monday - Friday of the next week also, both physically and mentally.
Rules Committee recommends 10 second substitution window
- Thread starter CoachJeff
- Start date
- Status
No... I haven't. I'm just looking at the data in the report that I posted earlier. I've never coached football and only played two years in HS.
The data folks are using in this argument don't take the fatigue factor from the game itself into account - it only measures the actual games. There is no accounting given for practices missed, slowness in recovery, etc. that can only be seen when teams are in practice mode week to week. Certainly, with it being football, fatigue is part of the necessary evils after a game. When fatigue issues begin significantly impacting preparation for the next opponent, it's going to be noticeable. And... a defensive coach like CNS is probably going to be adversely affected more than most because SO much of their defensive success comes from the mental preparation during the week.
If you played in HS, you remember some of this. I can remember the body fatigue for the first 48 hours after a hard-hitting game on Friday nights. However, what I can't remember is being so fatigued from Friday's game that I was still physically and mentally exhausted on Tuesday of the following week. That's happening more when you play in a "gassed mode"... and it is a safety issue to some degree.
Bottom line, though, is that you'll never get coaches subscribing to the HUNH to admit this. While I'm not saying coaches are totally unsympathetic to player health, at the end of the day success in their profession doesn't revolve around player safety. Rather, it revolves around the wins and losses... and if you're having success with this system, you don't want to admit flaws which may exist. BTW Hugh Freeze... telling folks that implementation of this rule may "cause some folks to loose their job" without acknowledging that many DC's HAVE lost their's due to the system YOU employ is more than just "a bit hypocritical."
It has been stated here that it is Alabama's intent to wear down the defense so that later in the game we have a physical advantage, and there is no questioning that. The difference lies in the fact that the opposing defense has time to sub almost at will, and we must wear down every defensive player the other team plays, not manipulate a system in order to keep a player(s) on the field for a time beyond his ability to play effectively. Big difference.
IMO, the Refs should not allow a snap until they are in position to properly officiate, which will alter plays and pace by having penalties recognized and called. Also, stop the Prairie Dog play, as it has been referred to. It's primary, if not sole purpose is to prevent substitutions.
I think the rule passes regardless of what people think of the stated reason for it because I believe it's obvious and admitted to, that the HUNH is being used to circumvent existing rules just like the 3" fuel lines in racing alluded to earlier.
IMO, the Refs should not allow a snap until they are in position to properly officiate, which will alter plays and pace by having penalties recognized and called. Also, stop the Prairie Dog play, as it has been referred to. It's primary, if not sole purpose is to prevent substitutions.
I think the rule passes regardless of what people think of the stated reason for it because I believe it's obvious and admitted to, that the HUNH is being used to circumvent existing rules just like the 3" fuel lines in racing alluded to earlier.
I wonder how the pace of the HUNH affects teams during practice. If the teams that run the HUNH are practicing at that pace all week, are their athletes on the defensive side of the ball just that much better conditioned than ours? Are there safety issues for the defensive players on teams whose offenses run the HUNH style of offense?
The article that I posted didn't really look at any individual games -- just at entire seasons over a four year period and tried to make some observations based on that. Admittedly, it isn't exactly scientific, but it's the best 'body of work' analysis that I've seen so far. You spoke about the effect on players during the week of practice for the upcoming opponent after playing a HUNH team. True -- the article did not address that. It did, however, look at injury rates.
I remember reading in another thread some time back (I can find it if you need me to) about how to stop the HUNH (I think it was shortly after the Iron Bowl) and no one was talking about player safety, that I remember. A few people did mention exhaustion, but not as a safety concern -- more as a reason for a missed assignment.
I do remember after HS games -- especially ones where I would lose more than 5 pounds in a single game -- causing the next day or two to be recovery days. Luckily, we didn't practice until Monday. I believe most colleges just watch film on Sunday and Mondays they don't practice. or have very light practices.
I've seen a couple of suggestions in this thread that I thought were good. One being changing the way the clock runs in college to be closer to the way it runs int he NFL.
Something I haven't seen suggested was changing the TYPE of player to defend against a fast paced offense. A 330 pound DT is probably not the best candidate to play at a very face pace for an extended length of time (though that player is ideal to play against, say, Arkansas).
...or working on a different player substitution method -- like getting one player rotated out per play rather than trying to sub in a whole DL. With practice, I really think that defenses could rotate fresh legs in every few plays. Not wholesale changes -- but one, maybe two, guys per play. Again... just a thought.
Defenses will, eventually, not only learn to cope with HUNH, but stop it. They always find ways to stop the offense at some point.
I remember reading in another thread some time back (I can find it if you need me to) about how to stop the HUNH (I think it was shortly after the Iron Bowl) and no one was talking about player safety, that I remember. A few people did mention exhaustion, but not as a safety concern -- more as a reason for a missed assignment.
I do remember after HS games -- especially ones where I would lose more than 5 pounds in a single game -- causing the next day or two to be recovery days. Luckily, we didn't practice until Monday. I believe most colleges just watch film on Sunday and Mondays they don't practice. or have very light practices.
I've seen a couple of suggestions in this thread that I thought were good. One being changing the way the clock runs in college to be closer to the way it runs int he NFL.
Something I haven't seen suggested was changing the TYPE of player to defend against a fast paced offense. A 330 pound DT is probably not the best candidate to play at a very face pace for an extended length of time (though that player is ideal to play against, say, Arkansas).
...or working on a different player substitution method -- like getting one player rotated out per play rather than trying to sub in a whole DL. With practice, I really think that defenses could rotate fresh legs in every few plays. Not wholesale changes -- but one, maybe two, guys per play. Again... just a thought.
Defenses will, eventually, not only learn to cope with HUNH, but stop it. They always find ways to stop the offense at some point.
For Auburn, we enjoyed a relatively injury free year on both sides of the ball. That is one team and one year -- but that's how it went for us this past year.
if this is a player safety issue of injury from fatigue i don't see how it matters when the fatigue and injuries occur. why does it matter if the offensive strategy is to exhaust one unit on one series of plays as opposed to a strategy that aims to exhaust the entire roster over the course of the game? a concussion is a concussion, a torn acl is a torn acl and i'm unaware of injury severity being tied to when a player is injured during a game. if, however, it's about referees not being able to get in position in time or if it's about linemen illegally downfield, then the issue should be framed that way. now, if as some have opined that the only way to get the committee to consider this is to make it a player safety issue i can understand that from a parliamentary perspective but it still leaves the questions unresolved in my mind.
Here is what I believe in a nutshell about it. This is about the fundamental nature of the game... what do people want the game of football to be? For some years now, there have been constant rule changes which (for the most part) promoted offensive football. To increase popularity and promote parity, football has generally become more offensive-oriented. However, we are now at the state where people have tired of watching the game boil down to "who has the ball last". Coaches like CNS, who grew up appreciating a different brand of game, probably say "I don't like what this game is becoming... and I surely don't enjoy coaching in this environment." In all of this, finally we have some coaches who are standing up and asserting something should be done to promote defensive football - if we can make rules which benefit offense, why not do the same with defense?
From my view, I hope for a decrease in offensive football... because I simply don't like games ending up 49-42. Also, I DO think CFB does something to start limiting those kind of outcomes. I think we've seen this in both the NBA and MLB. In the NBA, it became very trendy for a decade to have a fast-paced offense and run up and down the court with very little defense played. Look around at it today, and you see a return of defense and the half-court game. In MLB, they had a 15-year window where balls flew out of parks at a record rate. Today, it has moderated greatly because of an increased strike zone and new rules put in place to prevent drug use. Things like this are often cyclical... and the only thing I can conclude is that CFB is ready to say "now's the time to put the brakes on."
Last edited:
I haven't read this whole thread, so this may have already been mentioned. I find it very ironic that the folks that changed the spring recruiting rules because of CNS's success are the very ones raising a fuss because he's involved in trying to get some hurry up rules changed.
I'm with you on being tired of nothing but offense. I usually enjoy a good 21-17 game much more than a 49-42 game. I think it's that the casual fan can easily comprehend offense, but it takes a bit more knowledge and attention to appreciate defense.
Agreed - same goes for baseball. A student of the game really appreciates a 2-1 or 1-0 game, but the casual fan is bored and changes the channel.
As I commented elsewhere, when Baylor is in contention for national titles, you know somethings tilted wrong somewhere.
To my knowledge nobody really ran this offense when we just had a 25 second play clock. Under that clock, the ref would spot the ball and not wind the play clock until all referees were in position. Under the new clock, it seems you can snap the ball as soon as the refs are out of the way. Many times I have witnessed the refs still backing into position when the ball is snapped. Hence the reason you get all the missed penalties.
I've always enjoyed a well played game of football. The fact both sides know how to play defense, only adds to the moment. When teams really get after each other, hit hard and play fast, with a high intensity, that is a fun game to watch and usually the ones I tend to remember most. If, by definition, that is not what the "causal fan" wants, but only to score more points, than the "casual fan" is simply missing the game. I have no idea why such ill logic requires the NCAA to try and reinvent the wheel at this late date?
The argument here needs to be:
- Refs are missing calls (not holding – that happens all the time)
- Defenses don’t have time to sub and lineup
- There is a fatigue factor in play for the defense that goes above and beyond the normal fatigue in a game
- Refs are facilitating all this by moving too quickly (adjust clock rules or something)
- Ref safety
- Any arguments about “purity of the game” should be made on the grounds that
o Football was never designed to be a continuous movement sport like basketball, hockey or soccer
o Again, no time for adjustments except at half
- Refs are missing calls (not holding – that happens all the time)
- Defenses don’t have time to sub and lineup
- There is a fatigue factor in play for the defense that goes above and beyond the normal fatigue in a game
- Refs are facilitating all this by moving too quickly (adjust clock rules or something)
- Ref safety
- Any arguments about “purity of the game” should be made on the grounds that
o Football was never designed to be a continuous movement sport like basketball, hockey or soccer
o Again, no time for adjustments except at half
Man this is irritating. It's all offense these days when it comes to rule changes. The defense should have the opportunity to substitute, period. It still has to be done quickly, correctly, and then executed. Why can't these people see the crazy advantage the offense is exploiting here? Ahh!
I said this to a tennessee fan the other day when he was giving me the business about this mess. He is fairly knowledgeable about things and even agreed with me.
I believe that they should pass this 10 second window, but in addition to passing the 10 second window, they should add another referee?? The primary function of this ref would be to spot the ball, and whisle ready for play only after all of the ref's are in place.
- Status
Latest threads
-
SEC West Showdown Sends Alabama to Oxford to Meet with Ole Miss- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Davis II Named to Stopper of the Year Midseason Watch List
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Eleven-Run Third Powers Alabama to 14-5 Win over Samford
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Maybe aTm's Pockets Aren't So Bottomless After All -- Layoffs In The Athletic Department
- Started by 4Q Basket Case
- Replies: 6
-
Time to un-vacate 2005-2007 on field victories and un-forfeit the 1993 season?
- Started by CmdrThor
- Replies: 24
-