http://markbradley.blog.ajc.com/2014/02/14/does-saban-run-the-world-or-just-college-football/
Mark Bradley, the AJC & the jawga puppies sure are envious of Alabama.
Mark Bradley, the AJC & the jawga puppies sure are envious of Alabama.
UGA has a great program and I believe an outstanding coach (Mark Richt) but they will never be UA. -- that out of the way, I do have to ask myself, if Coach Saban wasn't such a proven winner, would he have as much influence on policies? Maybe not. That's how it goes.http://markbradley.blog.ajc.com/2014/02/14/does-saban-run-the-world-or-just-college-football/
Mark Bradley, the AJC & the jawga puppies sure are envious of Alabama.
I agree. The player safety issue aside, this change is not as damaging as most people think. What it will do is allow the refs to get set and actually be able to see the pre and post-snap penalties that they have been missing the last couple years. A lot of people that are against this rule seem to be in some kind of bizarro world. They said things like "More scoring is exciting" or "Up-tempo makes the game more intense". Really? 54-48 is exciting to you? Bottom line is there are 3 phases to football: offense, defense, and special teams. Offenses should not be allowed to dictate the entire game, and defenses should be allowed to sub on every play.I have never heard so much crap about such a minor change. Strictly from a mechanical standpoint, it will barely have an effect. As I said in the other thread, I think it's mainly a message to the refs that they have to be more deliberate. You'd think the rule was instead that they (HUNH) have to take a three-point stance and not look back towards the sideline...
It must be interesting to be CNS.I love the fact that he's so much into their heads that they're attributing the whole thing to him...
I've often wondered how the offensive linemen get away with that. If a d-lineman jumps offside & touches the o-lineman when they're looking toward the sideline, that's an infraction. To me, that movement by the o-line constitutes simulating the snap, or some other illegal procedure. But, as I have mentioned here before, I'm a simple man.I have never heard so much crap about such a minor change. Strictly from a mechanical standpoint, it will barely have an effect. As I said in the other thread, I think it's mainly a message to the refs that they have to be more deliberate. You'd think the rule was instead that they (HUNH) have to take a three-point stance and not look back towards the sideline...
That's the thing! The Barners complain that he "controls" college football, and if so, they are unknowingly giving him the ultimate compliment. As usual, it's just insane jealously.I love the fact that he's so much into their heads that they're attributing the whole thing to him...
As long as they don't get into a three point stance they can stand back up.I've often wondered how the offensive linemen get away with that. If a d-lineman jumps offside & touches the o-lineman when they're looking toward the sideline, that's an infraction. To me, that movement by the o-line constitutes simulating the snap, or some other illegal procedure. But, as I have mentioned here before, I'm a simple man.
Correct, which is why most of them never assume that stance. They just bend over without putting a hand in the dirt...As long as they don't get into a three point stance they can stand back up.
The AU fans are griping about that also. They call it "arbitrary standing over the ball."Why can't the refs just wait to blow the whistle and wind the clock until they are in position just like they do when they are moving the chains?
Like the olden days with the Dallas "flex" I think they called it. They came to the line in a two point stance then stood all the way up to put their hands in a three point stance.As long as they don't get into a three point stance they can stand back up.