Started By
Message
re: Should the NCAA ban blitzing?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:41 am to jvilletiger25
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:41 am to jvilletiger25
quote:
I don't see Les Miles crying about anything
you're not very observant
0
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:43 am to jvilletiger25
Please leave Jacksonville. Try Maine or the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:43 am to bona fide
quote:huh?
no
Taylor came of the left edge.
Theismann is right handed.
It was on his blindside.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:44 am to Guava Jelly
Do you not get the sarcasm? I expected it to fly over the uat fans' heads.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:47 am to jvilletiger25
You are really torn up over Saban's power. It is working.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:49 am to narddogg81
quote:
these are in no way spurious analogies that totally apply to letting defensive players substitute
You mean you are buying into that just being the reason? LOL
It is about getting the most correct defensive alignment called as much or more than substitutions. If you believe otherwise you are wrong.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:49 am to jvilletiger25
I think they should ban linebackers over 240 pounds. Those big guys get a head of steam going, they can injure some offensive players. Just looking out for the safety of the game.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:51 am to RedMustang
The folks who want to prevent the defense from getting substitution don't want to play best-on-best.
It's like hoping a starting QB is out.
And it speaks volumes.
It's like hoping a starting QB is out.
And it speaks volumes.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:53 am to Grievous Angel
quote:
The folks who want to prevent the defense from getting substitution don't want to play best-on-best.
It's like hoping a starting QB is out.
And it speaks volumes.
The best-on-best would be the starting 11 vs the starting 11 and would involve no substitutions.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:53 am to jvilletiger25
Maybe football isn't the right sport for you.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:53 am to RedMustang
Yep. You gotta admit, there is definitely a double standard out there when it comes to safety.
So far my favorite proposal is the raise your hand before the snap if you are blitzing. Wouldn't want anyone to be surprised out there...
So far my favorite proposal is the raise your hand before the snap if you are blitzing. Wouldn't want anyone to be surprised out there...
Posted on 2/13/14 at 11:55 am to joeyb147
quote:
The best-on-best would be the starting 11 vs the starting 11 and would involve no substitutions.
Fair enough. And maybe they play both ways.
Maybe there's not stoppage at all . . and maybe you cut it down to five on five, make the ball round, put two hoops at each end and make them dribble it.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:03 pm to Grievous Angel
quote:
The folks who want to prevent the defense from getting substitution don't want to play best-on-best.
It's like hoping a starting QB is out.
And it speaks volumes.
Creating an advantageous opportunity through work/practice, game-planning and execution does not equal getting an edge on the other team because their QB or whatever is out for the game.
It's only with this kind of poor logic can anyone attempt to justify such a poor decision to change the game.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:08 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
It is about getting the most correct defensive alignment called as much or more than substitutions.
Tell you what. Let the offense snap the ball as quick as it wants to, but if you make the defenders rush to get back to the line, then do away with all of the offense raising up looking to the sideline. No audible. Hurry up and run what you got.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:10 pm to crimsonsaint
quote:
Maybe football isn't the right sport for you.
That's what Gus whispered to your DC after the IB.
This post was edited on 2/13/14 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:11 pm to jvilletiger25
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:13 pm to jvilletiger25
Maybe the defense should have to let the QB know when they plan to blitz. Also they should go ahead and count to 3 before they do anything.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:14 pm to jvilletiger25
Sweet spinoff. You HUNH wot help you in Jordan hate next year
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:15 pm to Guava Jelly
quote:
Do these little asinine posts make you feel better? Here's a tip: get an offense that doesn't depend so heavily on the time between plays, get players who are athletic enough to impose their physical will upon the opposition and stop sobbing over the POTENTIAL of a rule change.
I don't like the notion that "The Nick Saban Rule" could be implemented any more than you do. I actually enjoy the wrinkle that these types of gimmicks add to games (I say that as an LSU fan). But bitching about it just makes you look pathetic and scared.
Listen to yourself...the 90% of us that aren't deluding themselves understand that this is about traditional style teams that don't like the newfangled dagnabbit gobblegook offenses and want things to stay the way they were. So in other words, THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO GET A NEW COACH, NEW PLAYERS, NEW S&C PROGRAM, NEW SCHEME. So YOUR answer is that the teams that run the HUNH should, at the request of those who can't win as often with this evolved offense, GET A NEW COACH, NEW PLAYERS, NEW S&C PROGRAM, NEW SCHEME. Ok, gotcha.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:15 pm to Lg
quote:
Tell you what. Let the offense snap the ball as quick as it wants to, but if you make the defenders rush to get back to the line, then do away with all of the offense raising up looking to the sideline. No audible. Hurry up and run what you got.
Or maybe, your coach should recruit differently and condition his players better for the fast paced game. Or we could just allow Alabama to get an automatic win versus teams that run that type of offense to avoid any embarassment or injuries. As much as you Gumps win, it's amazing you still find shite to cry about.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News