Started By
Message
1
Posted on 3/5/14 at 9:56 am to KaiserSoze99
Damn! I think were onto something.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 9:56 am to PorkSammich
quote:
Scrap the 10 second rule and just make it easier for the defenses to substitute.
I can accept that. I doubt very many people would disagree. Make defensive substitutions on the fly, like hockey, where as long as the players are leaving the field and not trying to participate, the team is not flagged for illegal participation.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 9:58 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Make defensive substitutions on the fly, like hockey,
dumb
Posted on 3/5/14 at 9:58 am to mwlewis
Not in favor of 10 second rule.
I think there are other ways to handle it.
Keep running clock like NFL after first downs because with TV timeouts game is long enough especially during SEC play.
Or they could allow a team to carry timeouts unused from first half to second half.
I think there are other ways to handle it.
Keep running clock like NFL after first downs because with TV timeouts game is long enough especially during SEC play.
Or they could allow a team to carry timeouts unused from first half to second half.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 9:59 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:I think if a player is making a legitimate effort to get off the field, is within a few yards of the sideline and in no way interferes with the game play, then refs should just keep the flag in their pocket.
where as long as the players are leaving the field and not trying to participate, the team is not flagged for illegal participation.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:15 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Make defensive substitutions on the fly, like hockey, where as long as the players are leaving the field and not trying to participate, the team is not flagged for illegal participation.
I come in this thread for comedy, and you post this logical bs? Damn it, this is an atrocity. Don't be all intellectual in your own "point and laugh" thread.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:37 am to DoreonthePlains
This guy disagrees:
quote:
bona fide
quote:
quote:
Make defensive substitutions on the fly, like hockey,
dumb
I don't see how that is any dumber than the 10-second rule, or ignoring the real issues.
A defender on the field can give a fair-catch type signal to indicate he is leaving the field and is ineligible to participate, while another player comes in to replace him. Simple solution. No stupid clock rules and gay shite to give Nick Saban and Bert Belly a much-needed advantage.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:41 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
don't see how that is any dumber than the 10-second rule, or ignoring the real issues.
So your defense is that someone else suggested a dumb rule change so it is ok for you to make a dumb suggestion?
quote:
A defender on the field can give a fair-catch type signal to indicate he is leaving the field and is ineligible to participate, while another player comes in to replace him.
dumb
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:42 am to KaiserSoze99
I vote to limit plays to 99999999 per game.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:44 am to bona fide
quote:
bona fide
dumb
So, you are proposing no change in how defenses can make substitutions?
If you're gonna sit here and criticize my proposed solutions as "dumb" why don't you give us an enlightened suggestion from you vast well of intellectual prowess?
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:47 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
So, you are proposing no change in how defenses can make substitutions?
correct
quote:
If you're gonna sit here and criticize my proposed solutions as "dumb"
you agreed that it was dumb saying "it's no dumber than the 10-sec...."
quote:
why don't you give us an enlightened suggestion from you vast well of intellectual prowess?
play ball, I have no issue with current rules
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:51 am to KaiserSoze99
I think things are fine as they are. If you're going to relax the 11 players on the field rule for the defense, you need to do the same for the offense.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:53 am to bona fide
Fine. I don't disagree. But if the NCAA (and Nick/Bert) is going to FORCE us to make a change, which would you prefer:
1. 10-second rule; OR
2. Change in defensive substitution rules.
Now, tell me which rule is more "dumb" if we MUST make a change?
1. 10-second rule; OR
2. Change in defensive substitution rules.
Now, tell me which rule is more "dumb" if we MUST make a change?
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:57 am to KaiserSoze99
1. Yes
2. 80 plays. Because if you run 80 plays you're winning anyway, so we'll treat it as a mercy rule for Saban, Bert, et al.
2. 80 plays. Because if you run 80 plays you're winning anyway, so we'll treat it as a mercy rule for Saban, Bert, et al.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:59 am to The Sultan of Swine
quote:
I think things are fine as they are. If you're going to relax the 11 players on the field rule for the defense, you need to do the same for the offense.
I am open to that idea, but with some limitations.
The offense should be limited in making personnel changes much like they must be set before the ball is snapped. The offense has an advantage of knowing what they are about to do, and can take advantage of a defenses inability to substitute in a HUNH situation. But as a compromise, allow the offense to break the huddle with 12 players or make one player substitution while allowing the defense to make whatever changes it needs to make. It could easily work IF the real issue is personnel changes, fatigue, and concern about player injury.
10-second rule is full of shite.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:59 am to KaiserSoze99
10-sec rule would be much easier to enforce and would be less of a change from the status quo.
imo, the NCAA will tell the refs to slow the game down some, working within the current rules. The refs will then over emphasize this to some degree, giving Saban and the rest what they want.
imo, the NCAA will tell the refs to slow the game down some, working within the current rules. The refs will then over emphasize this to some degree, giving Saban and the rest what they want.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 12:00 pm to KaiserSoze99
No clock, no quarters...you play 40 total plays and the team with the most points after 40 plays is the winner.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 12:09 pm to bona fide
quote:
10-sec rule would be much easier to enforce and would be less of a change from the status quo.
I agree that it would be easier to enforce, but disagree on the change in status quo.
HUNH offenses are the status quo. This would eliminate that offense's key component (i.e. quick plays forcing the defense to play base and eliminating changes in blitz packages, stunts, different coverages, etc). As I understand the rule, the offense must wait 10 seconds before snapping the ball, regardless of the situation, except within 2 minutes of the half or end of game.
quote:
imo, the NCAA will tell the refs to slow the game down some, working within the current rules. The refs will then over emphasize this to some degree, giving Saban and the rest what they want.
I agree the refs will do this and I have no problem with it.
Why not make it a 5-second snap rule, where all subs are given 5 seconds to clear the field or get set before the Ump allows the snap, but ONLY apply the snap rule if subs are coming into the game on defense. Otherwise, the ball gets snapped as soon as it is set.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 12:12 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
A defender on the field can give a fair-catch type signal to indicate he is leaving the field and is ineligible to participate, while another player comes in to replace him. Simple solution
IF a change must be made, this is much better. The only possible snag is exploitation by defenses leaving 12 on field until last second then signaling off. Maybe the player must be at least to the numbers at snap?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News