are you trying to argue that the change to the 40 second play clock did not change the snap dynamics and substitution dynamics that existed prior to the rule change in favor of an offense an offense that plays in a particualr style? are you saying that the nfl did not handle these (apparently imaginary) changes with ref instructions? because if so you are just completely and willfully wrong. i wish people would just admit when they have a bias. the rule ended up changing things it wasnt intended to, just because you happen to like the changes because you feel it benefits your team doesn't mean they didnt happen

quote:
Allegedly, this is a rules question because of player safety.

it certainly was couched in those terms, presumably to get it through in a non rules change year, but everyone knew that was just a pretext. there may well end up being a player safety issue to it, but the kind of statistics you would need to prove it is not currently recorded.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Ross

Member since Oct 2007

47824 posts

Posted on 3/9/14 at 5:52 pm to narddogg81

quote:
are you trying to argue that the change to the 40 second play clock did not change the snap dynamics and substitution dynamics that existed prior to the rule change in favor of an offense an offense that plays in a particualr style?

No, and I don't think I've ever stated that.

quote:
are you saying that the nfl did not handle these (apparently imaginary) changes with ref instructions?

No, and I don't think I ever stated that.

quote:
i wish people would just admit when they have a bias.

Everyone has a bias. You've got people that hate the HUNH because they don't like to see football change from what they've grown used to growing up. You've got people that only like the HUNH because it's what their team runs to be successful, and you've got people that hate the HUNH because their team struggles with it or their coach has taken a public stance against it.

I believe I've made a post in which I've answered your original question that you have neglected to respond to. It highlights my opinion on your original subject matter completely. In it, I expressed that just because a style of play affords the offense an advantage, it does not make that advantage inherently unfair. I've highlighted why I think this is the case and don't wish to rehash it. However, faking an injury I believe is unfair because it is a manipulation of the rules to achieve a stoppage of play without sacrificing a TO (which the HUNH is not, it is simply playing the game of football inside of the rules). And, if you want to argue that it isn't an unfair advantage, that's fine, because it is still unethical. Not only is it obvious why it is unethical, but it is explicitly defined as unethical as quoted earlier in this thread.

I will repeat myself again though, anyone that advocates that an up tempo offense violates the "spirit" or "integrity" of the game but then even slightly believes that faking an injury is the proper course of action to fight the up tempo offense is taking contradictory and hypocritical stances.

0 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board