Started By
Message
re: NCAA Rules Committee Proposes to Eliminate HUNH
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:05 pm to undecided
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:05 pm to undecided
It's going to be a travesty if the Committee implements this rule. The power conferences need to break the frick away from the NCAA. I don't understand why these people so determined to water down football so much. It's pitiful.
0
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:05 pm to tider04
quote:
tweak rules to allow defense to sub whenever they want, just like the offense.
Wait, what? When did they change the rule to not allow them to sub when they want? Have I walked into bizarro world?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:05 pm to WDE24
quote:
yes. Allow HUNH during the point in each half when players are going to be most fatigued. Since this rule is about player safety, I hope they realize how disingenuous that part of the rule is.
....jeez.....if the teams have been employing the HUNH for an additional 56 minutes, then the safety issues are exacerbated.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:07 pm to NbamaTiger90
I would be against changing the rules. As for injuries, there's probably enough data available to see if HUNH paces increase the rate of serious injury vs 3 yds and a cloud of dust paces. If so, then maybe there's case to allow latitude on D substitution.
As for it being a gimmick, history will sort that out naturally. There are a lot of "gimmicks" that are already entrenched in game as currently played, e.g., onside kicks, fake FG's, etc. No need to outlaw gimmicks.
As for it being a gimmick, history will sort that out naturally. There are a lot of "gimmicks" that are already entrenched in game as currently played, e.g., onside kicks, fake FG's, etc. No need to outlaw gimmicks.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:07 pm to CharlesLSU
The Coaches in favor of this rule to slow down play all squat to piss
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:08 pm to tider04
quote:
More plays equals more opportunities for concussions. Fact, no study necessary. Next!
That's a bit simplistic. More violent collisions equal a greater opportunity for concussions. And if HUNH reduces the frequency and intensity of collisions (I'm not sure if it does) then it could be a net benefit to player safety.
Think of it in Nascar terms. What poses a greater risk of death or driver injury: 180 laps at Talledega going 200 mph bunched together on a tri-oval, or 300 laps on a short road course going 60 mph and turning all the time? It's not the number of laps, it's the physics of what's happening during those laps.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:11 pm to WDE24
That is the cluster part of the rule. It's either about player safety or it's about helping DC's adjust to the HUNH. If it's purely about safety then there should be no point in the game that it changes.
But they know damn well that it will bite someone in the arse that does not run a HUNH.
But it does not change how I watch football, this rule is just funny. They should just call it what it is going to be and tell everyone to deal with it.
But they know damn well that it will bite someone in the arse that does not run a HUNH.
But it does not change how I watch football, this rule is just funny. They should just call it what it is going to be and tell everyone to deal with it.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:24 pm to WDE24
quote:
This is about giving defenses time to make adjustments whether it be alignment changes or putting the proper personnel on the field.
quote:That strategy would get shot to the curb. That's why Troy Calhoun is taking the angle of "player safety" as his platform for a rules change. I don't blame him, player safety is a hot topic and it gets the attention of the fools at the NCAA.
Exactly. We can fairly and honestly debate this topic. I will disagree, but at least it will be an honest discussion.
My biggest issue is exploiting a false player safety issue to counter someones on field strategy. If you think the game should be changed based on fundamental strategic issues then propose the rule change on that front.
As a logical outsider, I can see straight through the BS and realize that player safety is the last of most coaches concerns, they just want to win ball games.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:25 pm to WDE24
quote:
Seriously? Your analogy never got off the ground. You analogized football with boxing and then equated rounds to number of plays as it related to player safety. That is just a poor analogy. Again, number of plays is much more analogous to number of punches thrown.
No, the point of my analogy was simply to state that dangerous sports limit the amount of violence the athletes are exposed to. You can accomplish this by limiting quarters, rounds, etc or by limiting the amount of contact within each quarter or round or whatever. Two ways to accomplish the same thing, the rules committee is attempting to accomplish this with the latter option instead of the former. Pretty simple concept really, and easy to follow the premise of the argument if that's what you were really interested in doing. You obviously just want to argue for the sake of arguing by pointing out every little difference even though that was never part of my point or the intention of the analogy.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:28 pm to graves1
quote:
Have you ever had a head injury? Real question. Fixing the sink raised up and hit your head? Hard.
I played real football and kept playing.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:29 pm to tider04
quote:This is a bit ironic since you have already conceded the fact that the player safety angle is a "straw man" (your words), which has been my entire point. Which of us is arguing solely for the sake of arguing?
You obviously just want to argue for the sake of arguing
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:34 pm to undecided
How would this propsed rule affect teams that go "HUNH" with, say, less than 2 minutes remaining in the game?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:36 pm to partsman103
It is suspended. Pretty stupid.
If you have a problem with HUNH, just outlaw it. HUNH is fine apparently when it is needed to win games in the last few minutes, however all other times it is barbaric and hazardous to player health!
If you have a problem with HUNH, just outlaw it. HUNH is fine apparently when it is needed to win games in the last few minutes, however all other times it is barbaric and hazardous to player health!
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:38 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
I did too. I started in 3rd grade. Played four years in college. When I played it was called "getting your bell rung". Now they call it a concussion.
I now have epilepsy. Due to head injuries while playing football. Scar tissue in my left temporal lobe.
Things ran a little slower back then, but doctors didn't know what they know now. I still remember being out of it and lining up.
Now days we "meaning doctors" now more about concussions.
I now have epilepsy. Due to head injuries while playing football. Scar tissue in my left temporal lobe.
Things ran a little slower back then, but doctors didn't know what they know now. I still remember being out of it and lining up.
Now days we "meaning doctors" now more about concussions.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:43 pm to WDE24
quote:
This is a bit ironic since you have already conceded the fact that the player safety angle is a "straw man" (your words), which has been my entire point. Which of us is arguing solely for the sake of arguing?
Let me clarify for you....I believe, like you, that safety is not the real reason for this rule. We agree there. I did simply point out that there is a legit argument to be made from that angle IMO, should one wish to do that. We both know that's not the motivation of the rule change. That doesn't change the fact that an argument can be made from that perspective. Understand?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:44 pm to graves1
quote:
Now days we "meaning doctors" now more about concussions.
Most of the BS rules do not apply to player safety.
1. Lowering you head on defense. If you can't do it on defense then why is a RB allowed to do it?
2. Facemask by a defender. Why is a RB/WR allowed to grab a defender by the facemask and shuck him to the ground?
It has nothing to do with player safety as a whole. It's all about pleasing the group that is bitching the loudest.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:45 pm to tider04
quote:An argument can be made from any perspective. The point I made over and over is that making that argument is a dangerous path to go down, especially without supporting data. Do you understand?
That doesn't change the fact that an argument can be made from that perspective. Understand?
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:47 pm to NbamaTiger90
It has a lot to do with player safety. Lawsuits in the NFL over it.
Teams that use the HUNH are going to argue it doesn't. And if you are winning I understand.
Teams that use the HUNH are going to argue it doesn't. And if you are winning I understand.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:48 pm to WDE24
quote:
An argument can be made from any perspective. The point I made over and over is that making that argument is a dangerous path to go down, especially without supporting data. Do you understand?
I do understand. Glad you finally do as well. Like I've said several times, agree to disagree. I don't think it's a dangerous path to go down. Everyone knows Boxing and MMA are dangerous sports, are they eliminating the sports, or have they created rules and limits to make them as safe as possible? Football isn't going away, if that's what you're concerned with. Anything that is a billion dollar business isn't going away in a capitalistic society.
Posted on 2/13/14 at 12:48 pm to NbamaTiger90
quote:Malzhan/Sumlin/Freeze, etc. better jump up on their soap box and start bitching then. They should take a stand to defend their type of offense. Make the NCAA take notice and call a spade a spade ~ make the NCAA and the rules committee provide verifiable evidence that HUNH causes more injuries.
It has nothing to do with player safety as a whole. It's all about pleasing the group that is bitching the loudest.
Page 35 of 44
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News