Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  NCAA proposes slowing game

Topic:  NCAA proposes slowing game
Author
Message
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/15/2014 10:22:01 PM 
NCAA considers rule change to slow down the game, and preventing teams from using a hurry up offense. One proposal provides a 10 second window to allow defensive substitutions before the offense can snap the ball. Teams would be penalized if they snap before the count on the 40 second clock reaches 29, except in the final 2 minutes of each half. The new rule is supposedly designed to protect players from injuries, which have been rising with increased numbers of plays per game, although some coaches dispute that injury rates have increased..

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
cbarber357
General User

Member Since: 9/9/2012
Location: Pickerington, OH
Post Count: 951

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/16/2014 1:24:20 AM 
That's a worse idea than legalizing heroin
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,745

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/16/2014 1:15:05 PM 
I saw commentary on ESPN that basically said that this will not pass.  According to these ESPN dudes, it supposedly was proposed by some coaches whose defenses were getting burned by the hurry up.  

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/16/2014 11:15:32 PM 
Basically some favor it, some don't. Trying to use hurry up all the time so that the foe can't make defensive substitutions is a different game than the traditional game. Is it better? Is it worse? Do fans like the fast pace? Are there more injuries now?

I know Ohio has had a lot more injuries since this came into fashion. Is that why? No doubt partly. Even if it doesn't make the game inherently less safe, more plays per game mean more chances for injury. Plays per game are up 25% or so in the last few years, so you'd expect 25% more injuries, at least. If players are playing tired, the injury rates may also go up, so it might account for even more than a 25% increase in injuries.

While I personally don't care for it, I do think that the majority of today's fans like the faster paced game, so I suspect the rule will not pass. On the other hand, i suspect there will be some other tweaks made to give defenses a fair chance to make substitutions.

Last Edited: 2/16/2014 11:16:32 PM by L.C.

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Casper71
General User

Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,090

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/16/2014 11:40:36 PM 
I believe in FAIR PLAY.  In fact it used to be on the clock in my days.  So, I say give the defense a chance to substitute and make every play fairer for both sides of the ball. 
Back to Top
  
TWT
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,171

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/16/2014 11:52:27 PM 
If you want to come up with some interesting stats L.C. I would be interested in learning the correlation between the play count of each Offensive Line member by season and career and the number of injuries. My guess is its a pretty linear graph as the plays go up so do the injuries. This goes back to my point that I don't think having the most seasoned line is the way to go because that is like operating a fleet of cars with 100,000 miles on them. I would play more true freshman and redshirt an upper classmen here or there with a nagging injury or if they need to work on their grades. 5th year Bobcat players have 9 or 10 years of physical play. Some lucky ones can go on and put 140,000 or 150,000 miles on those frames with a few years in the NFL but a lot of these guys are done by the 5th year of college ball. 

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Bcat2
General User

Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 7:44:22 AM 
Uncle Wes wrote:
If you want to come up with some interesting stats L.C. I would be interested in learning the correlation between the play count of each Offensive Line member by season and career and the number of injuries. My guess is its a pretty linear graph as the plays go up so do the injuries. This goes back to my point that I don't think having the most seasoned line is the way to go because that is like operating a fleet of cars with 100,000 miles on them. I would play more true freshman and redshirt an upper classmen here or there with a nagging injury or if they need to work on their grades. 5th year Bobcat players have 9 or 10 years of physical play. Some lucky ones can go on and put 140,000 or 150,000 miles on those frames with a few years in the NFL but a lot of these guys are done by the 5th year of college ball.


9 or 10 yrs of physical play compounded by 9 or 10 yrs of lifting aggressively to get bigger, stronger and faster. Perhaps many of those who add so much weight don't truly have the frame to carry it.

"Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men." JFK

Back to Top
  
The Optimist
General User



Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,594

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 8:58:14 AM 
Extremely dumb.

Football is constantly adapting. I am sure a couple old school coaches wanted the forward pass banned when it started to takeover the game as well. Here is a thought... Condition your players better!

The best rule change regarding pace would be the elimination of TV timeouts, but that is as unlikely (if not more unlikely) as this silly proposal.

I've seen crazier things happen.

Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,736

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 10:09:45 AM 
Casper71 wrote:
I believe in FAIR PLAY.  In fact it used to be on the clock in my days.  So, I say give the defense a chance to substitute and make every play fairer for both sides of the ball. 


Concededly I favor hurry-up offenses, the faster the better.

Question: Why should defenses be given time to substitute if the offense isn't subbing?

http://www.facebook.com/mikejohnson.author

Back to Top
  
Casper71
General User

Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,090

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 10:15:05 AM 
My assumption was the offense was substituting therefore it is ony fair to let the defense substitute.  Agree, if the O does not sub why should the D be able to IF the O just wants to run hurry up with the same personnel.
Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,736

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 10:25:56 AM 
My freshman year I player-coached an intramural team.  We were mediocre.  Okay on defense but struggled to generate offense.

Before the second season, I told the guys we were going to experiment with something different.  I handed them a "playbook."  It included only a handful of plays with a couple variations each.  But, I told the guys, we were going to run them without huddles and as fast as we could line up and our QB call out the play.

Our opponents quickly became gassed, first mentally and then phyically.  In those shortened intramural games we were winning by scores of 36-0, 42-0, etc. 

During the ensuing years I often wondered why some innovative coach or coaches didn't begin combining no-huddle with a hurry-up style.  Now that it's here and spreading, my zest for college football would wane if the NCAA put a governor on offenses.

http://www.facebook.com/mikejohnson.author

Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 12:40:49 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
Casper71 wrote:
I believe in FAIR PLAY.  In fact it used to be on the clock in my days.  So, I say give the defense a chance to substitute and make every play fairer for both sides of the ball. 


Concededly I favor hurry-up offenses, the faster the better.

Question: Why should defenses be given time to substitute if the offense isn't subbing?

I think the offense in some cases is substituting. They send a few players off the field, and the defense, not knowing who will come back, as in, 3 wide receivers, or alternately, a fullback and 2 tight ends, tries to compensate by running 15 players onto the field, and when the new offensive players run on, 4 defenders try to quickly get off the field. Meanwhile the offense tries to get set and snap before the extra defenders can leave.

I agree that if the offense doesn't substitute, the defense doesn't need to, but when the offense does substitute the defense should get a fair amount of time to react.

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,745

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/17/2014 11:48:06 PM 
L.C. wrote:
. . . I agree that if the offense doesn't substitute, the defense doesn't need to, but when the offense does substitute the defense should get a fair amount of time to react.


I agree with this, too.

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/19/2014 11:26:28 PM 
The NCAA should stick to revising the Bagel Rule:

www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-three-oklahoma-...

Last Edited: 2/19/2014 11:49:17 PM by OhioStunter
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/20/2014 3:21:26 AM 
What? Wait... no cream cheese?

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,392

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/20/2014 12:10:17 PM 
L.C. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Casper71 wrote:
I believe in FAIR PLAY.  In fact it used to be on the clock in my days.  So, I say give the defense a chance to substitute and make every play fairer for both sides of the ball. 


Concededly I favor hurry-up offenses, the faster the better.

Question: Why should defenses be given time to substitute if the offense isn't subbing?

I think the offense in some cases is substituting. They send a few players off the field, and the defense, not knowing who will come back, as in, 3 wide receivers, or alternately, a fullback and 2 tight ends, tries to compensate by running 15 players onto the field, and when the new offensive players run on, 4 defenders try to quickly get off the field. Meanwhile the offense tries to get set and snap before the extra defenders can leave.

I agree that if the offense doesn't substitute, the defense doesn't need to, but when the offense does substitute the defense should get a fair amount of time to react.

When the offense substitutes, the defense is allowed to substitute, this is the job of the Umpire who is to stand over the ball until the Referee gives the ready for play signal.

 
Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/20/2014 1:04:31 PM 
L.C. wrote:
What? Wait... no cream cheese?

And don't even think about setting out peanut butter.

 
Back to Top
  
Paul Graham
General User



Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/20/2014 4:38:21 PM 
Fewer plays, fewer injuries and less of a risk for long term physical and mental health problems.

Seems like a completely reasonable proposal.
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,745

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/20/2014 8:33:50 PM 
Paul Graham wrote:
Fewer plays, fewer injuries and less of a risk for long term physical and mental health problems.

Seems like a completely reasonable proposal.


Only #1 seems to have substantial evidence behind it.  The rest, at this juncture, appear to be mainly conjecture.  They might turn out to be true, too, but I don't think there's enough evidence now to say one way or another. 

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Paul Graham
General User



Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/20/2014 10:08:02 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
Paul Graham wrote:
Fewer plays, fewer injuries and less of a risk for long term physical and mental health problems.

Seems like a completely reasonable proposal.


Only #1 seems to have substantial evidence behind it.  The rest, at this juncture, appear to be mainly conjecture.  They might turn out to be true, too, but I don't think there's enough evidence now to say one way or another. 


I think its fair to assume here that the conclusion will follow from the premise. If everyone reduced their total driving by a factor of two, I think everyone would agree that accidents would be reduced. Would they be reduced by a factor of 2? Probably not. But they would be reduced.

I think given the recent research and notable tragedies, all options should be on the table for those interested in keeping this sport alive. Particularly changes as mild as this, which leaves the core of the game unchanged.

Last Edited: 2/20/2014 10:16:00 PM by Paul Graham
Back to Top
  
C Money
General User



Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/21/2014 10:42:03 AM 
I read somewhere....and no, I can't remember where so this is anecdotal.....that the injury rate between HUNH teams and slower-paced offenses is about the same, but the difference is in who gets injured. With HUNH offenses, skill position players are hurt more frequently, and with slobberknockin' offenses, it's the interior linemen.

While that makes some sense, I don't know that our experience is consistent with that idea.....it seems like most of our injuries have been along the lines even when we have tried to go HUNH, although we have seen a fair amount of missed time by our WRs.

I still think proper use of protective gear is the most important factor in avoiding injury. The helmet is not a weapon, and should be properly fitted. Mouth guards should not be trimmed down and should eliminate jaw movement. And for the love of God, wear freaking knee, thigh, and hip pads.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/21/2014 12:00:55 PM 
C Money wrote:
I read somewhere....and no, I can't remember where so this is anecdotal.....that the injury rate between HUNH teams and slower-paced offenses is about the same, but the difference is in who gets injured. With HUNH offenses, skill position players are hurt more frequently, and with slobberknockin' offenses, it's the interior linemen....

That might be true, but only if the HUNH offense was passing oriented , etc, while the standard speed offense was pounding the ball inside. What if you ran HUNH, running the ball? What if you ran a passing offense, but with huddles? It seems to me that the style of the offense and the speed of the offense are not necessarily dependent on one another.

It also seems certain that more plays means more chances to get hurt, plus tired players would seem likely to lead to a higher incidence of injury. Since many injuries occur in non-game situations (lifting, practice, etc), the increase would not be linear, however. Thus, if one team ran 60 plays a game, and another ran 80 plays a game, I would expect that the math would work out something like:
If 60% of injuries occur in games, then the 33% more plays would mean .4+.6*1.33=1.2, so 20% more injuries.

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,745

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/22/2014 10:11:56 PM 
Far be it from me to reject L.C.'s legendary mathematical calculations; however, in my own experience as a one of the worst athletes in history of basketball I know that I'm more likely to get injured when I'm not working hard and not doing things fast (being a relative term in my case).  That's because I'm less focused.  In football, I would think that a NHHU offense would stay very focused from play to play and, therefore, would be less prone to injury.  This too is anecdotal.  That's why I said earlier that I think we should wait until we have solid research and not jump the gun at this point.   

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Ohio
Post Count: 4,466

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/28/2014 12:43:18 PM 
Paul Graham wrote:
OhioCatFan wrote:
Paul Graham wrote:
Fewer plays, fewer injuries and less of a risk for long term physical and mental health problems.

Seems like a completely reasonable proposal.


Only #1 seems to have substantial evidence behind it.  The rest, at this juncture, appear to be mainly conjecture.  They might turn out to be true, too, but I don't think there's enough evidence now to say one way or another. 


I think its fair to assume here that the conclusion will follow from the premise. If everyone reduced their total driving by a factor of two, I think everyone would agree that accidents would be reduced. Would they be reduced by a factor of 2? Probably not. But they would be reduced.

I think given the recent research and notable tragedies, all options should be on the table for those interested in keeping this sport alive. Particularly changes as mild as this, which leaves the core of the game unchanged.


I think accidents would be reduced by a factor greater than 2. Not only are you halving your own driving, but the reduced number of cars on the road would make the act of driving less risky.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,496

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: NCAA proposes slowing game
   Posted: 2/28/2014 1:08:19 PM 
It reminds me of how our local city government was patting itself on the back a year or so ago. It seems that since they started their bicycle safety program 20 year ago, head injuries to children riding bicycles are down by 50%. It sounds great, until you look around and realize that you never see kids on bicycles anymore. When I was young, I as on my bike all the time, going here, going there. Today's kids, not so much. A guy I know tried a job as an ice cream man, and found he couldn't even make minimum wage. His one sentence summary of the situation was "oddly, you rarely see kids outside anywhere". So, are head injuries down per biked mile? Or, is it just that biked miles are down > 50%? And that isn't even factoring in the effect of spending millions of dollars on bicycle trails so that when kids do bike they don't need to be on roads.

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  1 - 25  of 41 Posts
Jump to Page:  1 | 2    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 518 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
518 Guests
0 Registered Users
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2025 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties