I know Saban is a power player, but there are so many teams that have benefited - nay, transformed - by instituting hurry-up offenses. You would think they would these new teams would have a bigger voice It levels the playing field (see Auburn v Bama). I think ISU has a better chance without this new rule. Love to hear Mangino's position!
Rule Change to Slow down Tempo
- Thread starter Bret44
- Start date
I know Saban is a power player, but there are so many teams that have benefited - nay, transformed - by instituting hurry-up offenses. You would think they would these new teams would have a bigger voice It levels the playing field (see Auburn v Bama). I think ISU has a better chance without this new rule. Love to hear Mangino's position!
I know the NFL implemented the rule that a RB cannot lower his head/shoulders into a defensive player because of player safety. I didn't see that called once this past year. The "player safety" rules are a one-way street. We now see a rule (regardless of whether Saban was a main backer) backing the "safety" of the defenders.
It is strange that faking an injury is really the only response a defensive coordinator has to the breakneck speed of offenses these days. Think about that. Faking an injury has become a staple football and that is wrong.
We also see offenses snapping the ball before the chains are set, before the referee is set, before defenders are set, before announcers can swallow their saliva. That is rediculous and needed to be addressed.
Also, with only a 10 second window, a defensive coordinator will not be able to just jog guys onto the field. It will still be a very quick decision and the defense will still have to be on their toes. I personally cannot stand seeing a defense that is gasping for air and whiffing on tackles, or a dime/nickle formation on the goalline, all because the offense can do whatever the hell they want.
So at the end of the game... A trailing team fails to complete a play that would stop the clock and has no timeouts, the clock is down to :10, the game is effectively over with the new rule change.
Seems legit.
Seems legit.
Last edited:
I just went through the 2013-2014 rulebook, and could not find any indication that after a first down the chains or the down indicator must be positioned prior to the snap. The only rule is that after a first down, the clock stops and it does not start again until the referee gives a signal that the ball is ready for play. The definition of "ready for play" does not include anything about the chains being set up. There is nothing that explicitly states that the line-to-gain or down indicator must be placed before the referee can give the signal.
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR14.pdf
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR14.pdf
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
No.
This proposal would not apply in the last two minutes of each half, so the "hurry up" offense could still be used for that entire four minutes of game time. I guess there's no concern about injuries and conditioning when you're near the end of a half ...
And now I feel dirty for defending even an aspect of this silly rule change.
The key advantage is not injuries or substitution. What will kill offenses is having a 40 second window reduced to 11. No catching the other team napping or taking a long count to get the other team to jump. Easier to stay prepared for 11 seconds than 40.
So if you get the ball back down ten with 4:25 to go, you aren't allowed to run "hurry up" for another 2 minutes?
That's insane.
I agree with the rule! The game is going too fast! These kids need time to breathe! These up tempo offenses are ruining the game and I don't want the game to change! Also, bi-racial marriages shouldn't be allowed! And black people and women shouldn't be allowed to vote! Why can't these kids smoke cigarettes while on the field?! Babe Ruth was able to! Where are my Depends?!?!
I see what you are doing here but by the standards of this board I am an old fogey and I think this is one of the worst ideas the rules committee has ever had.
Old fogey is a mindset, not age.
My point was more based on people wanting the rule change because they're afraid of explosive offenses changing the landscape.
Landscape needed changing. Way too much specialization. Let's force some of these players to be football players rather than just playing situationally.
Yeah, let's make our punter have a few rushes and passes as well. :wink:
For what is best for ISU overall, which is not our 1st team guys to go though seasons where they are seeing 50% more snaps a year. We do not even know if Mangino could, or wanted to, have ISU going TT speed. It probably means little to Mangino and the offense, but slowing down the game is a big boost to our defense.
Just let the teams that vote for it be force to play it (when on offense) and the teams that vote against it not have to play it when on offense.
??? That would be the worst rule ever invented if they did that in basketball.
Imagine having offsides in basketball.
There is no question ISU is better off with the existing rules. If they can prevent defenses from substituting, advantage ISU or any other offense for that matter.
I understand that you believe ISU's offensive fortunes will change under MM. However, in the past several years, it didn't matter how fast our offense ran if you cannot run the football consistently and get 1st downs. The only thing our "up tempo" offense did, when we ran it, more times than not, was get Kirby on the field faster.
