|
Replies: 206
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Question for clueless09 and other fans who think
Feb 13, 2014, 6:31 PM
|
|
the HUNH O is unfair...when a team is down, and the opposing team USES the clock to its advantage and melts it down not giving the other team a chance to score, is that fair (what Slurrier has done several times)?
That isn't a 'level playing field' either is it? You argument is invalid and has nothing to do with player safety...it just screams of:
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [3245]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7659
Joined: 9/21/13
|
Saban wants to use
Feb 13, 2014, 6:33 PM
|
|
His goal line linemen on every down
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
He just needs to get new ones in every snap
Feb 13, 2014, 6:44 PM
|
|
It's hard to run for 5 seconds when you are 50 pounds over your natural weight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
LOL. I see what you did there.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:59 PM
|
|
What's wrong with growing a couple helmet sizes under a good strength and conditioning program? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Their jaw strengthening coach is world renowned
Feb 13, 2014, 8:05 PM
|
|
Their boys have jaws that could cut through rebar. Totally natural.
Message was edited by: drewtigeralum03®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Deer antler is good stuff ;)***
Feb 13, 2014, 8:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21576]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13918
Joined: 9/7/02
|
Great point....
Feb 13, 2014, 6:37 PM
|
|
They might as well make a rule that says....
You MUST snap the clock within 20-25 seconds after each offensive play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Except there is already a rule that counteract this
Feb 13, 2014, 6:47 PM
|
|
It's called a play clock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
The play clock prevents the team that wins the coin toss
Feb 13, 2014, 6:51 PM
|
|
From forcing the game into overtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
40 seconds X 4 is a lot of time that can be burned if the
Feb 13, 2014, 6:57 PM
[ in reply to Except there is already a rule that counteract this ] |
|
opposing coach has no timeouts...is it fair that that coach can just run it out till the end of the game if it is close enough? What about kicking a FG at the last second to win? Is that fair...using the clock to clench a win?
The inherent speed the offense chooses should not be dictated by a bunch of crybabies b/c they don't know how to defend it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
So are you opposed to the 40 second playclock?
Feb 13, 2014, 7:00 PM
|
|
i'm confused?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Quit going off tanget, I'm asking if you can use the play
Feb 13, 2014, 7:02 PM
|
|
clock to your advantage in that situation, what makes it unfair about speeding the game up? And why in the #### would it suddenly be fair within the last 2 min of a game?
Stick to the topic
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
He has no answer
Feb 13, 2014, 7:03 PM
|
|
So he changes the subject. See my analogy post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81897]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47116
Joined: 3/18/07
|
I'd like you to explain your analogy of this rule change
Feb 13, 2014, 8:23 PM
|
|
and the poll tax...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
I'm still waiting for that as well
Feb 13, 2014, 8:35 PM
|
|
I'm probably too stupid to understand, but I'm willing to give it a try.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I hope i'm not wasting my time, but
Feb 13, 2014, 9:00 PM
[ in reply to I'd like you to explain your analogy of this rule change ] |
|
people were arguing because the laws allow you to substitute it means that you can.
That isn't true, because an offense going HUNH can prevent a defense from substituting even though technically the defense has the right to substitute. The offense can do this by either quick snapping while the defense is substituting to get get a 5 yard penalty or big play. Or they can simply lineup so the defense knows if they substitute the offense could easily get a free five yards or big play.
That is how the poll taxes worked. Poll taxes didn't prevent african americans from voting. However, african americans couldn't pay the poll tax, so they weren't able to vote.
Do you see the parallels?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Again with the fundamental error...
Feb 13, 2014, 9:02 PM
|
|
"HUNH can prevent a defense from substituting"
That's incorrect. Haven't you already been told that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
While I think you are reaching
Feb 13, 2014, 9:20 PM
[ in reply to I hope i'm not wasting my time, but ] |
|
I do happen to agree that practically the HUNH offense can make it practically impossible for the defense to substitute if the offense does not substitute.
I just fail to see it as anything but just another advantage in the series of advantages and disadvantages between the offense and defense. Now then, if the rules were unequally applied to each TEAM that would be an issue of fairness, but it is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Thank you
Feb 13, 2014, 9:30 PM
|
|
for at least avoiding the absurdity that tooka is trying to argue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
He didn't say substitution is impossible or disallowed.
Feb 13, 2014, 9:49 PM
|
|
It is just as allowed for both sides of the ball. After a play is over, there is a down and distance and a personnel package. Both sides are allowed to substitute as desired. Both the offense and defense is calling a play based down, distance, and personnel. While the HUNH makes the defensive coordinator make faster decisions it doesn't prevent him from substituting.
Are you ever going to try and provide some details, heck any, that lend to your silly "unfair" notion?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
I feel like it's similar to sending in more blitzing men
Feb 13, 2014, 9:38 PM
[ in reply to While I think you are reaching ] |
|
than you have protection for. The offense cannot do anything to stop this, cannot plan for it either.
The HUNH doesn't try to get too many men penalties, but rather, tries to execute before a defense can analyze a situation. Just as a blitzing corner is the defense's attempt to disrupt the offense.
Why should the defense get more chances to substitute than the offense? Give them 'substitution timeouts' similar to the 30-second timeouts in basketball. These cannot be used in the final 2 minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
How would the defense have more substitution opportunities
Feb 13, 2014, 9:42 PM
|
|
than the offense?
They would each have a guaranteed 10 seconds to substitute after each play. That seems extremely equal.
The HUNH isn't about executing before a defense can analyze a situation. It's about getting the defense in bad personnel matchups by preventing them from substituting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I disagree with this
Feb 13, 2014, 9:48 PM
|
|
"The HUNH isn't about executing before a defense can analyze a situation. It's about getting the defense in bad personnel matchups by preventing them from substituting."
I do think what you are saying is a true advantage of HUNH, but it is incorrect to say it is the sole reason it is run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
How does the HUNH prevent a defense from analyzing
Feb 13, 2014, 9:54 PM
|
|
what a situation?
What I think he and maybe you are doing is combining the HUNH and the Spread as if they are one tactic. The spread is designed to confuse the defenders at the point of attack and run multiple things out of the same look.
The HUNH is just just going fast. You can be a pro style offense and be HUNH.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
So yet again...
Feb 13, 2014, 9:55 PM
|
|
No attempt to answer "unfair".
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
It gives them less to time to adjust and react
Feb 13, 2014, 9:57 PM
[ in reply to How does the HUNH prevent a defense from analyzing ] |
|
It gives less time for communication from the defensive staff and repositioning.
It is also about throwing a large number of plays to feel out the defense and find vulnerabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That's what I said
Feb 13, 2014, 10:04 PM
|
|
the HUNH is about getting personnel matchups and the defensive coordinator not being able to correct them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Sigh.
Feb 13, 2014, 10:09 PM
|
|
Down, distance, and personnel is equally known by both both teams. Are you trying to say it's unfair for DCs to have to make quick decisions? What are you saying?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
No, you said it was ONLY about that
Feb 13, 2014, 10:18 PM
[ in reply to That's what I said ] |
|
The fast paced HUNH offense is more than just trying to keep the other team from subbing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Exactly, how is going fast our of a pro set or anything else
Feb 13, 2014, 10:00 PM
[ in reply to How does the HUNH prevent a defense from analyzing ] |
|
easier? You still have to see how many men on each side, is it shotgun/pistol, TE blocking or running, etc.
I'm not combining the Spread and HUNH. I'm sure some formations are less complex to analyze, but regardless, going fast is trying to not let the defense account for the position and probably roles of every player on offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Exactly.
Feb 13, 2014, 9:54 PM
[ in reply to I disagree with this ] |
|
The HUNH forces defenses to make faster decisions. Period. The offense is making fast decisions too, and both teams can substitute as desired. Not unfair in the least bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Do they not get the same amount of time to sub now?
Feb 13, 2014, 9:49 PM
[ in reply to How would the defense have more substitution opportunities ] |
|
And why would you substitute if you didn't see that there was a need? Are offensive players inherently in better shape, therefore need to substitute less?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Yup.***
Feb 13, 2014, 9:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
As long as the offense does...
Feb 13, 2014, 9:57 PM
|
|
Next.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6321]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5728
Joined: 11/2/08
|
Re: End of previous play
Feb 13, 2014, 10:03 PM
|
|
which on most plays, it would be plenty of time to sub. First down, complete pass, incomplete pass, play when the ball carrier runs oob, measurement. In those situations, there is probably more than 10 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
If you can't acknowledge what is unfair about that
Feb 13, 2014, 10:02 PM
|
|
you're just refusing to be reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Ya know...
Feb 13, 2014, 10:06 PM
|
|
You would present a far better argument if you actually stated what was unfair about both teams having the same time to substitute. As it is, you have no argument and haven't even tried, other than saying the defense can't substitute, which is completely incorrect. You acknowledge that now, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You don't find it unfair that one team can
Feb 13, 2014, 10:24 PM
|
|
decide when the other team substitutes?
I can't think of another sport where one team chooses when the other team can substitute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Incorrect again.
Feb 13, 2014, 10:27 PM
|
|
The defense can substitute every single play if they want to do so, regardless if the offense does or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
I see your argument, but you seem to think the offense holds
Feb 13, 2014, 10:29 PM
[ in reply to You don't find it unfair that one team can ] |
|
substitutions hostage, and that they occur on every play for the defense. Coaches don't substitute entire lines, they certainly don't sub every play. They get players that are good in both situations. Otherwise, it would be like having a timeout every play so each team can go to the side and talk about the next play.
Why does the defense get to move when none of the offense can or it's a false-start? Linebackers can roam, safeties can shift, that's when audibles are called. But if the defense shifts when there's only 10 seconds left, the offense can't take time to sub.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
If he said the HUNH forces DCs to think and react faster,
Feb 13, 2014, 10:32 PM
|
|
then that would be true. However, saying they can't substitute as they so choose is wholly incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
No but you are saying the defense can do nothing until the
Feb 13, 2014, 10:38 PM
|
|
offense does. Are you saying that if the offense ran the clock down each play and never substituted, the defense would never substitute either?
I was simply saying if you want substitutions to not be an issue, you might as well have a time-out after each play, and huddle on the side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
No
Feb 13, 2014, 10:49 PM
|
|
I'm saying that if an offense effectively utilizes a HUNH they can prevent the defense from substituting players.
The rule proposal we are talking about merely states you have to give 10 seconds from the end of the last play for the defense to substitute.
I'm not sure why that's unfair?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"they can prevent the defense from substituting players."
Feb 13, 2014, 10:50 PM
|
|
How many times will you state that error?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Another question regarding fairness.
Feb 13, 2014, 10:53 PM
|
|
Why can a player like Clowney walk around on the line of scrimmage, but the offense is prevented from moving their best offensive lineman to match up with him. Clowney is allowed to line up where ever he pleases, after the offense is set and can not adjust. This seems unfair, and I think the defense should have to declare where each player is lining up so the offense can adjust their offensive linemen accordingly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Good point. Should the defense be forced to be set?***
Feb 13, 2014, 10:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
I also asked this and wasn't really addressed
Feb 13, 2014, 10:55 PM
[ in reply to Another question regarding fairness. ] |
|
To be fair, there's a lot flying around, but I do think that the defense should have to be set in SOME kind of fashion and not be able to roam at will entirely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
What? I don't think you understand the rules here
Feb 13, 2014, 11:02 PM
[ in reply to Another question regarding fairness. ] |
|
if a team wanted to, they could shift their LT and RT mid play if they wanted to.
No different than any other audible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Do the tackles need to be set before the snap?
Feb 13, 2014, 11:04 PM
|
|
Yes, and that's unfair! LOL. Another swing, another miss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Not all players can shift, and I don't believe more than one
Feb 13, 2014, 11:07 PM
[ in reply to What? I don't think you understand the rules here ] |
|
can move at once. I know during motion, you cannot have a forward motion towards the LOS. The defense is not restricted in any way similar to this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Only one player can go in motion
Feb 13, 2014, 11:09 PM
|
|
but you're welcome to shift multiple players into different positions.
You do understand why the offensive players are required to be set right? It's to balance out their ability to choose when the ball is snapped.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
but defenses take advantage of that rule
Feb 13, 2014, 11:12 PM
|
|
by moving players around once the offense becomes set, and after a time in which the offense couldn't possibly move because of the play clock.
It's sort of like the poll tax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
What do you propose to fix this?***
Feb 13, 2014, 11:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Well obviously,
Feb 13, 2014, 11:17 PM
|
|
The defense should not be allowed to make any motion during the last 10 seconds of the play clock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
So neither team can move the final 10 seconds of
Feb 13, 2014, 11:20 PM
|
|
the play clock?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
No, the receivers can still move, 1 at a time
Feb 13, 2014, 11:24 PM
|
|
No one in the box can move.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Yes, I understand that. I'm enjoying the debate, please
Feb 13, 2014, 11:14 PM
[ in reply to Only one player can go in motion ] |
|
don't be condescending. If you weren't, then I apologize, but it came off that way. I understand the reason for the linemen being set, but once they are, the defense can still move.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Sorry I didn't mean to come across condescendingly
Feb 13, 2014, 11:16 PM
|
|
I do apologize.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Not a problem, it's a good heated discussion
Feb 13, 2014, 11:21 PM
|
|
I really do see your point of the offense 'controlling substitutions' by controlling the tempo, but this is present in every sport. If the offense shifts or goes in motion, should the defense be able to substitute there? It's controlling the rhythm of the offense.
I would only be able to buy the rule if it occured ONLY due to a substitution, and you limited the number of substitutions so you couldn't just do one for the sake of buying time. It's like being able to ice the kicker without a timeout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
There is always going to be some imbalance in sports
Feb 13, 2014, 11:27 PM
|
|
so nothing will ever be perfectly fair.
However, this is a major imbalance.
There are very few other sports where you have an offensive and defensive coordinator calling a play each and every play. By handicapping the DC you essentially change what makes football unique compared to other sports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
I understand that, I just don't see this rule as the answer
Feb 13, 2014, 11:31 PM
|
|
it certainly is AN answer, but just because an answer is right, doesn't mean it's the right answer (if you get what I'm going for). I think it should be a rule more focused on substiutions specifically, NOT penalizing a play style. And it is a playing style, because an offense that huddles each play is not affected by the rule, meaning that they do not currently hold the unfair advantage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
So how do you fix it?
Feb 13, 2014, 11:35 PM
|
|
You're not penalizing a style of play. You're just preventing that style of play from taking advantage of the rules?
I'm not sure how you address without this rule? Maybe you could not count players who are running off the field? i.e. if you're not trying to participate in the play you don't count as as one of the 11 players and can't have an illegal substitution thrown on your team?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
It is penalizing a style of play by limiting its use
Feb 13, 2014, 11:43 PM
|
|
You can't run HUNH if you can't hike the ball as fast as your offense can get set.
You can address it by enforcing this 10-second delay only on substitutions wanted, and you have to register your change with a ref (get another ref if needed). Basketball, soccer all do this. Baseball does it as well, but you can only do that between innings, as far as I know.
You could be seen as having no impact on the play if you're running off the field, similar to what you said.
You could require the offense to be set for at least 5 or 10 seconds before snapping the ball, so that you can't do a last minute sub and the defense has time to adjust. Or have a pre-set position, like what sprinters get before a race, that's 10 seconds.
Offenses can call audibles at the line. Is this unfair to change a play that the defense has a short time to react to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Honestly, how many plays does a HUNH snap
Feb 13, 2014, 11:48 PM
|
|
within 10 seconds?
I don't think very many. All this does is eliminate the fear of the quick snap that prevents defenses from substituting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
How many defenses need to substitute every play?
Feb 13, 2014, 11:49 PM
|
|
You're right, the rule would mostly affect short yardage plays, but defense's don't substitute every down, so why not enforce the rule ONLY when a substitution is made?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I think that is a fair compromise***
Feb 13, 2014, 11:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Agreed, and if they can make a way so that the defense can't
Feb 13, 2014, 11:56 PM
|
|
substitute every down (similar to current players falling down every play), while it would be frustrating, I would at least call it fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Nope, sorry it doesn't work like that
Feb 13, 2014, 11:08 PM
[ in reply to What? I don't think you understand the rules here ] |
|
The players can move, but they have to become set for at least 1 second before the snap. The defensive player can move freely along the line. The defensive player never has to become set.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You do understand why, right?
Feb 13, 2014, 11:11 PM
|
|
Because the offense decides to snap the ball. I'm sure if the defense decided when the ball was snapped they wouldn't be able to move either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Actually, the play clock dictates when the offense snaps it
Feb 13, 2014, 11:13 PM
|
|
The defense knows the offense must snap the ball somewhere within that 40 second (now potentially 30 second window). When the play clock run downs, the defense has an even better idea of when the ball is going to be snapped.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Isn't that the fault of the offense for not
Feb 13, 2014, 11:19 PM
|
|
being ready?
Or are you arguing we should get rid of the playclock?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
No, you have been saying the defense cannot substitute
Feb 13, 2014, 10:52 PM
[ in reply to No ] |
|
until the offense does. I am removing the HUNH piece of this entirely and asking that, if an offense ran the play clock down all the way for an entire drive and did no substituting, then would the defense never substitute either?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I think where I see the difference
Feb 13, 2014, 10:32 PM
[ in reply to You don't find it unfair that one team can ] |
|
Is that both TEAMS have the same abilities. Both offenses do have that advantage over both defenses. That's where I see it as advantageous but not unfair.
I liken it to basketball. When a team has the ball (an offensive possession) they determine whether a timeout is called (and thus substitutions allowed) or to force the other team to play out that possession with the players on the court. If they choose to call the TO to get the players on the court they want, then the defense can substitute as well. It's not exactly the same scenario, but it is very close.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That's a bit of a reach considering the offense
Feb 13, 2014, 10:37 PM
|
|
in your situation would have to use a timeout. In basketball the offense can't just decide to swap out players during live action.
Maybe in football they make a rule neither team can make a substitution in a series? That would be fair.
But I see why you feel that it's fair because both teams have the advantage over defense. However, if we analyze it as just offense versus defense it is unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I think the point holds
Feb 13, 2014, 10:40 PM
|
|
Because the defense, in basketball, CANNOT call a TO to substitute.
And I think football is rife with advantages versus disadvantages when it comes to offense versus defense. I think that's part of strategy to determine where you can exploit them. It is a bit, to me, disingenuous for folks to argue this under the banner of player safety, or in fact to argue it as a matter of "fairness" all the while ignoring the rest of the advantages/disadvantages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
No, the basketball team can't call a TO
Feb 13, 2014, 10:47 PM
|
|
however, if the offensive player goes up for a layup and the defensive player slaps it out of bounds. Both teams then have the option to substitute players.
In football if the offense throws an incomplete pass, the defense isn't given an opportunity to substitute.
I don't disagree it's disingenuous to argue it from the safety perspective.
I just don't understand how someone can believe the rules can tell you how long you have to snap the ball, but shouldn't be able to tell you how long you have to wait to snap the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Right, that is the beginning of a new possession
Feb 13, 2014, 10:54 PM
|
|
And similar to football both teams have as much time as they want to sub at will
And as for when you can snap the ball, I've always been of the mindset that it should be exactly when the ball is made ready by the ump. I see no reason to change that. SPot the ball and keep playing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"make a rule neither team can make a substitution"
Feb 13, 2014, 10:42 PM
[ in reply to That's a bit of a reach considering the offense ] |
|
Or you could leave the rule as it's been the entire history of organized football, and that's where either team can substitute on any play. What don't you like about that? Makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6321]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5728
Joined: 11/2/08
|
NO sport does that...
Feb 13, 2014, 10:50 PM
[ in reply to You don't find it unfair that one team can ] |
|
a football team can subsitute even with a fast paced offense. The D just has to be ready for the sub as soon as play is over. There is plenty of time to sub in most situations after a play.
Do you find it fair that 10 seconds is taken from the the offense when they have to wait if they can not snap the ball until 29 seconds? Even though they are running a hurry up offense, they may need that time if they see that they need to change the play due to the defense lining up in a way that does not suit the play the O was going to run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
How much time does a QB get to adjust to a blitzing corner?
Feb 13, 2014, 10:09 PM
[ in reply to Question: How much time does a defense have to ] |
|
I see what you're trying to say, that the offense controls the tempo. That exists in every sport, yet I can't quickly think of one where the offense is PENALIZED for taking a fast approach (golf maybe?). Why does the defense need to substitute any more than the offense? Can the offense substitute for every change a defense makes? No, because there's a play clock.
The play clock currently penalizes the offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
What does a blitzing corner have to do with substitutions?
Feb 13, 2014, 10:12 PM
|
|
I'm not arguing a RB a passing route in the flanks.
It isn't an issue of whether or not a defense needs to substitute as much of an offense. It's the issue that the offense can substitute whenever they want to, but the defense can only substitute when the offense does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
can't run a passing route****
Feb 13, 2014, 10:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
You're refusing to move on the premise that the HUNH is
Feb 13, 2014, 10:21 PM
|
|
designed SOLELY to stop substitutions (which is fine).
My stance is the HUNH does not directly attack substitutions, the point is to confuse CURRENT players on the field.
A blitzing corner is something that the offense cannot address until the ball is snapped. They cannot suddenly add a blocking TE or another lineman, or move that route to the non-blind side of the QB. Similar to how the HUNH has the offense get in position quickly and the defense must make quick decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Do you not see the fallacy in your comparison?
Feb 13, 2014, 10:27 PM
|
|
You're comparing what the offense can't do after the snap with something the defense can't do before the snap.
If an offensive coordinator outwits a defensive coordinator after the snap, all the credit in the world goes to the OC. There is nothing unfair about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"something the defense can't do before the snap"
Feb 13, 2014, 10:29 PM
|
|
Wrong. 100% incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
It's a valid comparison, it's quick decisions both sides
Feb 13, 2014, 10:33 PM
[ in reply to Do you not see the fallacy in your comparison? ] |
|
have to make each play. Just because it doesn't occur at the same time doesn't mean there aren't similar adjustments.
And how can the offensive coordinator outwit a defensive coordinator after the snap? The play is already running, it's up to the players to make a call....which is what the HUNH is forcing the players on the field to do, make quick decisions.
And are you saying that if the offense waited until 10 seconds left on the clock, then subbed, the defense could not do that until the offense did?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Correct. Equally quick decisions and foresight.***
Feb 13, 2014, 10:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It isn't a valid comparison because they aren't similar
Feb 13, 2014, 10:42 PM
[ in reply to It's a valid comparison, it's quick decisions both sides ] |
|
adjustments.
But you are right. I will retract my comment. If the OC outwits the DC by calling a better play call, credit to him.
I'm not sure what you're asking on the last comment. Can you clarify?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"If the OC outwits the DC by calling a better play call....
Feb 13, 2014, 10:47 PM
|
|
"If the OC outwits the DC by calling a better play call, credit to him."
Of course..that is the object of the game. However, you just keep running from the fact that both teams know down, distance, and personnel on every single play. The defense can substitute as can the offense. On any play. Both coordinators have to think equally as fast. What are you missing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
I believe it is a valid comparison, and I see why you don't
Feb 13, 2014, 10:49 PM
[ in reply to It isn't a valid comparison because they aren't similar ] |
|
You're viewing it more from the coaches/sideline. I am viewing it from the players perspective. And though I do think it's a valid one since both substitutions and blitz protection are quick adjustments due to personnel actions, I'll drop it because it's not a perfect comparison
My last comments was a scenario: Say the offense ran the play clock all the way down before snapping the ball and never substituted for an entire drive. Are you saying the defense cannot substitute at any time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It depends
Feb 13, 2014, 10:55 PM
|
|
Say the offense lined up ready to snap the ball within 2 seconds of the play clock starting. Then decided to wait the other 37 seconds to snap.
Did the defense have a chance to substitute?
No they didn't because if they had tried to send someone off and on the offense could have just snapped the ball and gotten a illegal substitution penalty or went for a big play.
Now say the offense was just wasting time and hadn't lined up to snap the ball. I would assume the defense could substitute.
Do you not see how an offense can prevent a defense from substituting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"Did the defense have a chance to substitute?"
Feb 13, 2014, 10:57 PM
|
|
Yes, they did. In fact, just as much time as the offense.
Swing and a miss, again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
I told you I see your point, but your argument for this
Feb 13, 2014, 11:05 PM
[ in reply to It depends ] |
|
rule is that HUNH is giving an unfair advantage. In your first scenario, the offense cannot substitute either, correct? And I'm saying they run the clock all the way down and snap the ball, they were guaranteed to do this each time. So they are also hurting themselves if they cannot subtitute.
And in the second, if the defense can substitute, then your argument of the defense cannot substitute is wrong since they clearly can even if the offense does not.
Again, I see your point in how the offense controls the pace, but this is something involved in all sports, and nowhere is it penalized by going fast.
You primary concern seems to be not enough time to substitute. Why not change substitution rules?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That's what i'm arguing for
Feb 13, 2014, 11:07 PM
|
|
to change the substitution rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
This rule doesn't change substitution rules though
Feb 13, 2014, 11:11 PM
|
|
It's forcing the offense to slow down. It's putting a restriction on them that you are arguing the HUNH does on the defense currently.
Make it so you if you sub, then there's a wait, but the player must get to his position quickly (no intentional walking). Give substitution timeouts that are 20 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Please note, I know it's not the SAME restriction
Feb 13, 2014, 11:16 PM
|
|
but it IS a restriction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You're looking at this through the present
Feb 13, 2014, 11:17 PM
[ in reply to This rule doesn't change substitution rules though ] |
|
yes it does hurt the offense by eliminating an unfair advantage the offense has currently.
However, the 10 second rule makes it fair for both the offense and defense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Your premise started with HUNH has an unfair advantage
Feb 13, 2014, 11:28 PM
|
|
but now it's all offenses? It's most definitely all offenses, but of all offenses, which does this rule specifically penalize? Ones that want to run a faster tempo. It doesn't make a slow-moving offense any more fair.
Again, it sounds like the defense can substitute any time they want, they just don't for fear of a quick offense. The rule attacks an offensive style of play if that is the case, and I don't see how you can say the rule is not designed for that. If there was a rule you could only run on 1st and 2nd down to cut down on RB and LB concussions, would that be a good rule?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
There is already a rule against slow tempo offenses
Feb 13, 2014, 11:36 PM
|
|
it's called a play clock.
Imagine if a slow tempo offense wasn't told they had to snap the ball within so many seconds? They would just wait all day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
It also wouldn't be exciting and fans wouldn't pay as much
Feb 13, 2014, 11:48 PM
|
|
The play clock forces play. This rule prohibits it. And the play clock isn't a rule that affects substitutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Incorrect yet again.
Feb 13, 2014, 10:15 PM
[ in reply to What does a blitzing corner have to do with substitutions? ] |
|
The defense can substitute with equal opportunity as the offense. Both teams call plays and can substitute as they so choose. Please stop stating this inaccuracy over and over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
If an offense substitutes then the defense is guaranteed an
Feb 13, 2014, 9:51 PM
[ in reply to How would the defense have more substitution opportunities ] |
|
opportunity to do the same.
Both teams are faced with similar situations. The offense needs x yards against the defensive personnel, and the defense needs to call a defense based on distance and personnel too. Both teams can substitute as desired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I would add
Feb 13, 2014, 9:54 PM
|
|
I think that it is a key strategic decision as to what personnel you have on the field. It isn't (or I don't think should necessarily be) solely about the next play. Part of strategy should be the offense having the players ready for the next play (and the play after) and ditto the defense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
True.***
Feb 13, 2014, 9:56 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
No, no I don't
Feb 13, 2014, 10:39 PM
[ in reply to I hope i'm not wasting my time, but ] |
|
The hurry up offense does not keep the offense from substituting. The only time it keeps you from substituting is when can't substitute in time. If the offense substitutes, the defense can substitute.
The poll tax...god, I can't believe I'm indulging you in this terrible analogy...was designed to disenfranchise a race of people. If the white guys substituted, the black guys didn't get to vote.
Also comparing football to civil rights is crass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
And it appears the rules committee realizes that
Feb 13, 2014, 7:06 PM
|
|
it is an unfair mechanism and is looking to rectify that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
LOL
Feb 13, 2014, 7:10 PM
|
|
Or, much more likely, folks who don't like (and have complained about) tempo offenses are using the "player safety" argument to try and take a way part of the advantage of fast paced offenses.
This is only a case of "fairness" in so much as certain coaches have been complaining of mean ole offenses running up the tempo
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
So are you disagreeing with the notion
Feb 13, 2014, 7:11 PM
|
|
that offenses have an unfair advantage with substitutions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I see no reason, at all, to think the advantage unfair
Feb 13, 2014, 7:14 PM
|
|
It is no more unfair than the offense knowing what play is going to be run, or what the snap count is, or any of the other myriad of "advantages" an offense has.
The tempo and speed at which you play, and how you use that tempo, be it fast or slow, is strategic and not the least bit unfair.
And lets be honest, when you have to couch your argument (as they have)in "player safety" it looks less and less like righting a wrong advantage and more like not liking to play against that tempo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It's not unfair that one side of the ball can determine
Feb 13, 2014, 7:17 PM
|
|
whether or not substitutions can take place?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I see no reason to think that unfair at all
Feb 13, 2014, 7:20 PM
|
|
Instead of repeatedly asking that question, perhaps you can try and explain to me what makes that advantage UNFAIR. The offense must allow the defense to sub if they do, as such their is no "we have fresh players and you don't" advantage.
It seems to me that it only exposes which squad is better conditioned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Oooh no, thom, it's unfair to make the defensive staff and
Feb 13, 2014, 7:22 PM
|
|
team to hustle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It's unfair because the offense gets to choose when
Feb 13, 2014, 7:27 PM
[ in reply to I see no reason to think that unfair at all ] |
|
substitutions take place.
If an offense wants to substitute they can do so at any time.
What if the defense lines up within 5 seconds, is the offense required to snap the ball and not substitute?
I'm not sure how anyone can argue that there isn't an unfair advantage for the offense.
Secondly, it isn't about conditioning. It's about getting your proper personnel on the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Dense.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:29 PM
|
|
I the offense substitutes then the defense is given a chance to substitute.
How many games of organized football have you watched in your life Toogie?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Easily
Feb 13, 2014, 7:30 PM
[ in reply to It's unfair because the offense gets to choose when ] |
|
"I'm not sure how anyone can argue that there isn't an unfair advantage for the offense."
To see something as advantageous or strategic does not make it automatically unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
But I'm not arguing it's unfair because it's strategic
Feb 13, 2014, 7:33 PM
|
|
I'm arguing it's unfair because the offense and defense do not have equal opportunity or control over substitutions.
Credit to the coaches who figured out a system to take advantage of the rules. However, just because they found a loophole doesn't mean it is fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Your fundamental error is clear.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:36 PM
|
|
"I'm arguing it's unfair because the offense and defense do not have equal opportunity or control over substitutions."
The defense can substitute on any play. What are you not getting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
And I'm simply saying I see no reason
Feb 13, 2014, 7:36 PM
[ in reply to But I'm not arguing it's unfair because it's strategic ] |
|
To think that both squads should have the same guaranteed opportunities to initiate substitutions.
I don't see any reason to think that is a matter of being unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
How would that fundamentally not be unfair?
Feb 13, 2014, 7:41 PM
|
|
And this is where the conversation dies.
You understand that it is unfair, but you don't see a need for the rule to be fair.
That's fine.
I just don't understand why you wouldn't acknowledge it. Well I do understand. You're doing what the coaches are doing.
If you refuse to acknowledge it's unfair you can pretend that it is fair. Just as the coaches against are going to pretend that the rule change is in the name of player safety.
It just sounds better that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Toogs, answer this simple question.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:43 PM
|
|
Can the defense substitute on any given play, or no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
No, not at all what I said
Feb 13, 2014, 7:43 PM
[ in reply to How would that fundamentally not be unfair? ] |
|
You repeating that it is unfair does not make it so.
I recognize that it is an advantage, but the game is a large series of advantages, not all of them fair or unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
The defense shouldn't be allowed to play a nickel back
Feb 13, 2014, 7:46 PM
|
|
on passing downs. That's unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Likewise, you refusing to acknowledge it
Feb 13, 2014, 7:48 PM
[ in reply to No, not at all what I said ] |
|
does not make it untrue.
You're just turning this into a semantics argument at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Thom is not arguing sematics AT ALL.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:50 PM
|
|
He is basically saying the offense and defense are given equal opportunity to substitute. Do you disagree?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
If it is so unfair, why will it be allowed during the last
Feb 13, 2014, 7:51 PM
[ in reply to Likewise, you refusing to acknowledge it ] |
|
two minutes? Is it just sorta unfair until you need to do the same thing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Because it's a compromise to make it fair for
Feb 13, 2014, 7:54 PM
|
|
teams who are trying to score.
Sometimes compromises have to be somewhat illogical to be reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Yeah...
Feb 13, 2014, 7:56 PM
|
|
You shouldn't be trying to score on any other possessions.
LOL. You're funny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
But you've had 58 minutes to score, why wait till the last
Feb 13, 2014, 8:00 PM
[ in reply to Because it's a compromise to make it fair for ] |
|
two? Should we give them an extra timeout if they've already used theirs since they are trying to score?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I would be fine not allowing it in the final 2 minutes
Feb 13, 2014, 8:03 PM
|
|
I was just trying to be open to compromise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Compromise?
Feb 13, 2014, 8:04 PM
|
|
Compromise what exactly? Can you provide some details?
But hey, that's rich, Toogie says the 2-minute drill should be banned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
No
Feb 13, 2014, 7:54 PM
[ in reply to Likewise, you refusing to acknowledge it ] |
|
It is not semantics to say you don't think something is unfair.
Is it unfair that offense knows the snap count and play call and the defense doesn't? It's certainly advantageous, but few would say it's unfair.
My point is that saying it's advantageous doesn't make it unfair, and it also does not mean that I am "refusing" to admit it is unfair. I am not saying it is unfair because I remain unconvinced it is even close to being unfair.,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
I think the offense should just tell the defense their
Feb 13, 2014, 7:57 PM
|
|
playcall on every down. That would be fair. Mano y mano and all that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That's exactly why you've turned this into a semantics
Feb 13, 2014, 7:58 PM
[ in reply to No ] |
|
argument.
You're trying to argue that advantage does not equal unfair. When that's what it means.
It is unfair that the offense knows the snap count and the defense doesn't, but that is an unfair advantage we have to live with if we wish to play the sport. Maybe you could have the referee blow a whistle to start the play? I don't know.
If you like the current substitution rule, that is fine. I'm not telling you it's illogical or unreasonable to like the rule. I'm just saying you can't disagree that it's unfair to the defense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Still waiting on you Toogs.
Feb 13, 2014, 8:00 PM
|
|
Why is it unfair?
And you know, it is quite funny that you of all posters would be accusing someone of semantics. Classic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
Unfair would be going beyond the rules of the game to
Feb 13, 2014, 8:06 PM
[ in reply to That's exactly why you've turned this into a semantics ] |
|
create an advantage, say, using deer antler spray. Using your big, quick, athletic TE on a passing route to create a mismatch against LB's and DB's is a legal and fair way to create an advantage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
What about players faking injuries? Fair?
Feb 13, 2014, 8:12 PM
|
|
There is no penalty associated with faking an injury. Does that make it fair?
I would argue faking an injury is unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
That's an awesome argument Toogs.
Feb 13, 2014, 8:14 PM
|
|
Too bad it has NOTHING to do with this thread.
Are you EVER going to define what you mean by unfair?
Dance, Toogs, dance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
He's still trying to figure out his analogy
Feb 13, 2014, 8:15 PM
|
|
Give him some time. I'm still waiting to see how the new rule change and the poll tax are related.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
Let them fake injuries then
Feb 13, 2014, 8:14 PM
[ in reply to What about players faking injuries? Fair? ] |
|
So essentially, instead of them faking injuries, you're going to come up with a rule so they get what they want? Yes, that seems fair. At least when they fake an injury they have to come off the field. How about making a rule that says you have to sit out oh, I don't know, the rest of the defensive series if you have to stop the game because of an injury. That seems like a fair player safety rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [361]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 1394
Joined: 6/7/06
|
I like that one if he is hurt the. He doesn't need to be
Feb 13, 2014, 8:31 PM
|
|
Back in within 3 or 4 snaps. Player safety first and foremost
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
How are you going to prove the player is faking an injury in
Feb 13, 2014, 8:17 PM
[ in reply to What about players faking injuries? Fair? ] |
|
order to assess the penalty? I'd say that falls more in line with unethical or immoral to the game rather than unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
You don't have to prove it
Feb 13, 2014, 8:18 PM
|
|
If the player is injured he should probably take the rest of the series off. You know, in the spirit of player safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
You do realize that's not toogie, right?***
Feb 13, 2014, 8:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
It is.***
Feb 13, 2014, 8:26 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6321]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5728
Joined: 11/2/08
|
nope...
Feb 13, 2014, 9:13 PM
|
|
09 started out posting on TigerNet as a snot-nosed kid that was going to usuc. He lives in Anderson
Toogie used to have his email on his profile. It was from a company that his dad and someone else owns. That is where toogie works. Can't remember where it is located,,,,York or Rock Hill, maybe.
These are 2 different people even though they are both idiots
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I know Toogie personally
Feb 13, 2014, 10:45 PM
|
|
And no, he is not ClassOf09.
Not the same people at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Do you know classof09 personally?
Feb 13, 2014, 10:53 PM
|
|
Just for the record, I have done business with toogie's father. I am familiar with him and have empirical evidence for my accusation as well. No biggie tho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6321]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5728
Joined: 11/2/08
|
Re: Do you know classof09 personally?
Feb 13, 2014, 11:03 PM
|
|
what is the name of that business. I can not remember. I am pretty sure toogies info in on there
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
It's alright, I like shooting down the numerous excuses used
Feb 13, 2014, 8:27 PM
[ in reply to AppTiger, you have presented some nice arguments. ] |
|
to try and prove a point. Kind of reminds me of Lowcountry Regurgitater, whatever happened to him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
You mean Blue Cootie?***
Feb 13, 2014, 8:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
Yes, all of him.***
Feb 13, 2014, 8:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 19419
Joined: 9/27/04
|
I think he's been busy
Feb 13, 2014, 8:31 PM
|
|
Preparing for the invasion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You can't
Feb 13, 2014, 8:40 PM
[ in reply to How are you going to prove the player is faking an injury in ] |
|
but I think it would be unfortunate if this becomes the tactic to combat a HUNH.
But at the same time I don't blame a DC for doing it if the offense is trying to take advantage of the substitution rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Please get off the meaningless tangent.
Feb 13, 2014, 8:43 PM
|
|
What makes HUNH unfair? You do realize, up to this point, you haven't tried to explain.. Right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
What do you mean becomes a tactic, it already is. And how
Feb 13, 2014, 8:44 PM
[ in reply to You can't ] |
|
Is not substituting your own players taking advantage of the substitution rules?
So you'd be OK with players crying wolf because they are too winded to play the next down?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I don't think faking injuries has anything to do with
Feb 13, 2014, 8:48 PM
|
|
conditioning.
I think it has more to do with getting the right personnel packages on the field.
I'm opposed to to faking injuries, but if we are going to give the offense an unfair advantage. I have a hard time faulting the defense for faking injuries.
Maybe through faking injuries it will force this rule proposal to be enacted if it doesn't pass this year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"I think it has more to do with getting the right personnel
Feb 13, 2014, 8:52 PM
|
|
.. packages on the field."
Is the defense allowed to do that or no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
If the offense does not substitute any players why do you
Feb 13, 2014, 8:53 PM
[ in reply to I don't think faking injuries has anything to do with ] |
|
need to change personnel? Is this only when they had a positive play? What if the defense just sacked the QB for an eight yard loss and they are trying to hurry up and get another play in, you want to change your players then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Why do football coaches call plays after each play?
Feb 13, 2014, 8:56 PM
|
|
Maybe I don't want to substitute my personnel if it goes from 1st and 10 to 2nd and 18.
However if it goes from 2nd and 10 to 3rd and 1, I probably want to get a few bigger players on the field to stop a third and short.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
"I probably want to get a few bigger players on the field"
Feb 13, 2014, 9:00 PM
|
|
So go ahead and do just that. Are you confused?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
Maybe you should have had your bigger players in
Feb 13, 2014, 9:04 PM
[ in reply to Why do football coaches call plays after each play? ] |
|
the game to start with so they wouldn't have gained 9 yards. Would it still be unfair if the offense kept the same players on the field while you bring in your big uglies to stop a 3rd and short, and they throw a little screen pass to Sammy for a first down or a touchdown because your big players are to slow to catch him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
No that wouldn't be unfair
Feb 13, 2014, 9:07 PM
|
|
if the offense called a better play call than the defensive coordinator.
In that scenario the defensive coordinator at least had the opportunity to call the play he wanted to with the personnel he wanted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
They can do that already, any time during the game.***
Feb 13, 2014, 9:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Yup, just a simple fact.
Feb 13, 2014, 9:11 PM
|
|
It's bizarre how he continues to ignore it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
Well I definitely can't argue with that.***
Feb 13, 2014, 9:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Wrong. Period.
Feb 13, 2014, 10:02 PM
[ in reply to No they can't*** ] |
|
Is that seriously all you got? Really>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Why do you keep running from it?
Feb 13, 2014, 9:10 PM
[ in reply to No that wouldn't be unfair ] |
|
"the defensive coordinator at least had the opportunity to call the play he wanted to with the personnel he wanted."
What prevents him from doing that every play?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
Also, faking injuries is absolutely due to conditioning.
Feb 13, 2014, 9:00 PM
[ in reply to I don't think faking injuries has anything to do with ] |
|
There has never been as much talk about players faking injuries till the success of these HUNH teams; Oregon, Auburn, Clemson, etc. How many teams fake injuries against Bama's methodical, clock eating, wait for the defensive substitutions to be made, hand it to the 240 pound running back dripping with deer antler spray offense, so they can get the right personnel on the field?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81897]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47116
Joined: 3/18/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5972]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3941
Joined: 1/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Because then you REALLY wanna score points...
Feb 13, 2014, 7:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6321]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5728
Joined: 11/2/08
|
disagree....
Feb 13, 2014, 8:04 PM
[ in reply to It's unfair because the offense gets to choose when ] |
|
the ONLY time it would prevent the D from subbing is when the ball is run straight up the middle and the ref gets there really fast to spot the ball.
Any other situation, the D has time to sub. First down, complete pass, incomplete pass, play when the ball carrier runs oob, measurement. In those situations, the D has more than 10 seconds to sub.
Anytime a team finds a way to, as you say, take advantage of a rule (which imo, is playing within the rule), the NCAA changes the rule to suit a few whiney coaches whose team brings money in for the NCAA. So, once again it all goes back to the almighty dollar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
If most plays take longer than 10 seconds anyway
Feb 13, 2014, 8:14 PM
|
|
why are you opposed to the rules?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
No one is opposed to the rules.
Feb 13, 2014, 8:16 PM
|
|
It's you who thinks the current rules are unfair, even though you haven't said why.
Are you okay man?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
The defense is allowed to substitute whenever they want.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:20 PM
[ in reply to It's not unfair that one side of the ball can determine ] |
|
Sometimes they just need to hurry up. It is the offenses job to keep the defense off guard and the defenses job to call defenses based on down and distance.
This is pretty much the way the game has always been played, except it's faster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Add to that that each team is given 3 chances
Feb 13, 2014, 7:21 PM
|
|
To stop the clock each half.
Need to sub, call a TO, or hurry up and try.
Or, have your squad in better shape so you don't rely on a fresh defender every play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Yup. Pretty simple really.***
Feb 13, 2014, 7:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That would be ideal***
Feb 13, 2014, 7:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Toogs, you always have been dense.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:21 PM
|
|
Nothing is stopping he defense from substituting on any given play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
To be fair
Feb 13, 2014, 7:22 PM
|
|
Their is a practical issue stopping them, on many plays.
While I don't, at all, think it unfair, we certainly do line up earlier than we ever plan to snap it in order to stop the other team from having a chance to sub.
I see nothing, at all, unfair about this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
The hurry-up-and-wait offense we invented in 2003 was more
Feb 13, 2014, 7:24 PM
|
|
like that, i.e. line up and then see what they got before calling the play from the sideline. The HUNH offense goes fast, period.
Either way, agreed, not unfair at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
And, I"m out
Feb 13, 2014, 7:24 PM
|
|
Not getting into another Tooka debate
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Yeah I'm not arguing with him either
Feb 13, 2014, 7:29 PM
|
|
I just laughed that he left such an easy opening there with his desired comment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Do you make sense to yourself?
Feb 13, 2014, 7:30 PM
|
|
In reality, you haven't been right about anything in this thread. You seem really confused. Did I mention dense?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
And they can.
Feb 13, 2014, 7:27 PM
[ in reply to Goat Cheese, you said they could substitute as ] |
|
Again, thanks for showing just how dense you are.
And really, is goat cheese some sort of newfangled insult or something? Obviously you have regressed from when you first started posting here as Toogie to now, but really, can you at least try to be more mature?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3245]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7659
Joined: 9/21/13
|
If you send in a defender
Feb 13, 2014, 7:28 PM
|
|
He needs to be able to play as many snaps as the guy you send him in to defend. Not too complicated to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1376]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1467
Joined: 3/25/13
|
Here's an example....
Feb 13, 2014, 7:34 PM
|
|
If the offense makes 3 yards on first down and chooses to not substitute, then your defensive coordinator better be astute enough to realize down, distance, and offensive personnel. If the offense substitutes, then adjust as your defense as you see fit. It's really not that difficult. If defensive coordinators are going to make a million+ every year, then they better be able to think fast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [361]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 1394
Joined: 6/7/06
|
It all boils down to this..... If Saban were such a good
Feb 13, 2014, 8:20 PM
|
|
Coach, he would not look for additional advantages. the rules have been the rules forever. His line of thinkng is if my five star olinemen can't win 90 % of the games by dominating a game then I need to cry about it. The guy doesn't have to strategize for anything and he is feeling the heat and hitting the panic button. Hiring lane kiffin clearly says that. He is already worried after one loss to auburn who runs this type of offense. These offenses will still bring in personnel groups that will still give them an advantage. God forbid the man have to make in game decisions. If they ran a hurry up OU might not have been fresh enough to sack his passing efficiency leader(real challenge there when you throw the ball only enough to be able to recruit receivers) seven times . Any gamecock fan who truly had hopes of winning the sec would also realize that this doesNot help the either. But their only real concern is Clemson so it makes sense that they would be on board
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7010]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9418
Joined: 9/9/03
|
Re: Question for clueless09 and other fans who think
Feb 13, 2014, 8:52 PM
|
|
Obammy Rule...Equal $**T for all teams...
Hope and Change...
Saban Hopes the NCAA Changes the sub rule to his liking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3233]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 4960
Joined: 11/3/06
|
Here's the thing
Feb 13, 2014, 10:39 PM
|
|
Saban just wants a guarantee that he can send in his guys in time to get set and not be caught off guard. CockLover09 wants to throw out the "unfair" card, but it clearly carries no water.
Deciding when to snap the ball is a strategic benefit of the offense. Just like having what is essentially an extra player on the field (because the QB isn't going to block anyone) is a strategic benefit of the defense. No one is crying about a corner blitz being unfair even though all of your receivers can be covered despite that defender coming free.
If defenses don't like having to worry about when the ball is snapped get the offense off of the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2212]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2646
Joined: 10/25/02
|
stupid
Feb 13, 2014, 11:15 PM
|
|
It isn't an offense defense fairness issue. Both teams offense and defensive play under the same rules, so it's fair. I'd be unfair if different teams had different rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 206
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
