Jump to content

If you can't beat them on the field...


lionheartkc

Recommended Posts

Bielema was a p.....rick at Wisconsin and he will be a p....rick at Arky. He is my least liked coach in the SEC behind Saban and I only dislike Saban because he coaches spuat and kicks everyone elses @$$.

wde

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Every team that runs a 2 min drill is using speed as advantage. Like Gus said injuries are more about being in shape, stopping the no huddle is more about preparation, good coaches know how to defend it others just whine about it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not agreeing with BB but there is partial merit here. Teams that run the HUNH extend the game. That means more plays. The more plays run means more chance for injury. Here is my solution even though injuries was not my primary reason for this proposal. IMO college football should have a running clock after 1st downs like the NFL does. The only exception I say is let the clock stop for first downs under 2 minutes left in the half and 4th quarters. My guess is it cuts down total plays by 15 to 20 a game, more if both teams in a game are HUNH teams. That cuts the plays down and there is less chance for injury. Also the main reason for this idea I have had for the past couple years is it shortens the real time of a game which is approximately 3 1/2 hours (4 on the Commercial Broadcasting Station) Eliminating the clock stop on first down rule except for the stipulations above in a win/win for almost every one in college football IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that gets me is if your players are really that tired to the right thing and call a timeout. Outlawing teams playing fast is like outlawing offensive or defensive formations because they can't be stopped: lame as hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I travel to Europe a lot, and many of my friends over there don't understand the popularity of American football, much like we don't get soccer. Their complaint is there's so much standing around they lose interest. That's understandable considering their popular sports involve continuous play, like soccer and rugby. In his book Gus estimated that 7-8 minutes of a 48 minutes high school football game are actually spent playing football. I understand how those not raised with an American football tradition might get restless. American football isn't a game that needs to be slowed. Think about it - Gus makes football more like rugby, and much more exciting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BB just needs to stop whining and get his players in shape. He seems to forget that the offensive players are not subbing either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason I like the HUNH is it makes the game more fun to watch. Football does NOT need to move more slowly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That rule would hobble the HUNH offenses for sure (see AU 2011) but it would also mean the end of the two minute drill. Does he not realize that HUNH has been a part of football since the beginning? Gus just asked the question, what would happen if we did the two minute drill for the entire game? This is like guys who argued against the forward pass as being against the spirit of the game when Theisman figured out that the rules didn't preclude it. I think that fat sack of horse excrement has shown a complete lack of respect for the conference that he hasn't even played a game in yet and he will not be at Arky in 4 years. I would be shocked if they are bowl eligible in 2013, especially with their schedule, and I wouldn't be surprised in the least if they don't get to anything other than the BBVA bowl in the next three years until they get tired of him and hire Petrino back. Like Gus said, (to paraphrase) he just needs to get his fat ass players on a treadmill or something because our D will not be bothered by a HUNH, and not because they practice against it, but because CEJ has modified his system not to need substitution, and due to their physical conditioning. I'm sorry but this guy is a total ***** and I'm really looking forward to hanging 70 on them. I bet his players want him to shut his slobbering c#$# sucker before he gets them killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let's see here. He mouths off and implies he is better than Saban. Now he does this. I think he's a few fries short of a happy meal. BY the looks of him, he probably eats his meal and everybody elses too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never understood BB's argument...if your defense is good enough to stop the HUNH offense, then your d-players won't get tired...if they are out of shape and can't tackle in space, then they will get tired. With his way of thinking, then the NCAA should pass a rule that prevents spuat from having an offensive line like they had last year because they wore down defenses and somebody might get hurt. :dunno:

We are going to show this year why running the HUNH offense is going to compliment our defense, not hurt it...watch and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without reading all comments...sorry if mentioned. 1)The offensive team will be playing the same snaps at the same pace. 2)The defense will be pounding the heck out of skill position players. So to me the argument carries little weight/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without reading all comments...sorry if mentioned. 1)The offensive team will be playing the same snaps at the same pace. 2)The defense will be pounding the heck out of skill position players. So to me the argument carries little weight/

You're beginning to touch on the most salient point here but didn't take it quite far enough as I see this.

Right now we see coaches making comments that are true in a sense, but not in their entirety.

Bielema mentions the possiblity of more injuries. That's true. If you take a defensive player that is having to run back and forth on pass protection routes eventually he'll be winded to the point he won't have his body in proper position which can lead to injury. On the other hand, you can take a ground and pound offense that will wear down an opposing defense in the same degree.

Then you have coaches mention they (defense) should be in better shape. That holds true part of the time as well. However, not all of the time.

Take Freeze and the Ole Miss offense last season as example. They were substituting freely when they were playing on the short side of the field: as in nearest to their sideline. That didn't allow the defense to substitute as freely as they would have liked to have done. Is that an advantage to the offense? Sure. An unfair advantage? Here's the crux of the matter. I see a lot of coaches pointing to "they should be in better shape" when these same coaches are substituting players more frequently than the opposing team is allowed to subsitute.

There will likely be rule changes on the horizon but not to change the HUNH offense. It's likely to be more along the lines of how the officials are handling the pace of the game.

It is an unfair advantage if you have officials putting the "ball in play" at a different pace within the same game. Even if the two offenses are different, there should not be a case where the crew takes 30 seconds to put the "ball in play" for one team, then take 15 seconds to do the same for another.

It's murky, at best, right now. There are attempts to allow both teams the same time to substitute but there is still an discrepency in how long it takes officials to mark "ready to play" from one team to another.

Most importantly, to make these discussions revolve around a hurry up philosophy is missing the point. The hurry up offense isn't new. Arbitrary timing for when the play actually begins is something crews aren't officiating evenly across the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without reading all comments...sorry if mentioned. 1)The offensive team will be playing the same snaps at the same pace. 2)The defense will be pounding the heck out of skill position players. So to me the argument carries little weight/

You're beginning to touch on the most salient point here but didn't take it quite far enough as I see this.

Right now we see coaches making comments that are true in a sense, but not in their entirety.

Bielema mentions the possiblity of more injuries. That's true. If you take a defensive player that is having to run back and forth on pass protection routes eventually he'll be winded to the point he won't have his body in proper position which can lead to injury. On the other hand, you can take a ground and pound offense that will wear down an opposing defense in the same degree.

Then you have coaches mention they (defense) should be in better shape. That holds true part of the time as well. However, not all of the time.

Take Freeze and the Ole Miss offense last season as example. They were substituting freely when they were playing on the short side of the field: as in nearest to their sideline. That didn't allow the defense to substitute as freely as they would have liked to have done. Is that an advantage to the offense? Sure. An unfair advantage? Here's the crux of the matter. I see a lot of coaches pointing to "they should be in better shape" when these same coaches are substituting players more frequently than the opposing team is allowed to subsitute.

There will likely be rule changes on the horizon but not to change the HUNH offense. It's likely to be more along the lines of how the officials are handling the pace of the game.

It is an unfair advantage if you have officials putting the "ball in play" at a different pace within the same game. Even if the two offenses are different, there should not be a case where the crew takes 30 seconds to put the "ball in play" for one team, then take 15 seconds to do the same for another.

It's murky, at best, right now. There are attempts to allow both teams the same time to substitute but there is still an discrepency in how long it takes officials to mark "ready to play" from one team to another.

Most importantly, to make these discussions revolve around a hurry up philosophy is missing the point. The hurry up offense isn't new. Arbitrary timing for when the play actually begins is something crews aren't accustomed and aren't officiating evenly across the board.

Excellent points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contrary to what Bulemia is saying, this is an attempt to stop a very good offensive scheme, NOT protect players.

False dichotomy

He could well attempting to protect his players

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Arky gets eaten alive by Auburn, TAMU, and any other fast pace team they will play this season. If Coach Bowel-movement was running a fast pace offense, he would be pitching one of the biggest fits out there no doubt. He needs to condition his team to be able to play 60 minutes of fast pace offenses. As far as fast pace offenses he will see in the SEC for 2013 includes Auburn, TAMU, Ole Miss, UT, MS. State, and possibly others. If he is so afraid of this offense, why does't he just convert to a fast pace offense and join the bad boys of speed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

another possibility to level the playing field would be to do as Arky coach wants to do but.......allow teams to go in motion like the CFL. Now that would be fun to watch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Belly Buelemia is afraid of what Sumlin & Johnny Football are going to do to his defense. Then he goes to FLA where Muschamp will pound of them followed by SoCarl where Spurrier will air-raid his defense, then he goes to Bama where his defense will get literally run over, they mercifully get a break before Auburn AND OleMiss hit them with the HUNH back to back, they round out the season with MooState and the Corndogs. Welcome the SEC BB - it's brutal up in heah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...