Proposed CFB rule change

I agree. I don't support the change, but I don't think the player safety argument is wrong. I do think they are taking a valid concern, that these fast paced offenses will result in more injuries, and basically inflating it because some coaches don't like the disadvantage it gives their defense.

 

I'm not disputing this. I'm saying that there are plenty of other shitty human beings coaching CFB -- it's almost a prerequisite for the gig -- and some of them oversee outfits that wait until the play clock is in the single digits before snapping the ball.

 

It results in more plays, and with an increase in the number of plays you necessarily get more opportunities for players to get injured. And, again, if the only way to make football safe is to play less football, then football's days are numbered.

Proposed rule for 2015: eliminate overtime. You know...to increase safety.

 

These are just brilliant observations Droski.

 

I do my best.

 

Anal.

 

Can't say this stuff really passes the straight-face test, either. Plenty of the hardest hits are delivered by guys that are already slim.

 

I'd say safeties get the majority of the big hits on football.

 

Right. The big boys usually collide near the line of scrimmage at low speed.

 

To the extent you're alleging that there wouldn't be fewer injuries, both concussion and otherwise, if everybody in the league dropped 20 pounds, then I'll reply without further hyperbole that you're a moron. Because such an allegation isn't merely wrong, it's objectively, provably wrong on every conceivable level, and with little effort.

 

Malzahn speaks on the rule change

He has spoken several times with Troy Calhoun, who is chair of the NCAA football rules committee.

This is not a rule-change year. The NCAA changes rules in even years (ie 2014) only when player health/safety are at issue.

"(We've) ssked him to move this to next year, which is a rule-change year," Malzahn said. "I really feel like next year, when it's a rule-change year, a healthy debate ... would be very useful. We don't need to lose sight of the fact that to change a rule, it has to be for health and safety."

Malzahn added: "I've never felt that, on either side (of the ball), that it was a health and safety issue."

Malzahn was quick to note that safety is important to him. "I'm always, first and foremost, concerned about player safety. We play in a very violent game. As far as this particular rule without any documented evidence, I disagree with them.​

The phrasing of the above is a bit confusing, but it's saying that in even years, only safety rules are allowed. So since it needed to be under the guise of player safety this year, tattletale saban brought it to the committee with player safety as the concern -- even though it has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with scheme. So basically, saban's a lying sack. But he has enough power that people will listen to him. He also knows if he has to bring it before the actual regular rules committee next year under the umbrella of competition, he can't catch people off guard and the process involves more debate with actual coaches (I think). It's less likely to get passed in that way, in my opinion, because...well, it isn't unfair to go fast. He saw this year as his best shot. Really ****ing devious. On one hand, game recognize game, I guess. I mean, do what you gotta do. But on the other, this is him admitting he's not willing to try to adapt and find a way to beat it. He needs the rules changed. Weird. All time greats are supposed to just figure it out, right?

 

We aren't going to have a bunch of Kenyan distance runners out there. Most of these guys in the secondary couldn't drop twenty and be in any better shape.

But I'd be interested in seeing the objective proof that works on every conceivable level.

 

The guys who would be losing a few pounds so that they could run a bit longer without getting gassed are the LBs and the d-linemen. And LBs especially are the guys on the field who have become so simultaneously big, strong,and fast that it's a bit frightening, and definitely hazardous to the health of those who are on the receiving end of their hits.

And while D-linemen aren't usually hitting guys with a full head of steam, they're also 260+ and running 4-6 40s. They hit with authority.

 

DL hit like bears more than trucks the majority of the time. Those linebackers will still find a way to kill people. The headhunting rules are about all that can be done there beyond some huge coaching reform on the art of proper tackling.

 

But I'm pretty interested in seeing this proof that renders any contradictory position moronic.

 

Let me be clear here. When you say "any contradictory position", you are in fact referring to my statement that injuries, including concussions, would necessarily decrease if the size of players decreased across the board? And, again, just to be crystal clear, you are "pretty interested" in seeing "this proof"? Is that right?

Well, I'm so glad to hear of your interest. Shall we narrow down the part that intrigues you so?

You want proof that the magnitude of the harm caused to the body as a result of an impact is directly proportional to the force of said impact?
Or do you want proof that force equals mass times acceleration?
Or do you want proof that greater size is greater mass?
Or do you want proof that humans who run faster run with greater acceleration?
Or do you want proof that the size of NFL players has increased continually?
Or do you want proof that the speed of NFL players has increased continually?

I really look forward to hearing back from you. I certainly won't be looking on the internet for established data the supports the above. No no, you're "pretty interested", and so I want you to dig in and explore this really really complicated concept.

You know what they say about giving a man a fish.

 

You specifically said there would be little effort involved, so just throw it all at me.

 

But go ahead and throw in how hurry up offenses are necessarily going to cause a 20 pound drop across the board. Or why offensive coaches won't adapt to these diminutive defenses by trotting out 350 pound OLs with a power running game. And explain why research is already underway that indicates spread offenses (employed by so many of the hurry up teams) do in fact lead to more high impact hits on offensive players. And wouldn't this great endurance increase from the weight loss result in higher velocities later in the game when normal sized defenders would be slow and tired?

Don't bother answering. I'm already ashamed to have even asked. I'll just be crying in the corner.

 

I was unaware that football had a serious injury issue compared to other sports. I thought football and basketball were about even in regards to injuries.

 

it's worse than those sports certainly. gymnastics is flat out terrible though and no one talks about that.