Sound Off: Time To Slow Down College Offenses?

[canesfins]

Slow down for what?

[fistofrage]

I prefer the chess match of strategy. To some extent, the hurry up offenses just try to create a mismatch by not giving the defense time to get set or get the proper personnel on the field. I don't believe the hurry up offenses play the game as its intended to be played. Its more of an exploit to gain an advantage. Just my opinion, but I'd like to see 5 to 10 seconds inbetween plays to give the defense an opportunity to get its plays and personnel in.

If you like hurry up, that's fine too, just my opinion. Whatever the rules are, the coaches need to adapt.

[seasprite]

Quote: Originally Posted by fistofrage

I prefer the chess match of strategy. To some extent, the hurry up offenses just try to create a mismatch by not giving the defense time to get set or get the proper personnel on the field. I don't believe the hurry up offenses play the game as its intended to be played. Its more of an exploit to gain an advantage. Just my opinion, but I'd like to see 5 to 10 seconds inbetween plays to give the defense an opportunity to get its plays and personnel in. If you like hurry up, that's fine too, just my opinion. Whatever the rules are, the coaches need to adapt.

So hurry up offenses arent considered a "chess match of strategy"?

[sparkdawg777]

This is stupid, I bet more people get hurt from playing against Alabama than against these up temp offenses. Those guys who a majority are NFL caliber players are playing someone like Georgia State every year. How is that safe for the Georgia State players? Maybe Alabama shouldn't be allowed to play FCS schools.

[seasprite]

Quote: Originally Posted by sparkdawg777

This is stupid, I bet more people get hurt from playing against Alabama than against these up temp offenses. Those guys who a majority are NFL caliber players are playing someone like Georgia State every year. How is that safe for the Georgia State players? Maybe Alabama shouldn't be allowed to play FCS schools.

Like South Carolina State is much better................

[supermanemblem]

Quote: Originally Posted by seasprite

Sounds like everything that you have described is the very definition of "creative".

Ask the Broncos and Saints how creative their offenses were when Seattle was smacking them down, or look at how Oregon has trouble scoring 20 on Stanford. These new offenses are not creative. They were created to play as close to the line as the rulebook allows. The problem is that not every team has the players to attack these offenses, but when they do, the "creative" offense is neutered.

[supermanemblem]

Quote: Originally Posted by Watson

Don't feed me this BS about it being for the safety of the player. Soccer doesn't need a rule like this, neither does rugby or basketball. That's a hilariously bad reason. As far as the substitution thing goes, isn't that the point of the offense? To get any advantage possible against a defense? And so they found a way to do that, so instead of making the defense finds a way to adjust, we're going to candy them? This guy.

I could care less about substitutions. My point was that these offenses are soft and can still be dominated by old fashioned football principles, mainly hit hard on defense. These "creative" offenses haven't found a way to get around that.

[seasprite]

Quote: Originally Posted by supermanemblem

Ask the Broncos and Saints how creative their offenses were when Seattle was smacking them down, or look at how Oregon has trouble scoring 20 on Stanford. These new offenses are not creative. They were created to play as close to the line as the rulebook allows. The problem is that not every team has the players to attack these offenses, but when they do, the "creative" offense is neutered.

They are very creative, in the very definition of the word. If they are so easy to defend, why even talk about a rule change............oh yeah, thats right, its because they are beasting many defenses.