TrueGSU.com

Follow GSUFANS.com on
     
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: NCAA posible rule changes for football

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LakeLand & Saint Simons Is.
    Posts
    2,920

    Default NCAA posible rule changes for football

    GSU Spread Option FOOTBALL - out weighed, but never outplayed

  2. #2

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    Just put flags on the players and be done with it.
    These rule changes are part of a much bigger history of animosity toward football (that created the NCAA) and the progressive animosity toward masculinity and American exceptionalism.

  3. #3

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Eagles_Cliff View Post
    Just put flags on the players and be done with it.
    These rule changes are part of a much bigger history of animosity toward football (that created the NCAA) and the progressive animosity toward masculinity and American exceptionalism.
    I think those Statesboro UGA fans are behind all of it

    Seriously, though, while I generally share your lament regarding the decline of certain aspects of our culture, and although I was initially one of the most vocal complainers about the “softening” of the rules, the targeting rules really aren’t THAT big of a fundamental assault on the nature of the game. The problem has mostly been in the slowness of the adoption of reasonable and uniform enforcement and the abject ignorance of announcers and fans when discussing it. Bottom line is really just this: don’t use the head as either a weapon or a target on a defenseless player. Otherwise it’s business as usual. Now, that’s not how it’s always been called, but that’s how it’s written and that’s the intent. (The “don’t be too rough with the quarterback” rules are a different story-I can’t defend that bunk).

    What the rules are written to prevent are “inhale vigorouslyer punch” knockout hits that-while they’re fun to watch on a highlight reel-aren’t really an integral part of the game. You can still have plenty of mano-a-mano violence without guys being carted off from defenseless, blindside hits. Hit as hard as you want, just don’t use your head or aim for your opponent’s head.

    What they really need to do is just embrace a rugby-based interpretation of tackling rules: nothing initiated above the shoulders, must use arms and wrap up. Rugby probably has 1/5 the number of concussions as football, and nobody who’s ever watched much rugby would argue that it’s a “soft” or emasculated game.
    Ever devoted to the twin causes of reason and justice . . . ever at risk of waxing verbose

  4. #4

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    I think those Statesboro UGA fans are behind all of it

    Seriously, though, while I generally share your lament regarding the decline of certain aspects of our culture, and although I was initially one of the most vocal complainers about the “softening” of the rules, the targeting rules really aren’t THAT big of a fundamental assault on the nature of the game. The problem has mostly been in the slowness of the adoption of reasonable and uniform enforcement and the abject ignorance of announcers and fans when discussing it. Bottom line is really just this: don’t use the head as either a weapon or a target on a defenseless player. Otherwise it’s business as usual. Now, that’s not how it’s always been called, but that’s how it’s written and that’s the intent. (The “don’t be too rough with the quarterback” rules are a different story-I can’t defend that bunk).

    What the rules are written to prevent are “inhale vigorouslyer punch” knockout hits that-while they’re fun to watch on a highlight reel-aren’t really an integral part of the game. You can still have plenty of mano-a-mano violence without guys being carted off from defenseless, blindside hits. Hit as hard as you want, just don’t use your head or aim for your opponent’s head.

    What they really need to do is just embrace a rugby-based interpretation of tackling rules: nothing initiated above the shoulders, must use arms and wrap up. Rugby probably has 1/5 the number of concussions as football, and nobody who’s ever watched much rugby would argue that it’s a “soft” or emasculated game.
    Way to much embracing in Rugby, scrum on.

  5. #5

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    Quote Originally Posted by garns 4 View Post
    Way to much embracing in Rugby, scrum on.
    C’mon Garns! Scrums are like 5% of a rugby match. About like special teams play in football.

    Plenty of hard hitting going on:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sj7v5bLmWlQ
    Ever devoted to the twin causes of reason and justice . . . ever at risk of waxing verbose

  6. #6

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    I agree with the harder rules for targeting. The headhunting bull**** has to stop.

    It's not that difficult to avoid cheapshotting a guy in his ****ing head and giving him Brain damage.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Warner Robins, GA
    Posts
    25,767

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    I'm glad to see them addressing the issue of "stands" vs "confirmed."

    For me, with targeting carrying a penalty of ejection, calling a targeting penalty as "stands" was unfair. I'm pretty mad everytime they make that kind of call. "Stands" infers that not enough conclusive evidence exists to overturn the call. This means that targeting possibly did NOT occur, but they can't overturn the call on the field as the rules do not allow that without conclusive evidence. It's just been a mess.

    Requiring a targeting call to have all elements "confirmed" to be a valid penalty is a good move.

    I do think it's a bit of a slippery slope to have compounding penalties if you have more than one targeting penalty a year. That could get out of hand potentially.


  8. #8

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    The targeting review proposal where they can't just let the call stand is overdue.

  9. #9

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    Quote Originally Posted by yourmother View Post
    The targeting review proposal where they can't just let the call stand is overdue.
    100% agree with this. Not sure how I feel about the compounding penalty part, but I REALLY like the change about confirming the penalty. If you're going to kick a kid out of a game, you better have clear cut evidence that he broke the rules, end of story.
    Cameron Smith
    GS Student 2007-2011
    GS Fanatic 2007-the end of time

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LakeLand & Saint Simons Is.
    Posts
    2,920

    Default Re: NCAA posible rule changes for football

    (1) The committee, chaired by Stanford coach David Shaw, proposed a progressive penalty for those student-athletes who receive a second targeting foul in the same season. In addition to being disqualified from that game, the player would be suspended for the team’s next contest.

    (2) The second adjustment to the targeting rule deals with the instant replay review. Instant replay officials will be directed to examine all aspects of the play and confirm the foul when all elements of targeting are present. If any element of targeting cannot be confirmed, then the replay official will overturn the targeting foul. There will not be an option for letting the call on the field stand during a targeting review.


    Buzz K. - "I agree with the harder rules for targeting. The headhunting bull**** has to stop. It's not that difficult to avoid cheap shotting a guy in his ****ing head and giving him Brain damage.

    TALON - I agree Buzz. The long-term effect of multihull or even one severe concussion can end a player’s career & even more important the brain damage can affect his school work and affect the players life long term. I received a double concussion, it severely affected my short-term memory & I got to the point it was hard for me to do the most basic of tasks. I waited 5 months before seeing a neurologist. At first, I thought I'd snap out of it, but as time went as I became worse, I just didn't think about it. I'm lucky I went in when I did. The Neurologist said that after 1 year it would be as good as I would get. I took medication to heel the brain, but I still can see it has had a long-term effect on me.
    GSU Spread Option FOOTBALL - out weighed, but never outplayed

Similar Threads

  1. NCAA announces change to redshirt rule
    By gsugt1 in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 15th June 2018, 05:45 AM
  2. New NCAA recruiting rule
    By ValleyBoy in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 22nd June 2017, 09:18 AM
  3. 2016 NCAA Football Rule Changes
    By Eagle22 in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10th March 2016, 01:53 PM
  4. NCAA Proposed Rule Changes
    By SouthernPride in forum The Flight Line
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 17th February 2010, 11:51 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •