NCAA: Hit Defenseless Player Above Shoulders, Ejection.

[StretfordEnd]

Originally Posted by hubbarjm

Don't Bring any rules from soccer into my game. This is such a stupid idea 10 on 11? There is a reason why this sport in general is the most popular in the nation and that is because it is pretty much the exact opposite of soccer.

That's all we need is a bunch of pansies flopping,rolling on the ground, looking as if they were shot on the football field acting like they got hit in the helmet only to arise unhurt after the penalty.

Why is it stupid?

[gamecock88]

If it were purely about player safety, they player that gets hit would be taken out of the game as well as a precaution. Makes sense to me. Play until it's 1 on 1.

[hubbarjm]

Originally Posted by StretfordEnd

Why is it stupid?

Only a soccer fan would bring up such an idea as this. I mean can you play 4 on 5 basketball? It doesn't work Football is based on basic the principles of even teams. That's why it was such a run dominant game originally it was all about flanking and putting a helmet on a helmet out flanking/maneuvering the OFF/DEF

When you take out one of these players it gives the advantage immediately to the OFF which the game has already gone too far in the OFF advantage as is. SO are you telling me that in the world cup when whoever (i guess italy got a red and had to play the rest of the game down a man) they ever had a chance? of course not and the score reflected the lopsided nature of the rule.

I understand this is fine for that sport and that all you soccer guys love it but it is impractical for football. You could line up in the double wing formation (like its the 20's again) and just put a guy on a guy (obviously the OFF would have an extra 11th man as a blocker) and get 3-7 yards on the ground every play like it used to be. Or get burned by a long pass as the defense would have to cheat the then ground heavy offensive attack. It would be a blow out every time.

[ReadR00ster]

Originally Posted by StretfordEnd

They manage to do it in soccer. Why couldn't they in football? Obviously, they would have a hard time doing it, but I think it would be interesting to see this rule implemented, though I would not be for it.


Edit: Soccer is an 11 v. 11 game, too. That doesn't stop teams with ten players from beating teams with eleven players. If you follow soccer, a good example of this would be Barcelona v. Chelsea (Champions League, 2nd Leg) from 2012. Chelsea went down 2-0 at the Nou Camp, had John Terry sent off, and managed to salvage a 2-2 draw, allowing them to advance 3-2 on aggregate to the Champions League Final. Chelsea didn't win the match, but they scored two goals with ten men playing against eleven. That is impressive.

It's a completely different game! All you have to do to score is get the ball down to the other side of the field and you get several attempts at it. It's too easy for team to move the ball and score when the other team only has ten players. On offense it is too hard to move the ball with 10 against 11, either you wouldn't be able to block everyone and/or no one will be able to get open. I know you are probably a soccer nut but if you think this is a good idea it makes believe that you are not a very big football fan and don't know much about it. The way players always flop and get opponents carded in soccer and ejected because of all the acting and ticky-tack fouls is exactly the reason football should strive to be NOTHING like soccer.

[hubbarjm]

It was also run dominant cause a forward pass was illegal but I digress. The ejection is a silly idea because it will be on the head ref to make the call if it was an offense worth ejection. I remember a game on New years eve where the head ref couldn't even get the first down call right. So now we are going to place the fate of a season in these douches hands? And in the SEC one loses can mean the fate of the season as we all know...

[ReadR00ster]

And if they did this then coaches would have to start preparing plays for 11 vs 10 and 10 vs 10 and 11 vs 9 and 10 vs 9 etc.... Coaches don't have for this and players have to go to class. They need to stop screwing around with the sport of football it doesn't need any more changes. They've made too many already. If they are really concerned about player safety and don't want to interfere with the outcomes of games, they should do what the SEC did and start suspending players AFTER the game.

[2000grad]

[quote=hubbarjm;3699326]Don't Bring any rules from soccer into my game. This is such a stupid idea 10 on 11? There is a reason why this sport in general is the most popular in the nation and that is because it is pretty much the exact opposite of soccer.

That's all we need is a bunch of pansies flopping,rolling on the ground, looking as if they were shot on the football field acting like they got hit in the helmet only to arise unhurt after the

Everyone says 10 can't beat 11 but every day 11 can't beat 11, so using your logic, that argument flies out the window.

I think the point that you are missing is putting teeth into the infection rule because out is stopped to be about safety. many think out would be an interesting hypothetical. Just chill put a little and try to understand what people are saying.

[StretfordEnd]

Originally Posted by hubbarjm

Only a soccer fan would bring up such an idea as this. I mean can you play 4 on 5 basketball? It doesn't work Football is based on basic the principles of even teams. That's why it was such a run dominant game originally it was all about flanking and putting a helmet on a helmet out flanking/maneuvering the OFF/DEF

When you take out one of these players it gives the advantage immediately to the OFF which the game has already gone too far in the OFF advantage as is. SO are you telling me that in the world cup when whoever (i guess italy got a red and had to play the rest of the game down a man) they ever had a chance? of course not and the score reflected the lopsided nature of the rule.

I understand this is fine for that sport and that all you soccer guys love it but it is impractical for football. You could line up in the double wing formation (like its the 20's again) and just put a guy on a guy (obviously the OFF would have an extra 11th man as a blocker) and get 3-7 yards on the ground every play like it used to be. Or get burned by a long pass as the defense would have to cheat the then ground heavy offensive attack. It would be a blow out every time.

Valid points, but it could be done. I will disagree with you.

[StretfordEnd]

Originally Posted by ReadR00ster

It's a completely different game! All you have to do to score is get the ball down to the other side of the field and you get several attempts at it. It's too easy for team to move the ball and score when the other team only has ten players. On offense it is too hard to move the ball with 10 against 11, either you wouldn't be able to block everyone and/or no one will be able to get open. I know you are probably a soccer nut but if you think this is a good idea it makes believe that you are not a very big football fan and don't know much about it. The way players always flop and get opponents carded in soccer and ejected because of all the acting and ticky-tack fouls is exactly the reason football should strive to be NOTHING like soccer.

I'm not disagreeing that they are different games, nor am I advocating the inception of cards into football. My points are that it would be interesting to see it in football and teams would eventually learn to play with it.

I will say that it would be much more effective to send a player off without the option of replacing him than simply ejecting the player and suspending him for multiple games.

[Spurrier_Superior_One]

The refs can't even get calls right when they have review, just think back to the Citrus Bowl debacle.

[GamecockInHell]

I think intentional hits when they defensive guys leads with the top of his helmet should be outlawed. But to me facemask to facemask is just good football. And there has to be a specific guideline about wht it takes to be a defenseless player. They seldom ever call plays against guys running in late and hammering running backs, even when they do it with their heads. Get better equipment and leave the game alone.

[KaneisAble]

Originally Posted by StretfordEnd

The latter. The former is irrelevant if you properly arrange your players.

Could you expand on "properly arrange your players"? You mean that depending on arrangement (or formation, in football terms) there's NOT a central line of scrimmage or that its not a factor?

[StretfordEnd]

Originally Posted by KaneisAble

Could you expand on "properly arrange your players"? You mean that depending on arrangement (or formation, in football terms) there's NOT a central line of scrimmage or that its not a factor?

No. You and I agree on there being a central line. What I am saying is I believe it is feasible that you could arrange your players to stop the offense, regardless of the fact that you are down a man. I could very well be wrong, but it is something that I think would be interesting to see.

[hubbarjm]

Well it seems that the majority of yall know as much about football as you do about fornication. This idea is beyond stupid. They may eject players in the future (I have no doubt during this season it will occur) But they will never force a team to field 10 players due to penalty it goes against the very the fabric with which american football was created.

[Next Year]

Originally Posted by uscsandstorm85

Instant replay will not increase the accuracy. This rule needs a solid line that the refs have to go by when making a decision. The problem with this rule is every ref has a different view of what's above the shoulders, leading with the helmet, what constitutes a defenseless player, ect. While they have guidelines about those situations, there is still to much room for personal perception of what happened.

same thing with trying to interpret 1st downs...it is just too difficult

[ReadR00ster]

Originally Posted by StretfordEnd

I'm not disagreeing that they are different games, nor am I advocating the inception of cards into football. My points are that it would be interesting to see it in football and teams would eventually learn to play with it.

I will say that it would be much more effective to send a player off without the option of replacing him than simply ejecting the player and suspending him for multiple games.

Teams wouldn't learn to play with it, they would learn to quit because it would cause them to lose the game. They would NOT be able to win with only 10 players, the fact that you can't seem to understand that shows you now very little about the sport.

[robgusc76]

I really could care less. Players have gotten away from fundamentals. Theres no more wrapping up, its all about "the big hit". Thats why so many defensive backs look stupid every year, because they go for the knockout blow, and whiff completely. The game isnt about showing out, the game is about doing your job and helping the team win. This individual crap is hurting the game. Get back to basics. To me, there is nothing better than seeing a player end a play with a form tackle, i.e. Jadaveon Clowney.

Why are you trying to lay a hit above the shoulders anyways?! Thats not how tackling is taught. If you do it the right way, a player will never have to worry about being ejected in the first place. Let the disagreeing with me begin.

[GamecockSuperFan]

Ejection? A little harsh if you ask me. If the refs can decide on whether it was vicious and an intended hit above the shoulders between just an accident brought upon the speed of the game then ok, but I see too many problems with this because refs have proved to already get this call wrong. Losing your starting safety is a huge blow in the middle of the game, especially if that's one of your star players.

[GamecockSuperFan]

Originally Posted by robgusc76

Why are you trying to lay a hit above the shoulders anyways?! Thats not how tackling is taught. If you do it the right way, a player will never have to worry about being ejected in the first place. Let the disagreeing with me begin.

I think part of a defensive backs job is jarring the ball loose. If that means you have to lay a hit to a WR coming across the middle then that's what they do. I don't mean aiming above the shoulders, I just mean in the general arm/shoulder area to prevent the WR from catching the ball. I totally get your point and agree in some ways but If I see a WR make a catch across the middle and our safety comes up and just wraps him up and tackles him allowing him to still make the catch? Not what I want to see. A DB want's a WR to fear coming at him the same way the defensive line wants to put fear in the runningbacks and QB's from running their direction.

It's a rough sport, there are certain parts of the game you just can't change. You can make some things safer but the speed of the game, the heart and effort at which it's being played with, you can't avoid big hits like that sometimes in my opinion. I also don't believe many player's truly want to hurt the other person. There's a level of respect on the field, especially at the NFL level where this is the person's livelihood your dealing with.

[Kaka]

Originally Posted by hubbarjm

Don't Bring any rules from soccer into my game. This is such a stupid idea 10 on 11? There is a reason why this sport in general is the most popular in the nation and that is because it is pretty much the exact opposite of soccer.

That's all we need is a bunch of pansies flopping,rolling on the ground, looking as if they were shot on the football field acting like they got hit in the helmet only to arise unhurt after the penalty.

all soccer players are "pansies?"

I guess all baseball players are fat then... stereotypes, gotta love it