CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

……… during a College Football Rules Review Meeting, decisions were made that it’s OK to fake an injury to stop play, but if a defender commits holding to stop a play it’s an automatic first down.

Did I read that right??????




https://247sports.com/Article/College-f ... 183844436/


.

Yes...you read it right....but missed the subject affecting the reasoning behind the decision...legitimately injured athletes

I read the article……… it was a rhetorical question.

The response of the committee was a dodge, a slight of hand. They simply gave a bullshirt response to provide the hollow-heads a reason and an excuse for them not to address the issue. It’s not about whether or not it’s a legitimate injury to a player, it’s about the ethics of the Coach. Does he allow it with a wink and a nod, does he teach and coach it, does he condone it, does he turn a blind eye????? Surely things don’t have to rise to the levels of Hugh Freeze or Art Briles for someone to ask a question.

Where’s the Athletic Director, the school President, the conference commissioner, the NCAA???? Where’s their findings???? Was it legit or was it a flop????
.
.
.
And what about the player who was called for holding…….. what happens, if in fact, he didn’t commit the foul and the ref just made a error or cheated in his call and the Coach is out of timeouts and challenges??????

Or, is cheating allowed, wrong doing is OK………. and explained away to the simple minded???

--------------------------------------------------------------

Someday, we will simply lean into listening to [or in this case reading] others properly ...

I'd prefer a better address to the issue, where a player who incurs an injury, faked or genuine, would have to sit the rest of the series.

If it's about safety, then make it so.

If they can't keep up, because they are too winded. Then regulate it as an injury. Call it fatigue safety, or exhaustion prevention.

They want to hold a committee meeting which revues a way to limit the number of plays in order to reduce the game times. Allowing kids to fake & flop only serves the offense more time, and pressures them to move even faster. Which will produce even more plays.

I suppose they could go the other way, and say an offense must hold a few seconds between snaps, to prevent a hurry up approach.

Though, that would seriously cause a massive controversy, with claims of control overreach. Unless they allowed the Hurry Up strategy, however, only in the last two minutes of each quarter.

But let's face it. This has never actually been about player safety. Do the analytics.

More players get hurt in crammed Line-Up smashing into each other. You are less likely to get injuries on a 25 yard to the end zone.

And yet they change Overtime so that after the 2cnd extended period, teams must go for 2 point tries from the 3 yard line.

More is on the line every single play in this scenario. And as such, once Offenses have pored more emphasis on perfecting 2 point schemes in practice drills, Overtime will get longer and longer,with more frequent pileups at the goal.

.
.
.

I have another reading comprehension challenge I’m attempting to sort out…….. it’s the one in an article posted earlier about the NCAA commissioning a committee to determine a way to reduce the “exposure” a.k.a. the number of plays, so to speak, a player participates in during games and practices, with the intent of reducing “exposure”.

All while the CFP Committee is attempting to increase the number of games needed to win a National Championship…….

.
.
.

I think that if a player is injured he should be out the whole next series. If he is legitimately hurt, that is probably appropriate, if not it is a punishment.

Spence wrote:I think that if a player is injured he should be out the whole next series. If he is legitimately hurt, that is probably appropriate, if not it is a punishment.

And maybe there should be a sanctioned physician at each game, to diagnose whether or not a player should be allowed back into the game after game stoppage.

If he falls again, he should be out for an extended period of time, regardless of diagnoses.

.
.
.

Cane from the Bend wrote:

Spence wrote:I think that if a player is injured he should be out the whole next series. If he is legitimately hurt, that is probably appropriate, if not it is a punishment.

And maybe there should be a sanctioned physician at each game, to diagnose whether or not a player should be allowed back into the game after game stoppage.

If he falls again, he should be out for an extended period of time, regardless of diagnoses.

.
.
.

It is hard to disagnose getting the wind knocked out of you. Or getting your nuts crushed. I am not sure a doc would be able to legitimately stop it and it would put the Doc in a bad situation. If they were out the rest of that series and the next series, it would be at least enough to give a coach pause as to whether to tell the player to lay down.

I wonder what it would be like if we had a Singular Governing Body that has the know how, is capable, willing, and allowed to govern college athletics???

There’s some history to draw from a failed NCAA of how to do it right this time around. Although I suspect it’s probably too late…… as the enemy is no longer at the gate.

From where I sit, I’m seeing waaaaay to many cooks in the kitchen.


.
.

Faking injuries is a serious problem. And no one does it better than a L@ne K!ffen coached team.

It needs to stop.

Mountainman wrote:I wonder what it would be like if we had a Singular Governing Body that has the know how, is capable, willing, and allowed to govern college athletics???

There’s some history to draw from a failed NCAA of how to do it right this time around. Although I suspect it’s probably too late…… as the enemy is no longer at the gate.

From where I sit, I’m seeing waaaaay to many cooks in the kitchen.


.
.

Absolutely. And none of them are making biscuits.