ITKAs March 6th nears, the day of the NCAA Rules Committee’s infamous vote on the “10-second rule” heard around the world, a popular notion has been tossed around ad nauseam.

“If that mean ole Nick Saban can’t beat the hurry up, no huddle offense, he’s just gonna try and change the rules.”

This is usually uttered by our east Alabama brethren intoxicated by the orange and blue koolaid they chug day and night. It’s just a down home way of convincing themselves that the miracles they witnessed in 2013 are an actual mainstay in Lee County, rather than the Haley’s Comet-like reality that they actually were.

But statistics against this cheap form of football suggest something else entirely. If you’re an Auburn fan reading this, I know facts are tiring, and superlative sarcasm is preferred. But numbers don’t lie.

Just look at these averages vs. the output against the Tide.

Auburn 2009 Win
In a 26-21 win, Saban’s defense held the Tigers to 332 yards, 99 yards below their season average (431) and 12 points below their total points average (33.3).

Auburn 2010 Loss
In a 28-27 loss, Saban’s defense held the Tigers, led by eventual Heisman Winner $cam Newton to even less yardage than the previous year (324 yards), 174 yards below their season average of 499 yards, and 13 points below their season average of 41 points per game.

The difference in the game wasn’t Auburn’s offense, but Alabama’s inability to produce points in the 2nd half amid a string of freaky plays that still can’t be explained. I’ll never forget Ingram’s 30 yard fumble, traveling 2-feet from the out-of-bounds margin the entire way. Not to mention that under current NCAA rule, adopted after Newton’s father admitted to shopping him, a player like Newton would not be eligible. In other words, Loophole U. struck again.

Auburn 2011 Win
Auburn came in averaging 338 yards per game, but only managed 140 yards. The Tiger offense averaged 25 points per game, but failed to score. Saban’s defense held the Tigers, Gus Malzahn and all, to 198 yards below their average in a rump kicking the likes of which no living Auburn fan has ever enjoyed over Alabama. 42-14

Ole Miss 2012 Win
Saban’s defense held the Black Bear Rebel Thingies to 218 total yards, 205 below their average of 423 per game. Freeze’s brand of cheap football could only muster 14 points, 17 below their average of 31.

Statistically speaking, you have to have a player who wins one of these to beat Nick Saban's defense, and even then Bama has to help you.

Statistically speaking, you have to have a player who wins one of these to beat Nick Saban’s defense, and even then Bama has to help you.

Texas A&M 2012 Loss
Texas A&M averaged 558 yards per game with eventual Heisman winner Johnny Manziel. The Tide gave up a bunch, but still held the Aggies to 140 under their average, and 15 points under their points average per game.

Still, two redzone turnovers by Alabama were the difference in the game, not the Aggies’ brand of offense.

Texas A&M 2013 Win
The Aggies averaged 538 yards per game and 44 points per game. Against Alabama they gained 628 yards of offense and scored 42 points. Saban’s defense yielded 90 yards more than their average and just 2 points below their scoring average, but it was enough to get the win.

Ole Miss 2013 Win
Saban’s defense blanked the Black Bear Rebel Thingies, holding them to 205 yards of offense…268 below their 2013 average of 473 per game. Their 30 points per game average failed to reach the scoreboard.

Auburn 2013 Loss
In 2013 Auburn averaged 501 yds per game in total offense and 39.5 points per game. Saban’s defense held Auburn 108 yards under their average, and 11.5 under their per game average.

The loss came as a result of a myriad of reasons, none of which was the hurry up offense. Unless you count bad officiating that allowed the tying score.

—–

Now, I’m no mathmatician, but it appears that of the true hurry up, no huddle games we’ve looked at, Saban’s defense pitched two complete shut-outs while etching a mark of 5-3. Not to mention that two of the three losses came at the hands of teams aided by two eventual Heisman winners, yet still required Crimson collapse in other areas to make victory possible.

And those three losses? Yeah, they were by a total of 12 points.

So this Thursday, when the committee makes their decision, please save the regurgitations of Nick Saban being afraid of your offense. He’s simply not, and the notion is just as cheap and silly as the gimmick we call the “HUNH.”

The only people that are actually afraid are those fearing their loophole is about to close, making beating Nick Saban on a level playing field dang near impossible.


(Follow ITK on Twitter for Bama news, commentary and smack.)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

132 Responses to “Think Saban is scared of the HUNH? Stats say otherwise” Subscribe

  1. peachy March 3, 2014 at 11:53 pm #

    You forgot Oklahoma. 5-4. And 2-2 against Auburn though Auburn didn’t run the HUNH in the 2011 Iron Bowl. So 4-4.

    • ITK March 3, 2014 at 11:59 pm #

      Auburn didn’t run the HUHN with Gus Malzahn as offensive coordinator?

      • AUtiger March 4, 2014 at 1:00 am #

        No. Auburn did not always run the HUNH when Chizik was HC and Gus was OC. That was a big reason the Gus left for Arkansas State… so that he could run his offense without Chizik interfering.

        • ITK March 4, 2014 at 6:42 am #

          Gus didn’t leave Auburn for Arkansas State because he was offered a promotion, going from coordinator to head coach? Wow, do I stand corrected.

          As a matter of fact, I watched Auburn that year, and Malzahn’s dipsy-doo, trickeroo was in full effect. I know this because for jollies I kept count of how many times Onterio McCalleb sprinted out-of-bounds to avoid getting hit.

          Wait, you may be right. Malzahn’s offense wasn’t exactly functional when Nick Saban blanked it on Pat Dye Field. That may be what you’re thinking of.

          • peachy March 4, 2014 at 7:13 pm #

            No, Auburn wasn’t running the HUNH after the first 3 or 4 games. Chizik had Malzahn slow the offense to compensate the defense. This is a well documented fact. Its the reason Malzahn left for Arkansas St. Remember, he turned down the Vanderbilt job the year before. He wasn’t leaving for the job; he left because of Chizik. Again, well documented. So no, Alabama didn’t face the HUNH against Auburn in 2011. Go re-watch the game.

        • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 6:28 am #

          As usual you rat turds are full of shit. Barnturd U ran the spread in 2011. Then Malzhan abandond you and Cheeze Dick hired Loffler who installed the pro set. As for Oklahoma, that was an aberition just like Utah. A game after goals were lost. Still, we out stated them and lost on 5 uncharecteristic turnivers. As for w/l records, you forgot the ass stompings of spread offense Texas and Notre Dame and Florida in 2009 and 2010. That makes the record 9-4 since 2009: 11of the 13 against top 20 to top 5 teams. Fuck off Barnturds! RTR!

          • peachy March 9, 2014 at 10:16 am #

            Spread offenses aren’t HUNH offenses, idiot.

          • Crimsonite March 9, 2014 at 1:46 pm #

            What a dumbass you are Bitch. All HUNH offenses are Spread Option and NOBODY runs the Spread Option without going no huddle for the most part of the game. I told you half a dozen times to shut the fuck up until you learn something about football.

          • peachy March 9, 2014 at 4:17 pm #

            You really don’t know much do you?

            Florida ran the spread with Tebow.

            Auburn ran the HUNH last year with Marshall.

            They are not the same offenses. They are similar and use some of the same formations, but they are not the same.

            When Alabama beat Florida in 2009 they didn’t beat a HUNH offense. They beat a Spread offense. They were not HUNH. There’s a difference. Moron.

          • Crimsonitec March 9, 2014 at 5:25 pm #

            What the fuck is the matter with you, you retarded Bitch? There is no such thing as a ‘Hurry Up No Huddle’ offense! That you dumbass cunt is the nickname given to any offense where the chickenshits run the whole game without a huddle to try and tire out and confuse the defense. You can run the pro set, the west coast, the wing ‘t’, the wishbone, the veer or any fucking other offense without a huddle, and walla, it’s the HUNH. Stupid ass female. Weagle runs the spread option with Malzahn’s tweeks. Go back to making babies. Oh hell no, please no. I hope to hell you’ve been spayed! Bwaa Haww Haww! I’m finished with you. You’re too damn stupid to argue with. ROTFLMMFAO!

          • peachy March 9, 2014 at 6:21 pm #

            Ok, see if you can keep up. The article is about Nick Saban v/s HUNH offenses. You started throwing in wins against Florida, Texas and Notre Dame. NONE of those teams run the HUNH. NONE. Do you get that now? Those teams ran a simple Spread offense. They didn’t run the HUNH. Do you get that now? Maybe you need to head back into the kitchen and let your wife post on here for you. She probably understands football a little better than you. She would certainly know not to count wins against simple Spread teams as wins against the HUNH.

          • Crimsonite March 10, 2014 at 3:42 pm #

            No retarded bitch, you need to go back and watch Florida you dumb whore. Florida didn’t go without a huddle on every play. They didn’t need to. They were good enough at every position to man up and beat your ass. But they damn sure ran it when they needed to. They ran it in the 4th quarter of the 2008 SECCG. That is how they wore out an Alabama defense that had no reserves. CUM runs the spread with no huddle at Ohio St. All spread teams go without a huddle for most of the game. Saban is against the method, which is the no huddle part. He is not against any particular offensive formation. What’s your point anyway, dumb bitch? We all know you don’t know your ass from a hole in the ground. Love being the dumbassed, laughed at Bitch do you? Just quit deflecting and STFU!

          • Crimsonite March 10, 2014 at 6:49 pm #

            One more thing dumbass, although it really doesn’t need to be said. Texas went with no huddle a lot with Colt McCoy at QB, nut doubt you even know who he is. Notre Dame went up tempo in the second half against Bama. Their coach even said that’s what they would do to try and catch up. By the way stupid, he was running no huddle at Cincinnati when Malzhan was still in high school. Stupid bitch. RTR!

  2. Elite tiger March 4, 2014 at 8:49 am #

    It is not that he is scared. It is the control he wants. Take that away from him, and he doesn’t know how to respond quite as well.

    • The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 9:18 am #

      It’s a good thing he came to Alabama then and didn’t move to Texas. Alabama controls its own destiny again this season, and Saban controls Alabama’s football program.

  3. Cant spell roll tide without 2 L's March 4, 2014 at 8:58 am #

    How many prostyle teams beat bama while Saban has been there? Truth be told , MAJORITY of Saban’s losses at bama have come to HUNH / Spread teams. Can’t spin that fact.

    • The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 9:20 am #

      Who said Saban lost more games to anything but the HUNH? Why do you say things like that? Talk about spinning the facts…

    • ITK March 4, 2014 at 9:36 am #

      No, I totally agree that the HUNH presents the biggest challenge for Bama’s defense under Nick Saban. You won’t hear my arguing that fact. The team has lost just 6 times in the last 5 years, and four of those have been to HUNH teams.

      Saban runs a complicated system built on adustments, and a lack of time to adjust neutralizes it.

      Don’t hear me say it’s not a good plan; I’m just saying making football a continuous sport (like basketball, soccer, etc.) may be amended for many reasons, the health of the players being the least of them.

    • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 6:48 am #

      I think I can stupid motherfucker. Since 2009 Bama has lost 7 games. 4 to spread offenses and 3 to pro iffenses. 3 of the spread losses were to top 5 ranked teams. Ine won the NC and one played for the NC. One finished 5th. Okie finushed top 15.The 3 pro sets one was #1 and finished 2. One played for the SEC Championship. One won the Cotton Bowl. Yeah, motherfucker, Bama has so fucking much to be ashamed of, not to mention be afraid of. Stupid bastar
      . RTR!

  4. A Ganger March 4, 2014 at 9:02 am #

    Well said ITK…To these Aubie Barnterds there is a Saban behind every tree…They seem to ignore the FACT that NICK had NOTHING to do with the 10 second rule change YET they insist it is ALL HIS FAULT…Once again proving the point I made the day he arrived at BAMA…He is in their head so bad they can’t sleep eat or drink…LOL…tis worse than LOVE….It’s total BAMA OBSESSION!
    My point is this kids….Pretty much the ONLY team that can beat BAMA is BAMA…Yeah, they choked against $cam, and JFF and lost on a fluke play in the IB…but like ITK said.. paraphrasing .It was about what BAMA did or did NOT do…Not about the Trickery and speed of the HUNH…It was lack of execution and motivation that beat us in ALL those games…Bama did NOT get OUT COACHED…Because it is impossible to out coach the greatest coach of ALL Time…I hope they don’t pass the damn rule and BAMA dominates their asses anyway…

    • Afan March 4, 2014 at 9:17 am #

      Since when did Steve Spurrier, Will Muschamp, Mark Richt, Kevin Sumlin, and many others become Aubies. All of those coaches have acknowledged that Saban is pushing for a rule change because he doesn’t like the way other teams are playing the game. This is not an Auburn vs Alabama thing. This is Saban wanting the game to be played how he thinks it should be played. 75% of the D1A coaches disagree with him and probably 90% of the football watching public. If you think the push back on Saban is all Auburn then once again Alabama fans are showing how obsessed they are with Auburn.

      • ITK March 4, 2014 at 9:44 am #

        Well said. However, it may be a reach to say 90% of the football watching public want _________. You have no way of backing that up.

        Also, what’s wrong with Saban using his power to speak to an issue that affects the profession he’s spent his whole life investing in?

        Let’s say a new coach comes along and suggests two additional goal posts be positioned on either side of the 50 yard line, so that on 4th down, if they are close enough, a team can attempt a “side fieldgoal” for 2 points instead of punting. And what’s more, 75% (as you say) of the current coaches favor the idea because of various reasons

        This would be a concept that totally changes the game itself, not just an old, traditional coach’s preparation. I think we’re quick to embrace new ideas just because they’re new, especially if they are in our favor, regardless of the damage they do to the game we all say we love. And as a seasoned head coach, Saban would have the right to oppose the addition of these new goal posts, and could (and should) use whatever power he has to bring the pendelum closer to the middle, where it should be.

      • The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 11:01 am #

        @afan

        Excuse me?

        See, now you’re putting words in a lot of millionaires’ mouths, then making up rash percentages?

        Let’s start with Nick Saban. We’ve heard his analysis after the fact, and, like it or not, it wasn’t his idea. We also know the idea everyone was terrified about isn’t at all what the proposal would ever be able to do, so stop with that, no matter how much you think Nick Saban is instead trying to make the biggest alleged excuse of any college coaching career.

        You’re saying the other coaches’ reactions confirm why Saban is supporting the rule change? You believe them, but everything Saban says is a lie, despite Saban’s response being exposition of the proposal itself?

        Then what about the truth that Saban didn’t create the proposal (which you can hear from the director of the committee who did if you don’t believe Saban)?

        And what about Saban’s response and analysis after the fact? First, Richt has said things that seem to agree, not that throw Saban under the excuse bus. Second, have you heard any of the coaches you listed provide a reaction to Saban’s analysis?

        Mike Leach, for example, has continued to say Saban is trying to cheat. Seconds later, he admitted he hadn’t heard what Saban actually had to say regardless.

        Wow. Way to earn your millions, coach. I expect more for my coach’s money and, frankly, Saban is relentlessly underpaid. The coaches who can only react are outrageously disappointing for the degree of leadership and amount of revenue they take home.

        I wonder how many of the coaches have even read the proposal? After all, the only coach who seems to have provided any analysis of what the proposal actually says is, in fact, Nick Saban, not Steve Spurrier, Will Muschamp, Mark Richt, Kevin Sumlin, Mike Leach, et al.

        Then you say we’re obsessed? At least we’re not making stuff up.

        You don’t have to thank Nick Saban for it, but the fact remains that he’s come out and exposed more about the proposed rule than anyone else even bothered to try to give you. I encourage you to read it. Just try it on for size. Or listen to the live interview with the director of the board who proposed this change as late as two years ago.

      • The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 11:20 am #

        ITK, I think what he means but can’t say without unfiltered bias is that most (if not 90%, weird number) of the public are so desparate for a championship that they’re ok with the HUNH.

        The problem is the suggestion that they think the proposed rule change would elimitate the HUNH completely.

        Like many millionaire coaches apparently, Afan hasn’t read what the proposal is actually designed to do and how much it won’t change the sport as we know it.

  5. The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 9:14 am #

    Brilliant.

    “the Black Bear Rebel Thingies…”

    Simply brilliant, ITK.

    I am starting to more greatly appreciate the dichotomy of Saban as a defenseive genius able to stop HUNH teams at least better than any other coach in the league being refered to as an excuse-maker for explaining his support of someone else’s proposed 10-second rule, versus the HUNH itself being an excuse for the not being able to play the best fundamental football.

    I think another thing people have failed to recognize at least about the 2013 season was the relative youth on the defensive side of the ball. It’s no excuse, but the future isn’t exactly dim by any means (except for Alabama’s opponents, I suppose). Alabama lost Sunseri against Arkansas and he simply couldn’t be replaced, but the recruiting Saban has done since seems to deliberately targeted to prepare for the HUNH and I can’t wait to see how they adapt and how last year’s newcomers grow. It was a massive personel change on defense into 2013 and they performed tremendously well regardless. Now they’ve got experience, two emotional losses, and an angry coach? I think I hear a fire alarm.

    But knowing that the HUNH is now implicitly adjusting and fine-tuning Saban’s already outstanding defensive playbook and roster, is it that hard to believe we might be looking at another historically legendary defense at the Capstone? 2014 will help predeict what I think could be another of Alabama’s all-time great defenses in 2015. The talent is there, the speed and strength on the defensive roster is more varied than ever, the coach is on his worst losing streak of his career at Alabama (crickets), and once again Alabama controls its own destiny.

    • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 1:43 pm #

      Dude, don’t all the teams control their own destiny for 2015 at this point? We haven’t even played a game yet. If AL goes undefeated, they would win it all, same with AU, LSU, etc… That’s a sophomoric statement.

      • The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 3:22 pm #

        @footballfan44

        I’m not sure undefeated TCU or Boise State would have agreed with you in 2009 about every team controlling their own destiny.

        Regardless, we still don’t yet know how exactly the four-team playoff is going to work except they have been very explicit about the process being set up to pick the four “best teams.”

        There are four spots and there are five conferences that will have a champion.

        Math. It’s not sophomoric. It’s elementary.

        • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 3:43 pm #

          You made the comment that Alabama controls their own destiny. Maybe they ALL don’t, but why make that statement. If AL does, so does AU, LSU, or whoever that plays throughout the year. Controlling your own destiny means it is up to you. If you keep winning, you “go”. If AU wins every game, they go to the NC because they would have beaten AL. If AL wins every game they go. If LSU… Most of the upper tier schools control their own destiny before the season starts. So, what did that comment even mean and why make it.

          • The Conduit March 5, 2014 at 9:29 am #

            I never said Auburn doesn’t control its own destiny.

            I never said LSU doesn’t control its own destiny.

            Please stop putting words in my mouth.

            I don’t know why it matters so much to pick one part of a statement to focus on instead of the point at large about Alabama’s roster and Saban’s adjustments regarding the HUNH well before this proposal was made without his involvement whatsoever, but I’ll do you another solid and respond to your questions even though I’ve learned not to expect you to answer mine.

            Alabama starts in the top ranks again for the polls. Starting at the back means you don’t necessarily control your own destiny. For some teams, it doesn’t matter where they start. For example, I’m not sure how college football fans would have felt about an undefeated FSU playing an undefeated tOSU, Michigan State or Louisville instead of a one-loss Missouri or Auburn in 2013.

            Remember when Notre Dame played Alabama for the national championship? It was just the season before last and Notre Dame (who I would argue qualifies as one of the “upper tier” schools you mentioned) started outside of the national rankings. Other teams lost football games before Notre Dame even had the opportunity to control their own destiny, despite their schedule strength. Does that help (you don’t have to answer that, of course)?

        • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 6:58 am #

          Thus is the second time Conduit. Get your shit straight. TC fuckingU was not undefeated in 2009. Only Bama and Boise. TCfuckingU was undefeated in 2010. Damn

  6. Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 1:12 pm #

    Wow, here we go again. No one said he is scared of it. He has the hardest time against these offenses and, yes, Oklahoma has been left out of your article. The three teams that moved the ball best on Bama this year were all HUNH and he was 1 for 3 in these games. He also opens up 2014 against a possible HUNH non-conference team. The bottom line is that most of the coaches around the country are offended by the way all of this came about. No matter how much Saban or Bama wants to disassociate from the situation, he was right in the thick of it and its #1 lobbyist. ESPN did a poll and 83% of the 65 power conference coaches do not want to see this change without some more investigation and proof that there is some safety issues…whether they run an HUNH offense or not. Only 11 of 65 coaches were in favor of it and, I’m sure, that included Saban and Bielema. So, take them out and, really only 9 other coaches. He is getting little support due to the fact of the obvious motive behind it. It would have been wise to have waited until the appropriate time to try and make a legitimate argument rather than trying to get it rushed through under the “player safety” $cam. So, assuming that the rest of the country follows their team coaches, 90% may be a stretch, but 83% would be pretty fair.

    • ITK March 4, 2014 at 1:57 pm #

      Oklahoma was left out because it was essentially an exhibition game. The real prize had been determined for the season. This line of thinking is hard for fans of programs not in contention for it all year in and year out, but unfortunately it is the truth in Tuscaloosa.

      The other games mentioned were games when there was something still to play for, that’s why they are more telling.

      • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 3:32 pm #

        A bowl game with no real implications has never meant anything to me at all either. So, I get your point. However, if you’re saying that Saban did not FULLY prepare because it meant nothing to him, he did a disservice to his kids, the fans and the university. That was the last game for his seniors. That was the last game for AJ. If that is even close to being the case (which I don’t think it is because it you’re a winner, you want to win against LA Monroe as bad as you do in the iron bowl), he should be fired. So, by not counting that game, your numbers are not true. It was a big game for both sides and it counts when making fair comparisons for the season whether you like it or not.

        • ITK March 4, 2014 at 4:35 pm #

          In one unbelievably unfortunate play, Alabama went from being undefeated, #1 and headed for a third straight National Championship to playing in a meaningless bowl game. I don’t at all think the coaches were unprepared, but getting the kids to accept the consolation prize was another thing.

          The Sugar Bowl WAS NOT as big a deal to Alabama as it was to Oklahoma. Playing the two-time defending National Champs WAS the Sooners’ BCS Natty game. To Bama it was a silly exhibition.

          There were many issues on last year’s team; leadership issues among the team for one. I don’t mean to be crass, and that may sound funny coming from me, but you don’t understand what it’s like to maintain the level of excellence Alabama has for the last 5-6 years. Auburn’s brief success stories are bewildering, but then wither away for a few seasons before returning to contention. Alabama has maintained a standard few programs have enjoyed in the modern era. Nebraska, Florida State, USC and really Florida are the only other ones that can speak to that kind of dominance. But with this success, you have players who walk into winning and take it for granted, whereas with Auburn you have players on the team right now who remember what it’s like to not win a conference game. Auburn lost more in 2012 than Alabama has since 2007.

          But evidence of the coaching staff turnover between the Auburn game and the bowl game shows the upheaval of the program.

          And they still went 11-2.

          You can throw that HUNH game in if you like, but take contention out of the mix for a champion and you have yourself an exhibition.

          But on the other sideline, much was made Bob Stoops’ disdain for the SEC in the offseason, and this was his championship game, of sorts. And his players’, who haven’t won anything in their time there. It’s sort of like fighting the wounded lion. Sure, you’ve slain a lion, but he only had three legs and one eye. Come on.

    • The Conduit March 4, 2014 at 3:36 pm #

      @footballfan44

      Actually, many people have and continue to suggest Saban is scared of the HUNH, including current coaches in public interviews. Steve Spurrier went so far to call it the (new) “Saban Rule” which many media members irresponsibly adopted.

      And I thought my memory was short.

      The coaches are “offended by the way this came about?” I’m surprised more fans aren’t offended by the lack of awareness their school’s highly-paid coaches and many members of the press reacted to the situation in the first place.
      Frankly, I’m still disappointed by coaches like Mike Leach who continues to call the proposal an excuse by Saban despite admitting to not listening to a word Saban’s analysis of the proposal itself (not to mention the proposal itself not being read by many coaches and fans).

      But Saban was its #1 lobbyist?

      I get that Saban is perhaps the most prolific coach in the country and therefore the most publicized, but again, the director of the committe that proposed this change gave yet another interview barely a week ago stating Nick Saban’s near-zero involvement over the last two years (yes, two years, at least) of discussion and creation of this proposal.

      Wait, what am I saying? You’re still just plain blaming Saban for the proposed rule change and treating that as the be-all end-all bottom line? You’re not even trying to interpret it or understand how much or how little it will affect the game. This is silly. I get that you hate Alabama, but good grief. You say things like “he” is getting little support for the rule. He? You mean Nick Saban? So what? It’s not his rule, is it? Good grief.

      I hate that I feel compelled to say this, but Nick Saban is going to be the coach at the University of Alabama next year, not Texas.

      • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 4:12 pm #

        Dude, I think you have a screw loose. Do you actually go back and read your stuff. Your points are well…pointless. Wake up man, Saban is not the king. He has faults, he can be an ass and whether you want to admit it or not, he is VERY involved in this whole thing…like it or not. He was the ONLY coach who asked to meet under the “cloak of darkness” and it pissed the other coaches off. Quit saying the other coaches haven’t read it. How the crap do you know. Because they’re not supporting it??? They probably know WAY more about it than you or I do and made their own educated choice. They want to see more research before such a major change is made. That is called wisdom. Furthermore, I am not blaming him, but there are two coaches who are pushing for this more than anyone else. One is a nutcase and could be looking at a lawsuit from the parents of a dead kid and the other his Saban. On the “scared thing” yes, there may be some tongue in cheek forum crap about him being scared, but in serious discussions, people think it is just an outright $cam, a facade, a farce… Maybe some rules need to change a little, but not under the mask of “player safety”. I read a stat today that between 2009-2012, the Pac 12 ran more plays on offense and defense than any other conference and in the same period recorded less injuries. So, wouldn’t it be premature to make that change at this point?

        • The Conduit March 5, 2014 at 9:07 am #

          Saban is the king? I simply didn’t say that.

          Saban doesn’t have faults? I didn’t say that either. Deflect much?

          Always.

          I asked questions that you didn’t answer, and I’m not the one putting words in other people’s mouths.

          Then you say the coaches know more about it than I do after some have publically admitted to not reading it or Saban’s analysis? Do you really think I’m making it up or do you not listen to the actual responses from other coaches such as Mike Leach? After all, this is a national story, not just an Alabama one.

          Again, you keep saying “people” think it’s a scam, an excuse by Alabama’s football coach, but while ignoring this had already happened without him and was being talked about for at least two years by the people who actually created the proposal.

          Good grief.

        • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 1:56 pm #

          You are the one full of shit, asshole. Who the fuck do you think you are, claiming to know what is in Saban’s mind or any fucking thing about Saban for that matter. The fucking 10 second thing is a bunch of hokey pokey bullshit. It would have not one iota of effect on your pussy fucking offense. I don’t give a fucking shit whether it passed or not from a stand point of affecting the game. But I do wish to all the forces of the universe that it had passed – just to get to hear all you whiney pussy bastards cry over it for the next 10 years or so. Stupid bastards.

    • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 8:46 am #

      Try reading the fucking thread before you run your cum hole. Everybody who posted on here first said Saban us afraid of it. Every stupid homer son of a bitch from a rival school who’s posted on here and every other blog in the country for the past month, has said he was afraid. So just shut the fuck up until you get your ass informed. RTR!

  7. Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 1:17 pm #

    And, yes, he did hold AU to a whopping 108 yards below the yearly average, but that included some subpar, non-conference teams that all the big schools play. They still had nearly 400 yards on Bama and didn’t TA&M get close to 600 yards on Bama this year? If think that was well above their average per game. If they had any defense at all, that really could have been ugly.

    • ITK March 4, 2014 at 2:00 pm #

      Well remember 50 of those yards was the touchdown that should have never been.

      • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 3:21 pm #

        Should have never been? Do you mean in the AU game or T A&M game?

      • Elite tiger March 4, 2014 at 4:11 pm #

        According to the NCAA rule book, offensive linemen can be up to 3 yards down field as long as the QB is not past the line of scrimmage, when the ball is thrown. Also, if engaged with a defender at the Los , he can carry him as far as he can( remember The Blind Side), so Steve Shaw, head of SEC officials reviewed the play(a Bama grad by the way), and said the 3 lineman were 2 yards downfield, QB released the ball behind the line, and Jay Prosch was still blocking his guy 6 yards down field. Hate to let facts get in the way, but they always do. This is not the NFL. It is College Football!!! ( credit to Mike Gundy, who is a man, and he is 40.) Shaw said that on Wjox back in December.

        • ITK March 4, 2014 at 4:18 pm #

          I realize you must be new to the game, but why would an offensive lineman be engaged in pass protection 3-5 yards down field? There are fundamental differences in pass protection and run blocking.

          The Blind Side block was a run block, not pass protection. Excellent attempt, however. The TD should’ve never stood, but whatever helps you believe the win was legit.

          I heard Shaw say just the opposite, saying they blew the call. See how easy it is to reference a source you can’t back up?

          • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 4:34 pm #

            @ ITK, There are blown calls in about every game and, even with the technology that we have today, probably always will be. That is part of the game. All teams have had plays that maybe shouldn’t stand because of missed calls. I have to watch my hypocrisy here because I’m sure I have had sour grapes and given a good, “Well, that should have never happened because…” Later after the dust settled, it was still an “L” and I knew I was being a whiner. Again, I get your point, but not good in a forum debate. We need to try and live by the facts at hand. At the end of the iron bowl, there were pictures circulating all over the place that made it look as if Chris Davis’ foot was out of bounds and people were calling for an investigation. But, as level headed sports fans, you and I both knew that was not the case. Don’t be that guy here. You’re the creator of this and a writer that brings a lot of people in to debate. Even people like me. So, again, don’t be that guy.

          • ITK March 4, 2014 at 4:45 pm #

            Chris Davis was never close to being out-of-bounds. Those were clearly photoshopped. But a running play, since the inception of the forward pass, has never been allowed to suddenly become a passing play just because the QB wants to make it that, and somebody happens to be open…with run blocks in progress downfield. So if that makes me “that guy,” I’ll wear it like a badge of honor.

            But it’s that kind of thinking that Saban wants to address, and why eventually some of the rough edges of this offensive philosophy will be changed, possibly as early as Thursday.

            I mean, come man. Don’t be “that guy” who is mad because your wife is boinking a co-worker at work. I mean, you haven’t actually seen them doing it, have you? You just see all the signs, ran across a questionable text or two, and hear the whispers among common friends who are just as suspicious as you. No, regardless of gray circumstances, you want the rules followed, which means she stays true to you and you don’t need shots to protect you from what she may have.

          • peachy March 4, 2014 at 10:08 pm #

            You heard Shaw say the opposite? Here’s the link. The play was legal and the correct call made. Shaw even says it was:

            http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20131202/NEWS/131209988?p=1&tc=pg

          • Elite tiger March 5, 2014 at 7:26 am #

            Thanks to Peachy for providing the link where Shaw explained why the play was legal. Boom!!!! Now it is in your court to back up your claim of what he said. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter, because it will always be 34-28, no matter how any on here try to spin it. I do appreciate the back and forth debate, and see no reason why that shouldn’t be the norm on sites like this(whether it is an Auburn or Alabama site. ) We can agree to disagree. Nothing wrong with that.

          • Elite tiger March 7, 2014 at 7:26 am #

            It doesn’t matter what you or I think what a rule should say. The rule makes no distinction between run or pass blocking, in regards to where linemen can be. They didn’t miss the call, and they were not out of position either. Nor were they not in position on the Kick Six.

        • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 2:06 pm #

          Don’t play stupid, asshole. The recording plainly show’s Marshall’s toe on the LOS before he released the ball. Of course out of position officials have a hard time seeing that shit. Then there were the two O’linemen down field blocking. It was a bullshit play just like the invisible motin penalty the nullified a field goal. I’m going to record the IB this year for the first time since Snake’s ‘Run In The Mud’. Gonna enjoy watching your faggot asses get beat down by 35 points, over, and over, and over again for eternity! RTR!

          • Elite tiger March 9, 2014 at 3:20 pm #

            Snake’s run in the mud should have came back because of a hold on Gusty Yearout, but it will always stand as a Bama win. That is the breaks.

          • Crimsonite March 9, 2014 at 5:50 pm #

            I agree with that as of the officials clarifying the position of the ball. There is still some question about the down field blocking. Whatever. There’s no question about the phantom motion penalty that took 3 points off the board, or the td wouldn’t have mattered. Regardless dumbass, you aren’t old enough to know what happened in that ancient IB. I was there. There was so much mud in Legion Field that you could hardly tell which team was which. Players held on to each other just to keep from falling down. You couldn’t have called a legitimate fucking hold in that game without calling 5 on every play.Yearout was a damn walkon, he wasn’t good enough to have to hold. LMFAO! RTR!

        • Crimsonite March 8, 2014 at 2:09 pm #

          I have the recording, asshole. Marshall’s toe was touching the LOS. Therefore the blockers were illegal. Don’t give a shit what Shaw said. Dumbass must be near sighted, or maybe just didn’t want to start a controversy over something so close.

          • Elite tiger March 9, 2014 at 3:18 pm #

            It is not where his toe is. It is where the football is that makes it an illegal forward pass. And the football was behind the LOS, so the refs can’t just make up a new rule. They go by what is in the books, and that says it was a touchdown!! And it will forever be in the record books as such.

  8. Cant spell roll tide without 2 L's March 4, 2014 at 2:53 pm #

    The biggest issue with the HUNH for saban is not safety or Ref related. It is the fact that he will have to make adjustments to his defense that he has been so successful with since coming into the SEC. He has said it many times that he has reached a point in his career that he does not want to ” start over”. To adjust to the HUNH would mean he would have to ” start over ” in a sense. Now the point you made about bama holding Auburn 108 yards under their avg. That was due to mistakes by Auburn that should have never happen. Early in the game the wide open WR that was under thrown, and the fumbles by Marshall and Mason. Auburn still rushed for almost 300 yards which was par for the course for Auburn in 2013.

    • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 5:00 pm #

      @ ITK, you’re definitely being “that guy” well. Love the analogy, btw. Just remember, there are people like Conduit that really don’t make a lot of sense and the guy from other posts (Crimson whatever) who just starts cussing people out when they make a good point. But, you are the initiator of these. Even we (the Aubs) want to see you be a little above the rest. I don’t agree with a lot that you write and your style does not really suit me (AU or AL), but for now, I do hold you in a little higher regards and have a little more respect than the Goobs that chime in. You’ve created a place that allows for debate and I respect that. I’m not saying don’t point out the obvious. Just stay a layer (or three) above the others. If you do, I’ll keep reading as I’m sure others will as well. Don’t limit your audience.

      • ITK March 4, 2014 at 5:07 pm #

        @Footballfan44

        Debate is what makes this place great. You can’t get this debate on an Auburn site, or at least I haven’t found one. Actually, this is totally the truth, I have never attempted a comment on an Auburn site. You folks really are Aubsessed with what we think of you, which makes what we do here a layup.

        I agree with you about Crimsonite. He’s an acquired, profanity-filled taste. Conduit I have to disagree.

        But you’re not making sense in that you’re asking me to not care if the rules that were created to govern the game we both love are followed in order to assure order and a fair, level playing field. With that in mind, I bet you cheat on your taxes every year. And steal from your kids’ allowance kitty.

        • Hunter Ford March 4, 2014 at 5:28 pm #

          Debate is what makes everything great in the United States of America! USA! Could be back in the USSR…right?

        • Footballfan44 March 4, 2014 at 9:40 pm #

          Man, seriously? You’re going there? My last post had nothing at all to do with our debate. I was just saying that I respect the small world you have created. Why go there? I have never gone to a Bama site on purpose and the couple of times that I have come to yours is from googling things about football and it ended up that you were one of the ones that wrote about that particular topic. I’ve been on Auburn sites as well from doing the same thing. It’s not that AU people go on Bama sites or bama people go on AU sites. And, anyway who cares. My last point was that you have a voice. You have a chance to be above the “normal”. You can open up a place for lively debate and get your points in and I wouldn’t mind jumping in from time to time. However, you just did the one thing that I was hoping you wouldn’t. You went there. You launched a personal attack. I wasn’t saying anything negative about you, but you countered with personal meanness. An area where a real columnists shouldn’t have to tread. You went the Crimsonite level. And, honestly, I can’t imagine why.

          • ITK March 4, 2014 at 10:52 pm #

            No personal attack friend; I have no idea if you pay taxes, have kids, OR a kitty. The point is, you’re trying to say ignore the gray areas of the rules that the HUNH feeds off of, but I live in a black and white world and can’t. Was just making a reference to things I liken to this idea of “grayness.” Settle down.

          • Crimsonite March 9, 2014 at 1:58 pm #

            Don’t be trying to change your colors to win a point dude. I have all the evidence necessary in the CR Archives. During the past few weeks you have been as big an asshole on here as anybody. And for your dumbass information, I am not being an asshole. I am on our Bama blogsite and am giving all you trolling homer assholes exactly what a bunch of you deserve. You, dude, haven’t lived on this site for five years and had to put up with the jackoffs who come here looking for trouble. LL’s, Peachy and LMAO are actually pretty damn tame compared to many who have been here blowing their shit out their asses in the past. You come here and dis Bama – you get me in return. RTR!

      • The Conduit March 5, 2014 at 9:49 am #

        @footballfan44

        Says the guy who puts words in my mouth and doesn’t answer the respectful questions on the topic under the guise of being the respectable one.

        Good grief.

        As for “can’t spell’s” notice about Saban having to adjust to the HUNH, it’s an interesting point to say that he doesn’t want to.

        Truth be told, he already has.

        Look at the recruiting a few weeks ago alone. I’m hesitant to say anything about the youth, inexperience and injury on the 2013 team being any kind of factor, but rather I will say it seems hard to ignore Saban’s deliberate recruitment of smaller, faster players on defense and particularly focusing on positional depth at the positions best suited to combat the strengths of the HUNH.

        Lastly, frankly what makes the non-corporate press writers like ITK and CapstoneReport.com important and relevant is they say things that other sites simply can’t. I’ve seen much more irresponsible writing from other public press writers, such as Ron Reagan’s son most recently. You take what you can get, but capstonereport.com listens to more than just a single source, and most don’t have the same response whatsoever.

    • ITK March 4, 2014 at 5:02 pm #

      “Starting over” refers to going to another program, not adjusting a defense.

      For instance, he made adjustments that made Alabama the only team to completely shut Florida and Tim Tebow down in his career at UF. He was a joke in the NFL, but for a time was the most dominant player in the most dominant offense in college football.

      What you say suggests Saban is lazy. That’s anything but the truth. Now if you were talking about Spurrier…

      Again, check the three losses against HUNH teams and there is a common thread…freak of nature plays that took the game down to the wire, falling in favor of the opponent. And 2 of the 3 included a Heisman winner. But there are more that Bama has won going away.

      I’ll take those odds.

      • Cant spell roll tide without 2 L's March 5, 2014 at 7:43 am #

        For you to say that it took ” fluke ” plays to beat bama is just plain hillarious. Why was those teams in position for 1 play to win them the game? The fluke ” kick six” that keeps you bammers up at night , happened in a tied ball game. Why was the game tied when bama had the much better team/coach? Oklahoma just beat bama’s ass, no fluke. I do believe that LSU is the only prostyle team to beat bama since saban has been there. So as You said , I would take those odds , and stick to the HUNH. I also never called saban ” lazy”. Here I am trying to have a cival discussion on football ( like you claim you wanted) and you continue to put words in my mouth. Saban is the typical stubborn old man. He does not want to change a damn thing he does or how he does it. Saban is one of the best coaches of my life time. Can not take a thing from what he has done since he came into the SEC. All Malzahn and other HUNH coaches have done is find the one weak spot in saban’s game plan and continue to develop on that. What made bear an even greater coach was that he was able to realize that the game was changing and that is when the Wishbone came to bama. Saban needs to learn from that and make the changes to his program. No need in making up fairy tales about player safety and refs not being in position. Hell even Coach Gene Stallings ( one of my favorite coaches all time by the way) said he could shut the HUNH offense down. Never said anything about having to change rules to do so.

        • Yellowhammer March 5, 2014 at 3:44 pm #

          “Cant have a top 3 season in school history without 2 l’s” are you saying CNS hasnt changed anything? Do you bother to read sports media or possibly watch those obscure tv channels like ESPN?

          • Cant spell roll tide without 2 L's March 5, 2014 at 4:15 pm #

            Ummmmm…..HUH? PLEASE enlighten the rest of us common people with your input on what major changes saban has made for his counter punch to the HUNH. This should be interesting. This question is for imAyellowbammer, so no tag team partners on this one.

          • Yellowhammer March 5, 2014 at 9:25 pm #

            “Cant have a top 3 season in school history without 2l’s” it sounds as if you are admitting Marcus Tullius Cicero was right, although you had no idea (see: even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut) Secondly, you are quoted as saying “Saban is a typical stubborn old man who doesn’t want to change a damn thing” Enlighten me on where you mentioned the mickey mousezahn O in that statement other than the blabbering afterwards about his one weakness. Lastly, if you are looking for change,simply look at the coaching staff changes on both sides of the ball as well as in the football dept,. Someone living in the real world may have also noticed the types of players recently signed, (especially defensive players) that landed the unquestioned unrivaled #1 class ranked by all major recruiting services. They were recruited for shutting it down. I can say with confidence that I am glad CNS isn’t taking direct aim at my school’s team. If the past is any indicator, that leads to dismal years and coaching changes. Have a nice day!

          • Cant spell roll tide without 2 L's March 6, 2014 at 6:34 am #

            Saban /bama has turn over on the coaching staff every year. So what changes to the DEFENSIVE SIDE OF THE BALL has saban made in attempt to counter act the HUNH? Hiring Kiffin does not count. You are yet to point out one. I know you would like to make a witty post and think you won the argument , but you are actually helping my point. He is fighting change tooth and nail. Why do you think he begs and pleads with Smart not to leave for another job? I just think it is a damn shame that one of the so called ” Greatest Ever” can only manage to win half of his games against his teams biggest rival. You would think that with the cute name ” little brother” ( that you bammers use to make yourself feel better) that the almighty Saban could manage to do better than .500 against them. Now the HUNH is 100% in the mix? I like our chances.

          • The Conduit March 6, 2014 at 9:28 am #

            @can’tspell

            I know you said nobody else should reply, but what the hell, I’ll throw some sense in and offer my apologies.

            Have you not seen the recruits Saban picked up just weeks ago? I know everyone probably knows Alabama had the top class, but you might not have looked deliberately at who makes up that part of the roster.

            For example, Saban has been picking smaller, quicker players at key positions, a move that seems to be targeted at defending faster-paced teams who want football scores to look more like bowling and cringe at the sight of two good defenses playing each other. I talked about this a little here already but maybe you missed that, too. Still, two five-star corners isn’t just a coincidence, it’s a recruiting coup. Hand alone gives a good indication of the difference in size-based recruiting patterns.

            Then again, all Saban really had to do to stop Auburn this year was not miss just one of five missed field goals, never mind the defense altogether even though Saban deliberately recruited faster guys with the last class regardless.

            You mentioned Kiffin (even though you mentioned it in a response that didn’t mention Kiffin…?), but you didn’t notice the d-line coach swap with Texas, for example, among other things? That’s just weird, don’t you think? Maybe “selective” is a better choice of words than “weird,” but still.

            Saban begs and pleads with Smart to do what now? Again, now you’re just putting words in someone else’s mouth (which is getting older every time), but frankly I’d still suggest you’re not going to get a better DC than Smart in the first place. Good grief. Tell me how bad Smart wants to leave. I’ll hold.

            I like our chances, too. While the hurry-up is Auburn’s quintessential crutch, Alabama missing any one of five missed field goals was the only reason Auburn didn’t have to watch Alabama take a knee for the last two minutes of the Iron Bowl this year alone, nevermind the destruction last year with all but the same roster and the relative youth on Alabama’s defense in 2013. So yeah, I like our chances, too, even without putting words in anyone else’s mouth.

          • Cant spell roll tide without 2 L's March 7, 2014 at 12:55 pm #

            So cantdoit…..You are saying that Saban is out recruiting a certain type of player just to stop the HUNH? Let me make sure I heard you correctly. Saban feels so threatened by the HUNH that he has now started recruiting a different type of player just to try and slow it down? Is that what you are saying? That ” High School , Dipsy doo” offense is now making the great one change the way he recruits and coaches??? Are you also saying that Saban is in such a panic over the success of the HUNH that he is now running current coaches off in an attempt to find anyone who can slow it down? Is this what you are so proudly saying cantdoit? That is the point you was trying to make with your post, right?Wow! Who knew a High School Coach and is trick play book could cause such an uproar in Tuscalooser. No one on the bama staff is safe while Malzahn is in Auburn! So says cantdoit!

          • The Conduit March 7, 2014 at 3:19 pm #

            @Can’tspell

            Heheh.

            Heheheheheh.

            Mwahahahahahahahaha!

            Oh, man, you silly goose. You really do crack me up sometimes with your blind rage diaper fits. Never change, little brother. Please.

            You asked, “Saban feels so threatened by the HUNH that he has now started recruiting a different type of player just to try and slow it down? Is that what you are saying?”

            I’ll answer.

            No, that’s not what I’m saying. You’re the one upset suggesting Saban doesn’t want football to change when the reality of Saban’s brand of process ingenuity is to change regardless.

            I certainly never said what you suggested I said about players trying to slow down the HUNHNS? I don’t get that (what does it mean?), but one last time, I didn’t say it or even imply it.

            Saban has recruited faster players at some of the more pressure-sensitive defensive positions in regards to the HUNHNS, notably outside linebacker, corner and free safety. The talent and speed at these positions in particular play so well against any fundamentally-talented football offense that it may actually instead be completely incidental, but the conditioning guys like Christian Miller and Rashaan Evans are already naturally accustomed to can’t be understated. The game isn’t changing; it’s changed, and it’s not all Auburn’s fault, if that’s the suggestion you’re trying to make in regards to Saban’s alleged “fear.”

            When Saban started at Alabama, for example, the 40-second rule change hadn’t yet been changed (oh no, they changed sacred college football rules!), and the HUNHNS consequently hadn’t exploited the rule change or become nearly as popular as it has over the last 6 years. The HUNHNS has simply become part of the sport, and Saban (ike many coaches, by the way) has recruited in response.

            Half the divisional teams Alabama faces every season (again, not just Auburn) have implemented some form of the HUNHNS, never mind the non-conference ones like West Virginia this year. Think about it. Most of them use more of the hurry-up part alone than anything else, rather than the dipsy-do sub-14-second exploit the 2008 rule change exposed, I just think the silliest ones get in a huddle and run to the line only to stare at the sideline placards with pokemon, Gremlins and grilled cheese images of offensive play-calling enlightenment.

            Puke.

            To say Saban is afraid of the HUNHNS and that’s why he recruited even faster players is almost as ignorant as Saban would have been had he not noticed the change in the sport.

            Fortunately for Alabama fans, Nick Saban isn’t ignorant about college football.

            Running current coaches off, you say? What the?

            I think I made a mistake.

            You got me.

            I took the bait.

            There’s simply no way you’re being serious right now. Well-played, little brother.

            And finally, once again, it’s spelled, “The Conduit.”

            You know what? Never mind. Good grief…

            2008 is calling. It wants the rules not to change as badly as you were afraid they would but forgot they already had.

  9. Hunter Ford March 4, 2014 at 5:24 pm #

    Whenever I see posts about HUNH I think HUH? DUH HUH??

    Football at a high level is about trying to stay ahead of the game. Saban has dominated of late and folks are starting to come up with ways to counteract what he has done to be successful. I am not old enough to remember actually watching Vince Lombardi and the Green Bay Packers back in the day. But there was an old NFL Films show that showed Lombardi drawing up the old “Packer Sweep”

    You block here,,, you block there… you create a lane for the runner, and if you execute it right…NOBODY can stop it WHETHER THEY NO IT IS COMING OR NOT!

    I would agree strongly with a caller I heard on F-Bomb recently. Most rules changes these days have benefitted the offense and it is time for some rules that sway the balance of power back to defensive football.

    PEACE AND LOVE

  10. Hunter Ford March 4, 2014 at 5:26 pm #

    Know not no…can’t stop that sweep even if you Know it is coming….if it is executed right. Correctly

  11. Hunter Ford March 4, 2014 at 5:40 pm #

  12. Yellowhammer March 4, 2014 at 7:21 pm #

    Please please please all fans, all media every Bama/Saban hater in every corner of the world, PLEASE continue to spew your hate, please continue to say that CNS has no answer to the mickey mousezahn O, that he is scared, that the players are fat and out of shape…. and on and on and on….. Obviously you have forgotten what your original onslaught of doubt and ridicule inspired, and round 2 will be just as much fun if not more, Thankyou, your cooperation is very much appreciated.

  13. peachy March 5, 2014 at 2:04 pm #

    Also, the 10 second proposal has been dropped. No changes for Nicky boy.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2014/03/05/college-football-rules-committee-pace-of-play/6036617/

    • what? March 5, 2014 at 2:56 pm #

      Apparently common sense did win out.

      • The Conduit March 5, 2014 at 3:43 pm #

        Common sense, you say?

        It sounds to me like common sense never got a chance from most people regardless of the relatively benign proposal, don’t you think?

        It would be foolish to believe we haven’t heard the last of the debate from the same rules committee on the pace of the game relative to safety, either.

        I guess it’s a good thing Nick Saban got involved. After all, otherwise the rule proposal would have barely been noticed by most coaches and certainly not by the general public, and nobody would have cried into million-dollar puddles in a reaction to stop it. Everybody wins.

        Now Nick Saban has no “excuses” created by a separate committee over the past two years, right? So what happens when he doesn’t miss five field goals?

        “Uh oh…”

        • peachy March 5, 2014 at 3:56 pm #

          What happens when Malzahn has an inexperienced team?

          He stopped the dynasty with a team coming off a 3-9 season.

          “Uh, oh…”

          • Hunter Ford March 5, 2014 at 7:55 pm #

            Terry Bowden…nuff said

          • peachy March 5, 2014 at 8:15 pm #

            If you think Terry Bowden has anywhere near the success Malzahn has had then id like to see it.

          • The Conduit March 6, 2014 at 10:05 am #

            @peachy

            Inexperienced team?

            Can you explain that a little more? I feel like I’m missing something.

            Auburn’s team actually changed very little from 2012 to 2013, especially on offense, correct?

            It sounds like you’re saying there were a ton of changes on Auburn’s roster, but I always felt a little funny about the team having to see all the bandwagon fans who abandoned them the year before with record-low attendance, Georgia’s Nick Marshall notwithstanding.

            Want to talk attrition and inexperience? I’d suggest looking at Alabama in 2013, not Auburn. Take a look. Big changes and tons of attrition from what many called one of the best defenses of all time the year before when Alabama won the national championship in Miami.

        • Afan March 5, 2014 at 4:53 pm #

          Commons sense definitely won out. At this time there is nothing to say there is a player safety issue. No player safety issue then no rule change this year – common sense. Just b/c Saban and Bert say there is player safety issue doesn’t mean there is one, especially when they have no tangible proof at this time. Unfortunately, the argument they are both making is to not play football. Saban using a cigarette analogy was idiotic. You know what the answer is to the question about 1 cigarette or 60? Don’t smoke at all – common sense.

          • Hunter Ford March 5, 2014 at 8:00 pm #

            I believe Saban has a singular mind. He is not a philosopher or a great innovator. He knows how to FOCUS, WORK HARD, and MOTIVATE other folks to do the same. I believe, at heart, he is a shy person. I would want my son to play for Nick Saban more than any other coach living today.

          • The Conduit March 6, 2014 at 10:27 am #

            I wonder about the other 22% of coaches who voted for it besides just Saban and Beilema who are getting the blame for the proposal created by a committee that started the proposal two years ago, ie., before either of the two coaches taking the entirety of the blame were labeled as struggling with the hurry-up, know what I mean? Beilema alone hadn’t even played in the SEC or a hurry-up team when this proposal began. Think about it.

          • Hunter Ford March 6, 2014 at 6:16 pm #

            Peachy. Terry Bowden was like 22-0-1 until the Alabama game of his second season. He was 11-0 his first season….and he flamed out after losing to Alabama just sayin. I envision that fate for Gus

          • peachy March 6, 2014 at 7:03 pm #

            Fine. Compare him to Bowden. Bowden had a winning record v/s Alabama btw.

  14. Hunter Ford March 5, 2014 at 9:02 pm #

    Terry Bowden= Gus

    • peachy March 5, 2014 at 10:30 pm #

      Not even remotely. Malzahn has a long list of accomplishments and success. Bowden got ahead based solely on his name and Dye’s recruits. Malzahn is an offensive genius. It would be offensive to call Bowden a genius at anything. They don’t even remotely compare.

      • Fat_Dye March 6, 2014 at 7:12 am #

        You just said everything that proves hunter ford statement is true @ peachy .

      • The Conduit March 6, 2014 at 10:09 am #

        Dye’s recruits?

        What about Malzahn’s recruits? Didn’t he play last year with Chizik’s?

        I know he didn’t do outrageously well at recruiting this year, but his strentgh as you said is offense, not recruiting, even after getting to a national championship game, which should be a free-pass for an incredible recruiting class at most programs, particularly in the SEC I would think.

        It wasn’t, but it should be. I agree though, it’s not Malzahn’s strong suit. We’re all curious about what Auburn will look like in 2014, miracles notwithstanding.

        • peachy March 6, 2014 at 11:17 am #

          Actually almost the entire offense that Malzahn worked with in 2013 were Malzahns recruits. Remember, he was at Auburn for 3 years and only gone for 1. Marshall was his, Mason was his, Cameron Artis-Payne was his, nearly all the WRs and the entire O-line. That’s one reason this offense was so successful; 90% of them were recruited to play in Malzahns system. They weren’t Chiziks recruits. Chizik mainly recruited on defense. Terry Bowden had nothing to do with the players he inherited.

          And Auburn had a very good recruiting class this year. It was top 10 in every ranking. 247 had them 6th, Scout had them 8th, ESPN had them 8th, Rivals had them 9th. Auburn had an excellent recruiting class.

          • The Conduit March 6, 2014 at 12:23 pm #

            But now you’re arguing a different point. I agree with you that many of them were Malzahn’s recruits but not that they were inexperienced and Malzahn showed up and turned them into the Avengers or something. You said they were inexperienced but Malzahn crushed everyone with them anyway. I’m very confused here. So weird. Nobody came to see them in 2012. It was sad. But win at Auburn and people show up? Poor guys. Can’t relate to that.

            I didn’t say he didn’t recruit well, I said it wasn’t his greatest strength. Stop.

          • peachy March 6, 2014 at 12:53 pm #

            A lot of them were inexperienced in running Malzahns system. The year before Malzahn came back Chizik had his OC install an entirely different offense. And in Malzahns last year at Auburn they didn’t run his offense which is why he left for Arkansas St. Chizik made him go away from his HUNH offense to compensate the defense. So while most of the players last year were his recruits very few had ever ran his HUNH offense, unless they had played on the 2010 team (and not many did).

          • The Conduit March 6, 2014 at 1:03 pm #

            Got it. They weren’t inexperienced at fundamental football, they just weren’t good at it, then the hurry-up Malzahn brought last season helped the same players mitigate some of the fundamental shortcomings.

            Sounds weird though. They were the OC’s recruits (why not Chizik’s?), but the head coach took over the OC role after it got him a national title? It all sounds so weird. I had never really noticed it like that before. “Compensate the defense,” what’s that mean?

          • peachy March 6, 2014 at 1:21 pm #

            Malzahn recruited the vast majority of the offensive players. Chizik recruited the majority of the defensive players. That’s a fact. Both helped on both sides but Malzahn recruited the majority on offense. You could call them Chiziks players but they were Malzahns players too; not so much on defense but absolutely on offense.

            And Chizik made Malzahn slow down the offense because his defense was struggling having to go back on the field so quickly. This is a documented fact. Its the reason Malzahn left. Chizik wanted to go back to a power running game, control the clock style offense (what Auburn used to do). The only reason he hired Malzahn in the first place is because he knew Auburns talent level was way down (due to Tubervilles recruitment of players that never touched the field) and that the only way he was going to win early was to outscore people. And it worked. But it was pretty much all Malzahn. 3 years with Malzahn: 30-10 with an SEC and National title. 1 year without Malzahn: 3-9. Malzahn comes back: 12-2 SEC title and less than a minute from another NC.

        • Hunter Ford March 6, 2014 at 6:18 pm #

          Terry Bowden was a great coach at Samford and was undefeated through almost two whole season at Auburn. GUS= Bowden simple math

      • Hunter Ford March 7, 2014 at 7:47 pm #

        Bowden did not have a winning record against Alabama. Show me that he did.

        • peachy March 8, 2014 at 3:50 pm #

          Bowden was 3-2. He played them 5 times; 93, 94, 95, 96 and 97. He was fired before playing them in the 98 season. So yes, Bowden had a winning record v/s Alabama

          • Hunter Ford March 8, 2014 at 7:36 pm #

            So Peachy, you are saying that Bowden could have won against Alabama is the All-barns had not fired him.. Actually I think he quit. Gus= Bowden enjoy it while you can. You have to count that game in 98 cause Bowden was the coach at the start of the season…I guess… Why do ya’ll ass backward Aubies git rid of coaches in such a knee-jerk reaction way? Y’all recently fired a coach who gave you a natty for the first time in modern times… you ran off Tuberville who was arguably your best coach ever… Aubies???? yall are a mess.

          • peachy March 8, 2014 at 9:16 pm #

            No moron, you don’t count a game against a coach when the coach wasn’t the coach of the team. He wasn’t at the game, wasn’t on the sideline, had nothing to do with the play calling.

            FACT: Terry Bowden had a winning record against Alabama.

          • Hunter Ford March 10, 2014 at 9:36 am #

            I’ll concede that Bowden had a winning record in games he coached, but it is equally a fact that teams he was responsible for putting together DID NOT have a winning record. I still find it absurd that Auburn has ran off a coach that beat Alabama six years in a row, one that won a national championship, and Bowden who was undefeated through most of his first two entire seasons, and had a winning record against Alabama in games he coached. Again, Aubies are a mess.

    • Hunter Ford March 6, 2014 at 6:22 pm #

      Conduit…good point. There is some common sense to the whole injury thing..to bring up another point. Every time you drive a car you have a chance to have an accident. The less you drive the less chance you can have an accident. The more football plays you participate in, the more chance for injury. The fewer plays you are exposed to…the chance of injury is less. Simple math. Gus= Bowden ROLL TIDE… I should start saying GUS= Buster Brown Bowden

      • Elite tiger March 7, 2014 at 7:31 am #

        Buster Brown is taller than Nick. Just saying.

        • Hunter Ford March 7, 2014 at 7:48 pm #

          Prove it you got medical records?

          • elite tiger March 9, 2014 at 3:30 pm #

            Yes I do, and Nick refuses to release them, along with how many players you have on scholarship at any one time. Bowden is a couple inches taller than Nick, but it doesn’t matter how tall you are as far as to whether one can coach. By the way, do you have medical records to back up your claim that Nick is taller, or that he is allowed to ride the adult rides at Six Flags?

      • Elite tiger March 7, 2014 at 7:35 am #

        The solution to this is to practice, instead of play the game. After all, the injury chance is 7 to 1. But none of us want to just see practice. Unfortunately people get hurt, because it is a physical game.

      • peachy March 7, 2014 at 9:18 am #

        Has Saban came out in favor of fewer games? How about shorter quarters? Has he said anything about eliminating OT?

        Doesn’t Saban actually favor playing MORE conference games?

        His whole argument that its about “safety” is straight up BS. If he wanted fewer chances for players to get hurt he would go other routes. He sure wouldn’t be wanting to add MORE conference games where there would be MORE chances for players to get hurt.

        He just doesn’t want to defend these offenses. He doesn’t want to defend Malzahn.

        Its going to be fun this year. This years Auburn offense will make last years look slow.

        • The Conduit March 7, 2014 at 11:20 am #

          @peachy

          Seriously? Nick Saban doesn’t want to play against Malzahn?

          I think Malzahn doesn’t want to allow defensive substitutions the HUNH is designed to prevent.

          You know, defensive substitutions like we had just 6 years ago when the rules were changed for the 40-second clock instead of refereee-plus-25 and the hurry-up-no-huddle becamse the hurry-up-no-huddle-no-substitiutions?

          Wait, the rules changed? I thought you wanted the rules to remain the same as they always were? Forgot about that part, huh? Interesting.

          You’ll blame Saban again when this comes up, but it simply isn’t the last we’ll hear about this, like it or not, safety or not (which is irresponsible to ignore but not the core point regardless).

          • afan March 7, 2014 at 12:18 pm #

            Nick Saban doesn’t give 2 sh!ts about player safety. He doesn’t like the way the game is being played so he is looking for a reason to change it. Saban wants to implement a defensive scheme for every down, distance, and field position and to do that he has to substitute on every play. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, however the game doesn’t have to be played like that. If an offensive scheme is run in such a manner to limit defensive substitutions and fatigue the defensive players, so what? That’s a tactic just like defensive scheming requiring substitution after every play. Whatever scheme a team employs should play to its strengths. When an offensive scheme is run to limit substitutions and fatigue the defense, then practice, preparation, and conditioning tend to have greater importance than in game coaching. In that world the outcome of a game is put more on the players than it is on the coaches – and that is what Saban does not want. To say that more plays is a player safety issue is just a convenient crutch for people who don’t like fast offenses. If player safety were a real concern the number of games would be reduced and the quarters would be shortened. This is simply an argument about style of play.

          • The Conduit March 7, 2014 at 12:53 pm #

            I agree, and the game was never able to be exploited by a hurry-up at all….until the game was changed in 2008.

            You don’t want the committee to change football and it should always be the same?

            Wait, you don’t want Nick Saban to change football because that’s what you think is happenning?

            How come the 40-second-clock rule change just 6 years ago is the reason the hurry-up-no-huddle-no-substitution combination was simply impossible before then?

            Rules, that’s why. The HUNHNS exploited the rule, even if the basis for the rule was sound (and still is).

            Meanwhile, this proposal wasn’t ever (nor was Saban) designed to stop the HUNHNS, just the NS part. That’s it. That’s why you’re going to hear about it again. The 15 second rule change from 6 years ago gave birth to the exploitation, not the “football as it’s always been” argument, and this new proposal wouldn’t remove hurry-up or no-huddle or even a combination of both because they already existed when the clock was 25 seconds.

            Look, I don’t expect you to listen to me. Research the rule instead. Something tells me you weren’t upset about college football being changed forever by a rules committee in 2008, but you want to blame Saban instead now for Auburn being one of the teams to find the loophole in the way that rule changed the game forever (kinda like, “I didn’t know, Daddy”) and say 2008 is instead the birth of college football as we know it, not decades ago, but just six years ago.

            Do your homework, afan. I get that you hate Alabama, but this blind ignorance is getting out of control. All you can do is put words and allegations in Saban’s mouth but it’s clouding your judgment of the proposal in the first place and, again, this isn’t the last we’ll see of it and, frankly, I would only be surprised if the rule change year of 2015 doesn’t implement the loophole left six years ago when your precious rules were changed much more significantly than this proposal ever would or could have. So look it up. Go on.

          • afan March 7, 2014 at 2:35 pm #

            It’s not a loophole. All of you fast offense opponents are acting like football has always been played with first down specialists, third and long specialists, etc., etc. It used to be that a D lineman played on first down and on third down. Now we have nickel and dime packages that all but eliminate traditional D lineman. The game evolves and playing fast is just another evolution. Players use to play both ways now they don’t, the game evolves. To think that a player has to be substituted after every play is not a fundamental facet of football. I think the original rules to the game did not allow a player to go back in the game once he was substituted. As far as the 2008 rule change, one of the reasons it was implemented was to allow both teams to have more possessions during a football game. One purpose was to loosen up the game and increase the opportunities for both teams to score. Before the 40 second play clock change, it was possible for a team to take the opening kickoff of a half and keep the ball the entire quarter. Auburn did that against Florida and
            Spurrier one year and Spurrier raised the question “Is that what we want football to be?” – 4 possessions a game? You don’t have to like how the game is being played today and if you or Saban thinks there is a better way for it to be played, then by all means bring it to the table for debate. But to claim there is a player safety issue that must be addressed is dishonest and trivializes player safety. The whole approach to this from a player safety perspective has been wrong and to claim there is a loophole is also wrong. The intent of the 40 second play clock rule was to speed up the game. It has. Is the game being played faster than Saban would like, apparently so. Does that mean the game is being played in a way it should not be? Well that is up for debate, but viewership, ratings, and sports rights values would tell you that the game has only grown in popularity sense 2008.

          • afan March 7, 2014 at 3:17 pm #

            Here’s some research for you. The game is being played just like people thought it would be played. There is no loophole…

            http://timesfreepress.com/news/2008/jul/27/collegians-adjust-40-second-clock/

            “For all of our lives in college football, we’ve been used to the referee making the ball ready for play and starting the 25-second clock on every single play,” said Rogers Redding, the SEC’s coordinator of officials. “For the first time in the history of college football, that’s not going to be the case most of the time. The way it’s going to work is when the ball is dead without any signal from the referee, just a dead-ball signal from the covering official, the 40-second clock will start ticking down.

            “The referee will not declare it ready for play. It will be ready for play when the umpire places the ball on the ground and steps away.”

            South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier said the new rule, which is the NCAA’s third major clock-related change in as many years, favors no-huddle offenses and allows quarterbacks more time to read defenses. Georgia’s Mark Richt labeled himself “jealous” when asked about the change, because he tried to play fast earlier this decade with David Greene at quarterback.

            “Seven years ago, I would have been thrilled about it,” Richt said. “My ambition was to play as fast as we could possibly play and run the no-huddle and get to the line of scrimmage as fast as possible and get the ball snapped in a hurry and run as many plays as possible. We were not allowed to do that.

            “In my opinion, the officials in this league were more deliberate than in any league I had been. The SEC, to me, was grinding it to a halt. Now, all of a sudden, you can play as fast as you want to play.”

            Offenses still can’t substitute freely or go from one personnel group to another and snap the ball quickly, and defenses still will get time to make their own personnel changes. Yet SEC coaches agree that offenses that want to go fast can go faster now, or they can stay at the line of scrimmage a lot longer.

            “The officials are going to get out of the way, and there might still be 30 or 32 seconds on that 40-second clock, where before the most you would ever have is 25 at the line,” Richt said. “I think you’re going to see more teams quick-snapping it, and I think you’re going to see more teams also simulating like they’re going to quick-snap to try to recognize what’s going on and then sit there at the line of scrimmage and have literally 20 or 25 seconds to deliberate.

            “That might drive some people nuts. I don’t know.”

          • afan March 7, 2014 at 3:22 pm #

            And here’s another one for you from the AJC.

            Take special note of the last line. The rule was changed to produce more plays and more points…

            “NCAA extends play clock
            Pace of play addressed again by rules committee

            By TONY BARNHART
            The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

            Two years ago the NCAA Football Rules committee, concerned that games were running too long, put in a series of changes in hopes of speeding things up.

            They worked. In 2006 the average game time dropped from 3:21 to 3:07 but fans and coaches howled because there were about 13 fewer plays and five fewer points per game than in 2005.

            So last season college football went back to the old rules and the bad news is that games averaged 3:22, a minute longer than in 2005. The good news is that plays and scoring also went back to the desired 2005 levels.

            In an attempt to produce more plays and points in a shorter game, the rules committee went back to the drawing board and on Wednesday recommended a few changes for the upcoming season.

          • peachy March 7, 2014 at 3:41 pm #

            Your coaches main argument is for safety. He even restated that AFTER they shelved this rule. And again, if its about safety to him because of the number of plays why isn’t he petitioning for shorter seasons, less games or shorter games? He wants to focus on ONE offensive style; which happens to be the offense that gives him the most trouble. He could be petitioning for the clock to run after first downs, go back to 11 games, no conference title game, no play-offs, etc. But no, he focuses on ONE offense that gives him fits.

            And his whole style of play is based on exhausting and wearing out the opponent. Where is his concern for safety when his 300+ pound linemen are crushing the smaller players on FCS teams? Doesn’t seem to bother him then. He WANTS to beat his opponent into submission. But when it happens to him he’s suddenly concerned with “safety”.

            He’s just full of crap. He knows Malzahn can beat him and can do it consistently. He knows his oversized defense gets worn down by these offenses.

          • The Conduit March 7, 2014 at 4:11 pm #

            You left out the part about how that rule change from 2008 that you don’t cry about (I thought you wanted college football to stay the way it was and not change rules from 100 years ago?) allowed only one change.

            Once again you missed the point and immediately deflected, both of you.

            Hurry-up already existed in 2007.

            No-huddle wasn’t entirely uncommon.

            It’s the no-substitution part that the 2008 rule change created a loophole with. HUNH teams don’t necesarily exploit it outright, but Oregon and Auburn in particular do seem to try more often than most to deliberately enhance the side effect of no substitutions. It’s not on every play, but then again, isn’t that the point of this new proposal in the first place? Most plays would never be affected. Why? Here it comes.

            Let’s have a thought party now that you have literature. Why 15 seconds? There’s a very important reason the clock was changed by that amount. I’ll let you answer this one; I seem to be answering everything for you.

            Once again, Saban didn’t bring it to the table for debate like you’re suggesting we all should now (?).
            He created the debate by being a part of the after-thought of a committee’s already-written rule proposal, one which he didn’t even vote on, by the way. Again, the proposal itself was relatively benign execpt for teams trying to exploit the no-substitutions and only the no-substitutions part as a result of the 15-second replacement. And again, research why it’s 15-seconds. It’s incredibly relevant, as is the ten-second proposal’s purpose not being a coincidence.

            Let me be more deliberately expressive so you don’t try to put words in my mouth again; the clock change itself is NOT the problem.

            Let me repeat; the clock change is NOT the problem, nor do I have a problem with it whatsoever and, in fact, I’m totally agreeing with everything the coaches are saying about the ability to play fast and the inherent purpose for the clock change rule in 2008. I don’t have to like placards with pokemon and cereal brand icons on them, but you’re suggesting we’re making excuses while ignoring the only thing the rule change didn’t explicitly address or allow, which is why the loophole created by the no-substitutions part of the HUNHNS simply couldn’t exist before 2008. It didn’t exist because it couldn’t and the 40-second clock wasn’t designed to address it because it’s purpose was inherently to change the pace of the game, not to deliberately stop defensive substitutions from being in control by anyone other than the offense, hence why it’s called a loophole, make sense?

            Or do you think the 40-second clock was created deliberately to give the offense control of a defense’s opportinities to substitute?

            Let me know what you find. Or don’t. I don’t think you’ll like what you find, or when this comes up again next year with a more specific relevance.

          • peachy March 7, 2014 at 6:25 pm #

            First of all, there’s no rule against the defense subbing on every play. In fact, if you have your defense prepared you can sub on every play no matter what offense you face. Auburn and TAMU managed to do it against EACH OTHER. Are you telling me their DCs are better prepared than Saban and his DC? Go rewatch the Iron Bowl (though I know its painful). Alabama doesn’t seem to have much problem subbing. They seemed to be doing a pretty good job at it. It wasn’t the hurry up that caused them to give up 300 yards rushing; it was the scheme, the playing calling and the players. Had nothing to do with no being able to sub.

            What Saban wants is to be able to control the pace of the offense. Fact is, offense dictates pace. That’s a fact in any possession sport.

            Alabama ran 80 plays last year in their game against Kentucky. Where was Sabans concern during that game?

          • afan March 7, 2014 at 7:27 pm #

            You have no idea what you are talking about or deliberately choose to be ignorant. Saban and Bert have been lobbying for a change for more than a year. They broguht it up last summer and have continued to talk about it. There are numerous articles you can find on SI.com from 2013 talking about how Saban wants to change the way the game is played. The 10 second proposal is a direct result of Saban’s efforts in lobbying for a change. Only an idiot would believe that Saban was asked out of the blue to comment on the rule proposal when the committee decided to make the proposal. Saban and Bert were there because they had been lobbying for achange for more than there

          • The Conduit March 9, 2014 at 9:32 pm #

            @afan

            Then why didn’t Saban vote on it anyway?

            Stop making gross assumptions and calling me ignorant for not believing the “truth” while you refuse to see the proposal any more clearly than Rich Rod.

          • Afan March 9, 2014 at 10:26 pm #

            @conduit

            You have got to be kidding. Nick Saban could no more vote for that proposal than you could. He’s not a member of the committee, he had no vote to cast.

            Everyone knows the reason behind the proposal – it was a direct result of Saban’s lobbying efforts. If it had truly been a legit proposal that had been proposed based on its merits versus one guy’s idea of how football should be played it would have been put to a vote. Bert even said that once player safety proposals are sent to the rule making committee they always pass, the vote is just a formality. Of course this one did not make it to a vote b/c it did not have the support of the committee. If that doesn’t tell you that the proposal was just Saban’s and Bert’s idea then you will never see the truth.

          • The Conduit March 10, 2014 at 9:05 am #

            @afan

            That’s right, he can’t vote, but you’re the one saying he has more power than any vote ever could. See what I mean? Where does anyone go from here? Do we change the name of football to Sabanball or is there any way to consider that maybe the people who control the sport’s rules (and, consequently, perhaps even Saban himself) have the best in mind?

            But you keep saying it’s all Nick Saban. Brilliant. I’m the one who can’t see “the truth?” Or you’re blinded by your hate? Is it possible? When the committee makes a new proposal next year that does pass and simply fixes the 2008 loophole to allow defensive substitutions the way the sport always had before 2008 will you once again blame Saban? I think you will. I can’t relate to that kind of apathy, but then again, my university outright tells me not to.

          • The Conduit March 10, 2014 at 9:15 am #

            Let me put it to you this way; what if Saban hadn’t lost to Auburn this season? What if he got the three-peat? Would this February have been any different?

            After all, the 2013 Iron Bowl & the 2012 TAMU game were all winnable football games for Alabama, yes? I’m not arguing that they won, I’m saying they could have and nearly did, so for the sake of the argument let’s assume Alabama made any one of five missed field goals at Jordan Hare or ran the football on any one of four consecutive passing plays against TAMU in 2012, for example.

            Does the fact that the rules proposal would have still happened mean anything to you? Does the fact that Saban would have still supported it make it somehow less relevant or less about a consipracy to control the teams that nobody defended better than Alabama, even with a young team? Do you really think football is that big of a conspiracy and Alabama is that bad at football but instead that good at controlling the sport itself through rules and excuses?

          • afan March 10, 2014 at 10:39 am #

            @conduit

            You are either dim witted or knowingly say things in hopes that no one notices all of the fallacies in your statements.

            Lobbyists by their nature have more power than any one voter could ever have. A lobbyist’s intent is to influence all voters to vote in a way that they want. Saban is a lobbyist. His intent was to convince the committee to pass a rule that he wanted passed based on a reason that did not exist.

            I don’t hate Saban. I just don’t agree with his approach to changing the game to the way he wants it played. There is no player safety issue and there is no loophole. He was wrong and when the committee had time to listen to EVERY point of view and not just Saban and Bert, the committee realized it as well.

            I’m sorry to be the one to break it to you, but Nick Saban is human. He is not always right and just because he wants things a certain way does not mean that everyone else will agree with him. Saban wants the game played so that he can substitute on every play according to the circumstances. He wants to be the Wizard of Oz and choreograph every play. Its obvious that the vast majority of the people interested in CFB do not agree with him. That’s not hate, that’s called discernment.

          • The Conduit March 10, 2014 at 12:50 pm #

            Only human, indeed.

            It’s clouded your ability to think beyond what you’ve convinced yourself is the clear and simple truth, that’s all.

            Again, what if Nick Saban was never involved at any point in the last two years, nevermind the last month? That’s all you can see it as and I think that’s the part that’s making it so one-sided for you. It happened without him, but you can’t figure that part out.

            If you think not being able to substitue presents no safety issue whatsoever, we’ll just have to stop right there and I’ll agree with the doctors and the NHL (hockey is the closest I could think for safety and they changed a very similar rule for the same purpose) et. al. while you say this is just an excuse by a coach (or a committee, I can’t figure out who thinks what happened anymore but I’m still betting Saban won’t be the next coach at Texas come 2016) who is less afraid of missing field goals than using suits and ties to stop an offense born of the 2008 rule change. Never mind that it’s not only a safety issue to begin with, but you can’t even see it any other way because of what you’ve convinced yourself to be fact about Saban controlling suits in order to control offenses, but even that is only a result of Saban’s involvement and not the committee’s choices in the first place. Only human, indeed. You got what you wanted, and next year they’ll make the proposal the right way, the way the 2008 rule change wasn’t ever meant to change that part of the sport.

          • afan March 10, 2014 at 1:57 pm #

            The proposal did not happen without him, it happened because of him. He’s been lobbying for a change since 2012…

            http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2012/10/is_this_what_we_want_football.html

            Ignore the facts all you want, make up things to suit your arguments, but the truth will still be the same. If the proposal had actually been the result of something that the committee had deliberated on under the normal course of business where they get feedback from all of the stakeholders it would have been voted on and it would have passed. Bert said it himself, once the rule is proposed it always passes, the vote is just a formality. It didn’t happen this time because the proposal was a direct result of the lobbying efforts of Saban and Bert, it wasn’t a thoughtful, studied proposal for the good of the game. Calhoun said as much after the proposal was made – maybe we should go back and actually look at something. When was the last time a rule was proposed and it was not voted on or it was voted down?

          • The Conduit March 10, 2014 at 2:44 pm #

            Such a pity.

            You really do believe Saban plays the rule committee like pawns.

            Unbelievable.

            Sorry about your loss. At least now you have a year to prepare for the new rule next March.

        • Hunter Ford March 7, 2014 at 7:51 pm #

          I would eliminate OT in regular season games…. If I were king… and it is good to be the king…right?

  15. Hunter Ford March 7, 2014 at 7:57 pm #

    Go back to kicking filed goals off of those block tees and the goal posts are wider…Alabama is undefeated four the past 5 or 6 years

    • Hunter Ford March 10, 2014 at 7:43 pm #

      Tap…Tap.. is this mic on? Take my wife please…

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Think Saban Is Scared Of The HUNH? Stats Say Otherwise : BamaFootball4Life - March 5, 2014

    […] But statistics against this cheap form of football suggest something else entirely. If you’re an Auburn fan reading this, I know facts are tiring, and superlative sarcasm is preferred. But numbers don’t lie. Now, I’m no mathmatician, but it appears that of the true hurry up, no huddle games we’ve looked at, Saban’s defense pitched two complete shut-outs while etching a mark of 5-3. Not to mention that two of the three losses came at the hands of teams aided by two eventual Heisman winners, yet still required Crimson collapse in other areas to make victory possible. And those three losses? Yeah, they were by a total of 12 points. The only people that are actually afraid are those fearing their loophole is about to close, making beating Nick Saban on a level playing field dang near impossible. [More] […]

  2. Fear of Saban manifested in premature 10-second celebration | Capstone Report - March 12, 2014

    […] 3, 2014 Think Saban is scared of the HUNH? Stats say otherwise Alabama Football News […]

%d bloggers like this: