One of the uniquely but typically less publicized aspect of sports is the potential or non potential for rule changes within it. The technicalities and intricacies of what is allowed and how the game is structured has a massive affect on some sports more so than others. As with the offensively enhancing penalty rules in the NFL, substitution and clock management potentialities within collegiate football also serve to enhance the offensive capabilities within any contest.
In the last few years we have seen statistics and numbers unlike anything in the history of the game. Even in the country’s best conference, the SEC, gone are the days of grueling ground games and pro style schemes dominating the land. The spread offense is more or less a must for many programs and being able to dictate tempo and defensive match ups are as critical a component to success as there might be.
Several coaches have publicly commented regarding the potential rule changes being discussed in the collegiate game when it comes to being able to substitute fresh bodies in non dead ball situations. The current letter of the law leaves many defenses susceptible to elongated drives that are difficult to overcome depending on how many mismatches actually exist in any given match-up.
Nick Saban of Alabama and Bret Bielemea of Arkansas were two coaches to back the proposal of this potential rule change, which would inhibit the offense’s ability to snap the ball anytime prior to 29 seconds on what is a 40 second play clock.
Kevin Sumlin of Texas A&M and Rich Rodriguez of Arizona made strong statements deflating the likelihood that such changes would be a legitimate aspect of the game moving forward.
As is the case with many aspects of life, changes are hotly debated and never fully agreed upon. That’s a result of different people having different preferences, as is the case with the collegiate game. It just so happens that more and ore people within the college game clearly want to go up tempo and enhance the possibility of an “advanced flow” moving forward.
You can discuss the overall justifiability as to how the current rules in place either “inhibit player safety” or “maintain fundamental advantages,” but you probably aren’t going to come down to a designated answer. I get the idea that the offense, who possesses the ball, should have the right to dictate the way the game is essentially played.
But this isn’t like basketball where action is back and forth and pace is constantly changing. When you possess the ball in a football game, you have the ability to go into action for a set period of time and then return with what is essentially a reset in terms of formation.
That combined with the overall spacing on the field and the fact that there is so much space on the perimeter now being utilized in one on one scenarios makes it borderline impossible for certain defenses to stop the opposition. I’m not saying that isn’t fair, but isn’t the general idea of disallowing substitutions essentially a bit absurd at the same time?
Odds makers adjust to these sort of things far quicker than people realize, but its still difficult to gauge when rules are constantly changing. The recent alterations to the game that have led to more scoring at the pro level took a little bit of time to getting used to just the same, and moving away from that right now dilutes the product already established.
There is also an additional argument that teams like Florida State (who did not use an enhanced tempo until this year) and Alabama themselves clearly have enough other qualities to enable them to rise above the rest n matter how the “pace rules” shake out.
But those sort of scenarios are uncommon nowadays. It’s difficult to have a dynasty like the one Alabama enjoyed until the end of this season. The realization that they are basically still in the midst of a dynasty moving forward (and just took Florida State’s backup quarterback via transfer), makes things very much open that one of those two could continue to dominate regardless of the fact they are not most commonly spread-tempo groups.
But guys like Saban and others believe in core issues on the defensive end that enable them to stack there squads in ways that contain virtually any known offense. Their preference is defense first and let the offense come. They see themselves threatened by this sudden enhancement of tempo and what it could entail down the line.
You see, not everyone can build a defense comparable to Alabama. Ohio State used to come close, but following the end of Jim Tressel’s reign and as they moved into the Urban Meyer regime, it became apparent they were willing to go the way of the future so to speak.
Not only did OSU have a great offense last year, but so too did Auburn and Oregon. The Ducks have been doing this for a while and while they once, not too long ago, lost to the tigers in the national title game, they might be the team most responsible for triggering this sort of style.
Could it be possible that Saban sees what Auburn did with Nick Marshall and Tre Mason and wonders what’s next? Gus Malzahn took things to a new level this year. he did so with an attack rooted in the run game and also utilized a key player who used to be a defender. They featured a run based approach that is borderline impossible to defend given the fact they line up and attack you vertically from the get go with one of four bodies lined up close to the line of scrimmage.
Auburn ran for a ridiculous amount of yardage in the SEC title game against a Missouri defense that was excellent all season long. They also broke down Saban’s defense enough to hang around in a game that they eventually won almost miraculously.
The fact that Nick Marshall, a former starter in the secondary at Georgia, was used at quarterback was also incredibly telling. With all due respect to Marshall, he could barely throw it with enough consistency in the early part of the season to survive. But, he didn’t have to. The power run game they employed, stretched to the perimeter with Marshall who also proved capable of using cut back lanes thanks to his underrated raw physical power, made it vitally impossible to stop for many defenses.
I’m not saying just anyone can come a log and do what Malzahn did this year. His creativity and ability to change on the run was uncanny beyond belief. But if some of the elite coaches in the game can find guys like Marshall and create run based offenses that utilize an absurd flow that proves too difficult for anyone to stop, its quite apparent that you could see the defensive game disappear in many ways as we know it. You won’t see people ignore it, but if you have to use your 2-3 best specimens on the offensive end, it makes it difficult to gage just what you can do on the other side of the ball.
Some teams aren’t nearly deep enough or well developed enough as a program to not feel a heavy loss in that happening. But Saban has to know that there are certain schools out there potentially willing to try it if they have an offensive coach also willing to take chances and roll the divc.
No one knows what lies ahead in the college game. Look at how far it came over the course of a few decades since the 60’s and 70’s. It’s almost ridiculous to think about the scope of the game and how, at its core construction, how much more complex it is.
Nick Saban is undoubtedly brilliant and understands his competition enough to have an idea. You never know someone’s real motivation, and so hearing the media released thoughts of any major ball coach is always means for skepticism.
But there is a lot at stake with this potential rule change and the motivation of money as it applies to how popular the current game is could speak quite loudly. The evolution of the game is taking place right before us, and it’ll be quite interesting to see how it plays out.
