Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

2025 College Football Thread


Joe Bear
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Offenses ball at the 1. Pretty much what happens everywhere else on the field when the ball is fumbled out of bounds. The ball is given to the possessing team at the spot of the fumble.

Yes but the end zone is actually different. It's the same with kickoffs. Basically there is no actual penalty for being wildly careless with the ball and a potential albeit unlikely avenue for offensive fugery. 

I think if you change it, make it the same rule as a punt/kickoff going out of the end zone or into the end zone. Same result.

That way you penalize the offense but not enough to change possession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really like giving the the offense the ball at the 1. Either the defense did their job, and caused a turnover, or the offensive player was an idiot and dropped the ball while going into the end zone.

Another 1 that gets complaints is the pass interference penalty being a spot penalty in the NFL, instead of 15 yards. Defenses would be incentivized to commit fouls on every pass over 15 yards.

That said, it is annoying that a real strategy is to go fishing for PI calls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yes but the end zone is actually different. It's the same with kickoffs. Basically there is no actual penalty for being wildly careless with the ball and a potential albeit unlikely avenue for offensive fugery. 

I think if you change it, make it the same rule as a punt/kickoff going out of the end zone or into the end zone. Same result.

That way you penalize the offense but not enough to change possession.

My point is that there shouldn't be any penalty. Everywhere else on the field a fumble out of bounds is no big deal. Same thing should apply in the endzone. Nowhere else kn the field can the ball change possession on a fumble without being recovered inbounds by the defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

My point is that there shouldn't be any penalty. Everywhere else on the field a fumble out of bounds is no big deal. Same thing should apply in the endzone. Nowhere else kn the field can the ball change possession on a fumble without being recovered inbounds by the defense.

Yes but the rules are always different in the end zone. PI, sacks, penalties, etc. 

That's why I don't bristle at it. The end zone almost always has a different set of rules for just about everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Yes but the rules are always different in the end zone. PI, sacks, penalties, etc. 

That's why I don't bristle at it. The end zone almost always has a different set of rules for just about everything.

My main issue is the change if possession. If you want to give it back to the offense at the 20 I still think that sucks but it's a helluva lit better than a turnover. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OldhamA said:

Oh hey, the Canes had a prime let down opportunity after a very good season with everyone talking about the inevitable injustice that's going to happen when they get left out of the Playoffs and what do you know, they only bloody went on the road and annihilated Pitt. 

Nobody really cares to be honest. I'm fine with them making the playoffs. Let them in and let them get skull drug by a legit playoff team and there, all is well. There's always gonna be a team or two squawking about how they should've been in no matter what. You still get it in the basketball tourney of 64. The teams on the bubble don't really have a chance anyway do whatever. I think the 12 team field is about perfect IMO. All of the legit contenders are sure to get in. No, Texas is not a legit contender.

  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

In other college football news:

 

Lanoris Sellers and Arch Manning........GO BACK TO SCHOOL AND KEEP PREPARING.

Not ready for prime time yet.

Not even debatable IMO. Tons of talent but I'm honestly not sure either are NFL QBs. Both might should just cash as many NIL checks as they can.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...