Those silly coaches have no idea what they are talking about. They use phrases like “skipping the huddle” (no-huddle) and “playing with pace” (hurry-up) to explain a way that the game was changed in a significant way back in the early 1990s. As we are all now painfully aware, that could not possibly be true. I mean, prior to the advent of the 40 second play clock, the defense could freely substitute prior to the ball being marked for play to offset any advantage. And what’s with this Dooley guy saying “Sometimes defenses just take some time to catch up with offensive innovations and when they do, coaches come up with a new way to get an edge.” Nobody else has ever made that same point on any message boards I read.
The writer also seems to be placing a lot of weight on what these guys are saying. Let’s get this straight now, their opinions can’t carry much weight given that all of the college football rules interpretations don’t rely on their opinions. Really, I’m not sure why anyone would ever ask anyone else their opinion on the matter - other than this one guy that knows it all. And, as we know from watching football, all of those who interpret the rules always agree. Remember, all the officials in the booth
always, or is never, agree with the replay officials when interpreting the rules during actual games.
Maybe they need someone to teach them some football history – I think I know just the guy.
See what I did there?
I blame midtnvol for any posts that follow, he did link the article after all.
