So much for player safety

I knew that once some coaches found out there was a strategic advantage, they’d accept the HUNH even after complaining it lead to injuries. IMO it was never about player injuries for some of these guys, but rather just didn’t care for the HUNH.

Dan Wolken‏ @DanWolken
Saban says he still disagrees philosophically with no-huddle offense but if it creates issues for the defense, you have to go that direction

I guess it’s like an ole classic rock band that can keep on rocking thru the ages.
Have to change with the times.

I don’t think it was not caring for the no-huddle, it was their inability to defend against it. Certainly my opinion about Saban and Bielema’s complaining about it. Because to some degree both coaches have used the no-huddle since complaining so loudly about the safety issue.

So, I think you are right, coaches use what will win games. Period.

I don’t doubt he believes its a safety issue, but that doesn’t mean he’s so concerned about safety he won’t use it. In a way, that’s just football. We disallow horse-collar tackling, crackback blocking, etc because they’re dangerous, but if they were suddenly made legal, every coach would use them.

As much as we all hate to admit it, if we were truly concerned about safety, we’d eliminate football altogether & maybe replace it with flag football or something like that. Football by its nature is dangerous. Still, we ought to make it as safe as practical without completely gutting the game. (And even that’s a bit hypocritical of me. I’m for safety, but I love football. It’s a conundrum.)

It was and is a health deal.

To say playing more plays is safer, is just not accurate in my opinion.

I think both Saban and Bielema care about their athletes so to mock that is is not really cool in my opinion.

But they also have to win games plain and simple.

Then have NO PLAYS…are you kidding me! It was all about not wanting to have to defend it!!! Plain & simple!!

Nick Saban put winning over player safety. I am not sure there is any other way to put it. He may care about player safety until the cows come home. But it is clear by his statement today that he cares more about winning.

Just as I said he did many years ago.

exactly! The “injury aspect” was a smoke screen. CNS ran the HUNH to a great extent last year!.. It had NOTHING to do with safety. That was their way to oppose it w/o sounding like sissies!

You guys are certainly are entitled to your opinions.

But by saying those two head coaches didn’t really mean their commits about health safety back then - well, what you are doing is basically calling your head coach Bret Bielema a bold-faced liar and saying he doesn’t care about his players.

Pretty simple to me that you can be a caring head coach, mean what you say, but then still have to adapt.

As for ending football, that seems rather hybolic instead of realistic.

[quote="DudleyDawson"] You guys are certainly are entitled to your opinions.

But by saying those two head coaches didn’t really mean their commits about health safety back then - well, what you are doing is basically calling your head coach Bret Bielema a bold-faced liar and saying he doesn’t care about his players.

Pretty simple to me that you can be a caring head coach, mean what you say, but then still have to adapt.

As for ending football, that seems rather hybolic instead of realistic.
[/quote]
If that last sentence is a response to my post, Dudley, you need to re-read what I said.

I do believe CBB is/was sincere about player safety regarding the HUNH offense, but Saban road on his coat tail with it, just so CBB would catch most of the heat for it.
Thing is, Saban won NC’s with hardnosed football and talent in the very recent past, so now he seems like a bandwagon jumper to me or maybe as Dudley said, just adapting to win as an excuse.

It was a general statement

I always quote if I am talking to one person specifically