arrow-circle arrow-long-stroke arrow-stroke arrow-thick arrow-thin arrow-triangle icon 2 baseballCreated with Sketch. basketball calendar category check-circle check-square check comment facebook-circle facebook-icon facebook-rounded facebook-square facebook-stroke football instagram-circle instagram-icon instagram-square long-arrow-right rss-circle rss-rounded rss-square rss-stroke rss twitter-circle twitter-icon twitter-rounded twitter-square twitter-stroke user-group user

Hurry-up no-huddle player safety

By on February 13th, 2014 in Member Post 5 Comments »

Hey everyone,

A while back I read an analysis that showed that there were actually fewer injuries and minutes lost due to injury for teams that had hurry-up, no-huddle offenses.  Not just that, but teams playing them had fewer injuries during those games.  I thought it was on TET but I can’t find it anywhere.  It was done by an Auburn fan.

Does anyone know what I’m talking about and could send me a link?  I’ve tried searching the site (and the ‘net at large) but can’t find it.

Thanks!

5 Comments

  1. AubTigerman AubTigerman says:

    We at TET wrote several articles last summer about this subject. I think you might be referring to Acid’s July 25th piece, titled: “The Debate that Just Won’t Die” Link is: http://trackemtigers.com/?p=17002.
    In it he cited a story that may be what your thinking about.

    It was at College Football Matrix titled:
    “Speed May Kill, but Slow Can Hurt You on Offense”
    It was written by Dave Bartoo, National CFB Attrition Expert and Analytics Consultant.

    The link to it is:
    http://cfbmatrix.com/speed-may-kill-but-slow-gets-you-hurt/

  2. spanky says:

    Not exactly what you are looking for, but espn had an article today about new rule proposals regarding HUNH. The idea is to give the D a chance to substiute more easily. The way they got about this result is proposing a penalty on the offense if it snaps the ball before the 29 sec play clock mark. Just in talks at this point.

  3. Acid Reign Acid Reign says:

    …..Thanks, AubTigerman! What this new proposal does is allow the defense a little bit of time to substitute based on offensive personnel. Of course, you can substitute on defense now, if the coaches actually have guys prepared to run on and off as soon as the ball-carrier is tackled. Some coaches are lazy, and would rather have a helping hand from the rules.

  4. el757 says:

    Hey guys! None of this is exactly what I had in mind. Must have been a different blog. But the CFB Matrix article is great (as is Acid Reign’s analysis – as always). Thanks so much for the info! It just irritates me so much that without any evidence we’re letting a tiny dude with a Napoleon complex try to change the rules to give him an advantage.