gilstein21
Well-Known Member
figured we needed a thread for general off season discussion that may not relate to a single team/conference.
-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
Beardown About...Rose Bowl #0
- Thread starter gilstein21
- Start date
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
we'll start with the new rule proposals
1. Picking up the flag for an overturned targeting penalty.
2. Slowing down hurry up offenses.
http://espn.go.com/college-football...w-ncaa-football-rule-allow-early-subs-defense
1. Picking up the flag for an overturned targeting penalty.
2. Slowing down hurry up offenses.
http://espn.go.com/college-football...w-ncaa-football-rule-allow-early-subs-defense
Leach is on point as usual: "That’s really insulting that they are hiding behind player safety just because somebody wants an advantage. That’s crazy… My suggestion is rather than spending a bunch of time coming up with a bunch of really stupid rules, spend that time coaching harder. Worry about your own team and try to make your product better rather than trying to change the game so you don’t have to do anything.”
"First off, doubt it will pass. Second, it’s ridiculous. All this tinkering is ridiculous. I think it deteriorates the game. It’s always been a game of creativity and strategy. So anytime someone doesn’t want to go back to the drawing board or re-work their solutions to problems, then what they do is to beg for a rule. I think it’s disgusting.”
Rich Rod too: "It’s a joke. It’s ridiculous. And what’s most ridiculous is did you see what the penalty is going to be called? Delay of game! How is that a delay of game? That’s the ultimate rules committee decision. Make the game slower and call it delay of game.”
"First off, doubt it will pass. Second, it’s ridiculous. All this tinkering is ridiculous. I think it deteriorates the game. It’s always been a game of creativity and strategy. So anytime someone doesn’t want to go back to the drawing board or re-work their solutions to problems, then what they do is to beg for a rule. I think it’s disgusting.”
Rich Rod too: "It’s a joke. It’s ridiculous. And what’s most ridiculous is did you see what the penalty is going to be called? Delay of game! How is that a delay of game? That’s the ultimate rules committee decision. Make the game slower and call it delay of game.”
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
this is from the college football matrix website
For all of FBS football in 2012, the ‘fast’ teams averaged over 17 plays per game more than the bottom 20 ‘slow’ teams. This is 26% more plays run per game than a ‘slow’ teams. Even though this adds up to over 340 more plays run in a season, the ‘slow’ teams still lost 8 more starts to injury than the ‘fast teams.
The average number of starts lost per play was 33% HIGHER for the ‘slow’ teams. Although this is all FBS programs and just the 2012 season, that is a huge argument in favor of ‘fast’ play.I know, I was thinking the same thing you are “That’s all FBS teams Dave, how about just big boy AQ football.” If you were hoping the numbers got better. Stop here. It gets worse.
The top 15 ‘fast*’ teams in AQ football in 2012 ran 2697 MORE plays than the 15 ‘slow’ teams in 2012. This resulted in 24 FEWER starts lost to injury to the ‘Fast’ teams. The ‘fast’ teams lost just 5.87 starts to injury in 2012 which is 22.7% less that the 7.50 starts lost per team for the ‘slow’ teams. The amazing stat is that injuries that created starts lost per play occurred at a rate 56% greater for teams that play ‘slow’.
Top 15 ‘Fast’ Teams in AQ Football 2012
Average Plays per Game: 81.2
Total Starts Lost to Injury: 88
Average Number of Starts Lost Per Team: 5.87
Average Starts Lost per Play: .072
Top 15 ‘Slow’ Teams in AQ Football 2012
Average Plays per Game: 66.2
Total Starts Lost to Injury: 112
Average Number of Starts Lost Per Team: 7.50
Average Starts Lost per Play: .113
For all of FBS football in 2012, the ‘fast’ teams averaged over 17 plays per game more than the bottom 20 ‘slow’ teams. This is 26% more plays run per game than a ‘slow’ teams. Even though this adds up to over 340 more plays run in a season, the ‘slow’ teams still lost 8 more starts to injury than the ‘fast teams.
The average number of starts lost per play was 33% HIGHER for the ‘slow’ teams. Although this is all FBS programs and just the 2012 season, that is a huge argument in favor of ‘fast’ play.I know, I was thinking the same thing you are “That’s all FBS teams Dave, how about just big boy AQ football.” If you were hoping the numbers got better. Stop here. It gets worse.
The top 15 ‘fast*’ teams in AQ football in 2012 ran 2697 MORE plays than the 15 ‘slow’ teams in 2012. This resulted in 24 FEWER starts lost to injury to the ‘Fast’ teams. The ‘fast’ teams lost just 5.87 starts to injury in 2012 which is 22.7% less that the 7.50 starts lost per team for the ‘slow’ teams. The amazing stat is that injuries that created starts lost per play occurred at a rate 56% greater for teams that play ‘slow’.
Top 15 ‘Fast’ Teams in AQ Football 2012
Average Plays per Game: 81.2
Total Starts Lost to Injury: 88
Average Number of Starts Lost Per Team: 5.87
Average Starts Lost per Play: .072
Top 15 ‘Slow’ Teams in AQ Football 2012
Average Plays per Game: 66.2
Total Starts Lost to Injury: 112
Average Number of Starts Lost Per Team: 7.50
Average Starts Lost per Play: .113
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
this also looks at offensive snaps per team per game average over the last 13 or so seasons
2000: 70.9
2001: 71.4
2002: 70.7
2003: 70.9
2004: 70.2
2005: 70.7
2006: 63.9 (The year rules changed, allowing the clock to run)
2007: 71.9
2008: 67.7
2009: 67.7
2010: 68.3
2011: 69.7
2012: 71.4
2013: 71.9
2000: 70.9
2001: 71.4
2002: 70.7
2003: 70.9
2004: 70.2
2005: 70.7
2006: 63.9 (The year rules changed, allowing the clock to run)
2007: 71.9
2008: 67.7
2009: 67.7
2010: 68.3
2011: 69.7
2012: 71.4
2013: 71.9
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
I loved the Pirates comments earlier when I read them too. There are 11 voting members to the rules committee; that includes 7 women. Saban and Fat Boy may be able to player safety them into voting for it, but there'd be a huge outcry against it. Here are the voting members:
Shelley Appelbaum, senior women's administrator, Michigan State.
Derita Ratcliffe, senior women's administrator, UAB.
Jeff Hurd, commissioner, WAC.
Noreen Morris, commissioner, Northeast Conference.
Lisa Sweany, AD, Armstrong Atlantic State University.
Kristy Bayer, senior women's administrator, Arkansas Tech.
Doug Zipp, AD, Shenandoah University.
Lynn Oberbillig, AD, Smith College.
Sue Lauder, AD, Fitchburg State University
Larry Scott, PAC-12 Commissioner
Jon Steinbrecher, MAC Commissioner
Shelley Appelbaum, senior women's administrator, Michigan State.
Derita Ratcliffe, senior women's administrator, UAB.
Jeff Hurd, commissioner, WAC.
Noreen Morris, commissioner, Northeast Conference.
Lisa Sweany, AD, Armstrong Atlantic State University.
Kristy Bayer, senior women's administrator, Arkansas Tech.
Doug Zipp, AD, Shenandoah University.
Lynn Oberbillig, AD, Smith College.
Sue Lauder, AD, Fitchburg State University
Larry Scott, PAC-12 Commissioner
Jon Steinbrecher, MAC Commissioner
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
the clock ran when the ball was kicked. Remember Fat Boy used this rule to run out the clock against Penn St. He kept kicking it out of bounds or something, but Penn St couldn't just take the ball at the spot, Wisconsin had to rekick. They kept doing it til the clock was on zero.
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
the next season after fatboy's stunt. The reason was to speed up the game for TV time slots, but in the end I don't think it did much, and it pissed everyone off.
Not sure about everybody but I see 3 votes against it right off the bat. Pac-12, MAC, and WAC.
nowitsourtime
Well-Known Member
Lulz, Saban will really do anything to try to get rid of the teams that ruin his national championship run. College Football will be much less enjoyable if no-huddle is slowed down by rule changes. The only way we'd see less injuries as a result of a slow tempo game is the elimination of all those phantom injuries these slow teams pull.
This Mike Leach radio interview on the defensive substitution rule change proposal is golden. I love that guy.
http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/wjox/media/mp3/Mike_Leach-1392337109.mp3
http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/wjox/media/mp3/Mike_Leach-1392337109.mp3
coogrfan
Well-Known Member
Kevin Sumlin chimes in on the proposal to slow down spread offenses:
“The issue of player safety has been unsubstantiated,” Sumlin said. “How this proposal came about without the other side being able to speak to the committee, that’s a concern, particularly when you look at three of the four coaches in there. Arkansas was 121st in snaps per game, Alabama was 116th and Air Force was 104th. To say there’s no agenda here, I think you have to question that.”
Amen, coach. A-frakking-men.
“The issue of player safety has been unsubstantiated,” Sumlin said. “How this proposal came about without the other side being able to speak to the committee, that’s a concern, particularly when you look at three of the four coaches in there. Arkansas was 121st in snaps per game, Alabama was 116th and Air Force was 104th. To say there’s no agenda here, I think you have to question that.”
Amen, coach. A-frakking-men.
Exactly. Usually the NCAA and its rules committee isn't THIS obvious about the agenda they are trying to push. They aren't even trying to be covert here. If this rule proposal passes, it will be such an embarrassment to football. Like Leach said in that radio interview, the idiocy of calling delay of game on a team trying to speed up the game will make the entire sport look foolish.
Leach's points are right on, when did coaches stop having to coach? Football is cyclical, new strategies come and go and come back again, you have to adjust with it or you get left behind. These coaches are blatantly trying to say, we won't (or can't) be bothered to make the adjustments, so let's change the rule.
I don't mind the idea of pushing some advantages back towards the defense, but not by changing a rule that takes away the ONE advantage an offense has. Leach mentioned some interesting things in that interview. If you're going to do this in the name of "player safety" (lol), how about change that the defense has to come set before the snap just like the offense? Or how about the defense can't blitz more defenders than the offense has players in the tackle box? Those would have just the same impact on player safety as this idiot rule (none).
I've been thinking this over a ton since word of that proposal came out. Why not give teams 3-20 second substitution timeouts per half (in addition to the usual 3) that can be used any time during the game except the final two minutes of the half. Like basketball timeouts to stop a run. People have been using the term "basketball on grass" to describe some of these up-tempo spread offenses, why not give teams the one thing basketball coaches have to slow down a run? However, during a 20 second timeout, the only thing you can do is substitute. Coaches cannot leave the sideline and players on the field cannot leave the area of the field between the numbers unless being substituted. It is purely a timeout to substitute. Nothing more.
As soon as the 20 second timeout is signaled by the referee, the play clock will be set to 20 and run. At its conclusion, the play clock will reset to 40 and run immediately. At that point the ball is marked ready for play. If you substitute after the 20 seconds are up, you are flagged for illegal substitution. If you have too many men on the field after the 20 seconds are up, you are flagged for illegal substitution. If the ball is snapped and you're not lined up, you're shit out of luck, should have subbed faster. Also, if you have defensive players conveniently getting injured to slow down tempo, you'll be charged one of your 20 second timeouts. If you are out of 20 second timeouts, you'll be charged a five yard penalty. Not sure how that could be enforced, so refs would have to use judgment.
Leach's points are right on, when did coaches stop having to coach? Football is cyclical, new strategies come and go and come back again, you have to adjust with it or you get left behind. These coaches are blatantly trying to say, we won't (or can't) be bothered to make the adjustments, so let's change the rule.
I don't mind the idea of pushing some advantages back towards the defense, but not by changing a rule that takes away the ONE advantage an offense has. Leach mentioned some interesting things in that interview. If you're going to do this in the name of "player safety" (lol), how about change that the defense has to come set before the snap just like the offense? Or how about the defense can't blitz more defenders than the offense has players in the tackle box? Those would have just the same impact on player safety as this idiot rule (none).
I've been thinking this over a ton since word of that proposal came out. Why not give teams 3-20 second substitution timeouts per half (in addition to the usual 3) that can be used any time during the game except the final two minutes of the half. Like basketball timeouts to stop a run. People have been using the term "basketball on grass" to describe some of these up-tempo spread offenses, why not give teams the one thing basketball coaches have to slow down a run? However, during a 20 second timeout, the only thing you can do is substitute. Coaches cannot leave the sideline and players on the field cannot leave the area of the field between the numbers unless being substituted. It is purely a timeout to substitute. Nothing more.
As soon as the 20 second timeout is signaled by the referee, the play clock will be set to 20 and run. At its conclusion, the play clock will reset to 40 and run immediately. At that point the ball is marked ready for play. If you substitute after the 20 seconds are up, you are flagged for illegal substitution. If you have too many men on the field after the 20 seconds are up, you are flagged for illegal substitution. If the ball is snapped and you're not lined up, you're shit out of luck, should have subbed faster. Also, if you have defensive players conveniently getting injured to slow down tempo, you'll be charged one of your 20 second timeouts. If you are out of 20 second timeouts, you'll be charged a five yard penalty. Not sure how that could be enforced, so refs would have to use judgment.
Schauwn
Well-Known Member
That's where it all goes downhill. We saw how well that worked this year with targeting.
Don't blame the refs for targeting. It was a short sighted rule and they faced poor performance reviews if they didn't err on the side of caution. It was one of those "point of emphasis" things and a number of officials got negative performance reviews for failing to call above the shoulders contact, whether it was truly targeting or not. They were told to call anything close and then go to review to correct it. Unfortunately the rule forbid them from overturning the penalty, just the ejection. That rule will be fixed this year.
College football refs aren't always perfect (some aren't always even good) but they are far better than they get credit for. In the case of targeting, they were handcuffed by a really shitty rule that was impossible to correctly enforce.
It would not be very difficult to use judgment on injuries and an announced warning (like a sideline warning) could be given before any penalty was enforced. If you want to take it out of the officials hands, you can, but that would involve a rule that said "an injured player may not return to the field for the duration of the drive he was injured" and I don't think anyone would want.
College football refs aren't always perfect (some aren't always even good) but they are far better than they get credit for. In the case of targeting, they were handcuffed by a really shitty rule that was impossible to correctly enforce.
It would not be very difficult to use judgment on injuries and an announced warning (like a sideline warning) could be given before any penalty was enforced. If you want to take it out of the officials hands, you can, but that would involve a rule that said "an injured player may not return to the field for the duration of the drive he was injured" and I don't think anyone would want.
Judging whether someone is actually injured is not rocket science. If a guy all of a sudden plops down on the 5th play of a fast moving up-tempo drive and is right back out there, I think you can put 2 and 2 together. See this series of plays:
(Skip to 1:37:50, apparently you can't embed a video with a time code)
5 straight no sub up-tempo plays from Auburn, Alabama's NT goes down after the 5th, sits there a while absentmindedly pointing to his legs, trainers barely look, he goes to the bench and does not receive any additional medical attention. Auburn scored a play or two later so he didn't come back that drive, but he was back out there the very first play of the next drive. He was faking an injury because he is a 310 pound defensive lineman whose conditioning wasn't up to par and Auburn was exploiting it with inside zone after inside zone. Precisely the situation my 20 second substitution timeout idea is looking to rectify.
Any idiot can tell when a team is blatantly faking an injury, that is what I'm talking about penalizing. If a guy cramps up 2 plays into a drive, gets some attention and is back out 2 plays later, that's fine. It had no impact on the game. If a guy goes down 5 plays into a demoralizing up-tempo drive after getting gashed for 7 yards a carry and is back out 2 plays later, I think a warning is a pretty easy call to make.
(Skip to 1:37:50, apparently you can't embed a video with a time code)
5 straight no sub up-tempo plays from Auburn, Alabama's NT goes down after the 5th, sits there a while absentmindedly pointing to his legs, trainers barely look, he goes to the bench and does not receive any additional medical attention. Auburn scored a play or two later so he didn't come back that drive, but he was back out there the very first play of the next drive. He was faking an injury because he is a 310 pound defensive lineman whose conditioning wasn't up to par and Auburn was exploiting it with inside zone after inside zone. Precisely the situation my 20 second substitution timeout idea is looking to rectify.
Any idiot can tell when a team is blatantly faking an injury, that is what I'm talking about penalizing. If a guy cramps up 2 plays into a drive, gets some attention and is back out 2 plays later, that's fine. It had no impact on the game. If a guy goes down 5 plays into a demoralizing up-tempo drive after getting gashed for 7 yards a carry and is back out 2 plays later, I think a warning is a pretty easy call to make.
The obvious examples are the ones that need to be penalized. If players and coaches are spending their limited practice time perfecting faking injuries instead of conditioning so a player can go more than 5 plays without being winded, that's their choice, they won't be winning many games like that. The sad thing is, the coaches in favor of this new substitution rule are precisely the type of coaches who would do just that. They are looking for an easy out rather than coaching up their players.
I think my 3-20 second substitution timeout idea would please both sides. Offenses would be able to run up-tempo all they wanted. A team that runs 75 snaps a game would only have to worry about the defense using a substitution timeout on 6 of them. Defenses would have a legal recourse to stop the game momentarily to sub players in and out 3 times a half during an especially brutal up-tempo drive where they couldn't sub players in the traditional manner.
It should eliminate the defensive coaches whining about not having a chance to sub, it should eliminate defensive players needing to fake injuries to stop the game and it will do those things without completely negating the perfectly fair and legitimate strategy of up-tempo offense.
I think my 3-20 second substitution timeout idea would please both sides. Offenses would be able to run up-tempo all they wanted. A team that runs 75 snaps a game would only have to worry about the defense using a substitution timeout on 6 of them. Defenses would have a legal recourse to stop the game momentarily to sub players in and out 3 times a half during an especially brutal up-tempo drive where they couldn't sub players in the traditional manner.
It should eliminate the defensive coaches whining about not having a chance to sub, it should eliminate defensive players needing to fake injuries to stop the game and it will do those things without completely negating the perfectly fair and legitimate strategy of up-tempo offense.
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
i liked one of the coaches opinion's on this regarding the defense. If this goes through, then any defender who is blitzing must raise his hand pre snap.
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
or maybe just shorten the game by a second
worst2first
Well-Known Member
I heard a great interview today on KTCK The Ticket with Mike Leach about this ridiculous rule proposal. He was his usual greatness.
For the record, I'm all for leveling the playing field for the defense but this is not the way to do it.
For the record, I'm all for leveling the playing field for the defense but this is not the way to do it.
Last edited:
If we're talking about adjusting current rules, yeah, PI has to be on the top of the list in both college and pro. In college, they have got to stop flagging every little contact. Receivers can fully extend their arms and rarely get called, defenders tug a guy a little as he goes by and flag. In pros, they just need to change the enforcement. Spot foul is just idiocy. Can you imagine spot foul DPI in CFB? Teams would just launch it down field every play for a bail out flag.
In both CFB and NFL, they need to make a point of emphasis to call OPI, specifically picks. The Broncos abused the shit out of pick plays all year and the NFL let them get away with it. Didn't fly against a Seahawks team showing mostly Cover 3 zone and look what happened?
Would also like to see a point of emphasis on linemen down field. So many teams are running packaged plays these days and ending up with OL 5-7 yards down field. I think Chad Morris spoke up at the coaches convention just straight up saying "they are not calling linemen down field so we are going to release those guys 7-8 yards until they start flagging it."
You'd think those are things these defensive coaches would be complaining about well before whining about not having enough time to snap the ball. A couple of those issues actually are safety issues, unlike this bullshit about tempo being a safety issue. Pick plays are really dangerous (see Welker vs Talib) and having a 300 pound OL releasing down field to block a 200 pound safety without a flag sure isn't a safe venture.
That's just me though.
In both CFB and NFL, they need to make a point of emphasis to call OPI, specifically picks. The Broncos abused the shit out of pick plays all year and the NFL let them get away with it. Didn't fly against a Seahawks team showing mostly Cover 3 zone and look what happened?
Would also like to see a point of emphasis on linemen down field. So many teams are running packaged plays these days and ending up with OL 5-7 yards down field. I think Chad Morris spoke up at the coaches convention just straight up saying "they are not calling linemen down field so we are going to release those guys 7-8 yards until they start flagging it."
You'd think those are things these defensive coaches would be complaining about well before whining about not having enough time to snap the ball. A couple of those issues actually are safety issues, unlike this bullshit about tempo being a safety issue. Pick plays are really dangerous (see Welker vs Talib) and having a 300 pound OL releasing down field to block a 200 pound safety without a flag sure isn't a safe venture.
That's just me though.
bjc
Butt Naked Wonda
While only about 5 of the 16 violations were in football, this list of self-reported NCAA violations committed by Oklahoma State is a joke. Drop the hammer, lmao.
http://m.newsok.com/article/3934950
http://m.newsok.com/article/3934950
Last edited:
Hahahahaha those are hilarious. Just like Nebraska getting probation for giving "optional" textbooks to scholarship athletes rather than just the mandatory ones. The NCAA is so sad.
OSU is hardly the only Oklahoma school breaking ridiculous rules.
The tweets from those two athletes in the article are hilarious.
OSU is hardly the only Oklahoma school breaking ridiculous rules.
The tweets from those two athletes in the article are hilarious.
Last edited:
BearDownUofA
Festizio
I was just about to post that. This is sad and pathetic. Is the NCAA going to start checking every athlete's meals for calorie content now?
JSU Zack
How do I IT?
The delay of game rule proposal is a black mark on Saban. I'm not sure why one of the best defensive minds in the game has to resort to this. As a Bammer, it's shameful he can't get in a room with his staff and figure out a defense/personnel group to stop the up-tempo. I can't remember who said it, but "The easiest way to stop a no-huddle team is a 3 & out". Saban likes to make a point that his 3-4 scheme is capable defending spread defenses, but his linebackers have never been the athletic types. That combined with his love for run support safeties doesn't help him. His best bet is to recruit a different kind of players or quit whining.
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
GuyIncognito
pressure cooker full of skittles
I have a sneaking suspicion that this might be a case of OU football trolling the NCAA by reporting ridiculous violations that don't actually exist.
If so, it's the best thing ever. I have a hard time believing that compliance people just make up rules without checking.
If so, it's the best thing ever. I have a hard time believing that compliance people just make up rules without checking.
Hahaha that's too funny. My guess is the compliance people just wanted to be extra careful because you never know. There are some baffling NCAA rules, some of which are pretty generic so it is better to be safe than sorry. If the NCAA is out here putting the hammer down on schools for including optional textbooks or accidentally returning a phone call to an unknown number that happened to be that of a recruit, god knows what they'd do if they found out kids were getting extra servings of pasta.
If you've never been to a compliance briefing, you'd be in for a treat. There are just too funny to be taken seriously. My favorite two NCAA rules are: 1) Student-athletes can't use any school phones, athletic department or otherwise. 2) Student-athletes can't get rides from any staff member, athletic department or otherwise. Additionally, a student-athlete can't get a ride to an away game from anyone except a fellow student-athlete or his parents. So the parents of another student-athlete can't offer to drive a group of athletes to an away game.
Those two rules have always stuck with me as just ridiculous NCAA bullshit. My other favorite is that student-athletes can't use the printers in the athletic department offices. Heaven forbid they don't have to spend 10 cents on copies or print outs for class.
If you've never been to a compliance briefing, you'd be in for a treat. There are just too funny to be taken seriously. My favorite two NCAA rules are: 1) Student-athletes can't use any school phones, athletic department or otherwise. 2) Student-athletes can't get rides from any staff member, athletic department or otherwise. Additionally, a student-athlete can't get a ride to an away game from anyone except a fellow student-athlete or his parents. So the parents of another student-athlete can't offer to drive a group of athletes to an away game.
Those two rules have always stuck with me as just ridiculous NCAA bullshit. My other favorite is that student-athletes can't use the printers in the athletic department offices. Heaven forbid they don't have to spend 10 cents on copies or print outs for class.
JSU Zack
How do I IT?
@TXHusker05 To me the NCAA rules were made by folks who were not student-athletes to me.
JSU Zack
How do I IT?
As a reporter, I have to be careful how I interact with players on social media, particularly recruits who are yet to sign a LOE. One of our guys tweeted a basketball recruit from Ohio asking when he was visiting one of the OVC schools, and we received a complaint from said school. They didn't want to risk the NCAA levying sanctions even though we are an independent news site.
gilstein21
Well-Known Member
fuck this motherfucker
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/02/arkansas_bret_bielema_players.html
Might as well just quit playing any sport anyone has ever died in
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/02/arkansas_bret_bielema_players.html
Might as well just quit playing any sport anyone has ever died in