You're mis-characterizing things, again. He's never made "an argument" stating more injuries happen with the HUNH.
This is the exact text from his original comments, when asked, about the no-huddle in
October of 2012 during the SEC teleconference.
"I think that the way people are going no-huddle right now, that at some point in time, we should look at how fast we allow the game to go in terms of player safety. The team gets in the same formation group, you can't substitute defensive players, you go on a 14-, 16-, 18-play drive and they're snapping the ball as fast as you can go and you look out there and all your players are walking around and can't even get lined up. That's when guys have a much greater chance of getting hurt when they're not ready to play.
"I think that's something that can be looked at. It's obviously created a tremendous advantage for the offense when teams are scoring 70 points and we're averaging 49.5 points a game. With people that do those kinds of things. More and more people are going to do it.
That statement was followed by the question,
"Is this what we want football to be?"
At that point the reports had him stating the no-huddle offense leads to more injuries. Did he say the no huddle leads to more injuries? No. Are there people saying he's said that? Yes. And, they're wrong.
This being presented under the "safety" monicker has to do with when it's implemented. The only way a rule can be instituted in 2014 is if it directly relates to player safety. That's wrong, no doubt. There's nothing to back that up.
IF it were brought up under "competitive advantage"—as it should have been—it wouldn't be on the "docket" until next season. If you want to point to a coach as the one who made that decision, point to Troy Calhoun.
Click to expand...