|
Post by gooutlaws on Apr 16, 2009 8:34:22 GMT -5
There seems to be a little bit of a question about how DBs can cover WRs coming out of the Outlaws/Grizzlies game. Here is the quote and article from the Fairbanks newspaper. newsminer.com/news/2009/apr/12/outlaws-destroy-grizzlies-indoor-stage-billings/I was just wondering if the Fairbanks coach is correct. I have never heard of the rule, but I know the IFL might have a few different twists than I am familiar with. I also do not know if the Outlaws were covering the WRs this way. I am not a coach and do not pretend to be, and one reason is I don't see the whole field well. And before I hear any cracks about the officials in Billings, I know they struggle and could be a lot better. I see it every game and it is frustrating. But if the IFL wants local officials and these guys are the only ones either willing or "qualified" to do the job I have to learn to live with these guys.
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Apr 16, 2009 9:54:01 GMT -5
I would doubt that is the rule in the UIF. Offensive numbers simply haven't been high enough to think that defenders were so limited.
Even the CIFL gets officiating assignments correctly...done at the league level, with guys rotating places.
|
|
|
Post by kratos on Apr 16, 2009 16:14:30 GMT -5
Can someone get ahold of all the rules and post them or maybe point us to where there at so we. can call coaches out when they are bull shiting and trying to make excuses.
With tired legs from nearly 20 hours of travel, the Grizzlies were unable to keep up with Billings’ receivers, who caught 13 passes for 181 yards and nine touchdowns.
“The long transportation isn’t an excuse, it’s just a variable,” Fairbanks coach Sean Ponder said by telephone.
So what they are telling me is that Maryland is one of the better teams in the league? They go up there lose by only 30 then they go and beat the Wild? All I know is that sounds like an excuse and they really shouldnt use that one. I say play the game and if you lose get over it and just play next week. And also how does traveling make you tired? It not like your walking all over the place, you get to sleep on the plane its just one big joke to me.
|
|
|
Post by Bouncer_Texxx on Apr 16, 2009 16:59:07 GMT -5
they lost to the best team in the league, by a LOT. Apparently some of the coaches weren't told that the UIF rules were going to be used. All of them.
a lot of good your league dues are doing boys, time to start demanding better. the change has to come from within. Us fans aren't going to abandon our individual teams (I'm certainly not)
|
|
|
Post by msantamaria on Apr 16, 2009 18:56:34 GMT -5
I don't have a full list of rules, but I do have documentation of some of the major rule changes made in the offseason that I received before the first homegame of the year. If I find the sheet (doubtful considering I'm the least organized person on the planet), I'll copy the highlights.
|
|
|
Post by kratos on Apr 16, 2009 20:14:56 GMT -5
Ok thanx
|
|
|
Post by afan on Apr 16, 2009 20:35:33 GMT -5
With tired legs from nearly 20 hours of travel, the Grizzlies were unable to keep up with Billings’ receivers, who caught 13 passes for 181 yards and nine touchdowns. “The long transportation isn’t an excuse, it’s just a variable,” Fairbanks coach Sean Ponder said by telephone. Maybe he should have tried tripping a receiver in the end zone ;D
|
|
|
Post by kratos on Apr 16, 2009 22:00:23 GMT -5
lol
|
|
|
Post by Doom on Apr 17, 2009 2:07:30 GMT -5
What kind of idiot would make a rule like that, especially being able to have 2 receivers in motion, if u couldnt swap out for some confusion there would be someone open on nearly every play, wow just idiotic, and i like afans suggestion, do you one better, mug the receivers every play mabey then you wont get blown out by so much, mabey keep it within 40
|
|
|
Post by Bouncer_Texxx on Apr 17, 2009 10:00:17 GMT -5
What kind of idiot would make a rule like that, the AFL?
|
|
|
Post by CF4L on Apr 17, 2009 11:09:19 GMT -5
What kind of idiot would make a rule like that, the AFL? and look who is out of business...
|
|
|
Post by Doom on Apr 17, 2009 17:32:13 GMT -5
and look who is out of business... also to add more to that, AFL only had one man in motion, makes it a bit less confusing, and less "pick" routes etc imo.
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Apr 17, 2009 21:47:45 GMT -5
What kind of idiot would make a rule like that, the AFL? The AFL has no rules about who can cover whom. Their rules are with the LBs and blitzing; the DBs may have to line up against someone, but they don't have to cover their head-up guy. I'd rather see the NIFL's three in motion myself.
|
|
|
Post by Doom on Apr 18, 2009 3:48:07 GMT -5
I believe the UIF had that same rule u have to be head up on "someone" but after the ball is snapped there is free movement from dbs and dlineman.
|
|
|
Post by exit322 on Apr 18, 2009 6:53:32 GMT -5
Yeah - the UIF's difference from the AFL in that regard was the whole LB alley thing. The AFL used to have the box where the two LBs couldn't leave (now it's anywhere wall to wall for five yards from the line of scrimmage).
|
|