|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 18, 2011 8:50:46 GMT -6
hahaha I Exalted you for Smiting Stein, Jimmy!
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Oct 18, 2011 15:27:36 GMT -6
Did you guys hear??? The NFL has decided instead of having kick off after every point, they're just going to drop the ball from 20 feet up on the 10 yard line of the receiving team. The rules are, the non-receiving team must stand at the 40 yard line on their side of the field and must wait until the ball is released which will be indicated by a giant green light, before they can run. The release of the ball will be controlled by the special teams coach of the non-receiving team via remote control. The ball will be places vertically in a "claw-like" contraption which will hang from the sky-cam which maneuvers over the field. The ball must first bounce before it can be touched by the receiving team. However, if the non-receiving team can recover the ball before a member of the receiving team touches it first, they take control of the ball on the 50 yard line starting with a first and 10 yard situation. If a player of the receiving team makes contact with the ball, but can not take complete possession and a member of the non-receiving team gains possession, the non-receiving team will start in a first and 5 yard situation on the 25 yard line; unless the ball is recovered by the non-receiving team and taken into the in-zone, which will result in 5 points and no chance for an extra point kick. The new "Drop Ball" will repeat.
And the decision making council is voting on it this week. If it passes on Friday, it will go into effect on November 1st!!
Oh... Wait... No, they wouldn't do that. That would be asinine.
|
|
|
Post by kentuckybrown on Oct 18, 2011 16:42:06 GMT -6
I'm still of the opinion we should wait until everyone has played a match or we wait until Nationals. It's never good to mix rules up in the middle of a season.
|
|
|
Post by sweeter9 on Oct 18, 2011 17:54:56 GMT -6
It is a sunk cost at this point. If something was a bad investment, dont keep invested in it. You dont just stay with a stock in the stock market just because it cost a lot to get it. We shouldnt keep a rule just because a few teams have already played with it. Similar ideas here. Cut our loses and revote on it.
|
|
cg
Full Member
Posts: 194
|
Post by cg on Oct 18, 2011 19:15:43 GMT -6
We shouldnt keep a rule just because a few teams have already played with it. Similar ideas here. I think that's actually a fairly good reason for keeping it, if you modify the sentence just a bit. We (you) should keep a rule because just a few teams have already played with it. Specifically, only 9 teams have actually played with this in an NCDA game. I mean, that's what you guys are talking about, NCDA games, right? Last I checked, you guys do whatever you darn well please in practices, meetings, or whatever you call 'em. What you're talking about is when school A meets school B. Going off what Stokes said, it sounds like the things some of you worry about happening don't happen when different schools play each other. The majority of schools don't have a basis to speak from. I don't either; I've never played against another school under this procedure. Meanwhile, the team in the best position, Kentucky, is saying to hold off. Seems like he'd be in the best position to go "Oh my god this is awful" instead of some of the more vocal people.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer Jardine - SVSU on Oct 18, 2011 20:32:48 GMT -6
I would have to say wait till Christmas Break for all the teams to get a chance to play. That way the revote doesn't happen before a major tournament or match up. And if you are complaining about the rules everyone only has to look at them selves. As far as I can tell everyone who was against the rule right now WAS IN THE CAPTAINS meeting. I didn't see this kind of protest then.
|
|
|
Post by KFitz on Oct 18, 2011 21:47:38 GMT -6
Alright, now seems to be a good time to mention that we shouldn't have a captains meeting After the tournament play of nationals. Honestly i have only been to two captains meetings. but they feel like that go on for years, after everyone is fatigued if not flat out exhausted from playing dodgeball after probably only 3-4 hours of sleep due to a long drive and hotel madness. I'm not asking for a pity party (i'm not proud of the decisions i made at the captains meetings), but the reason we check the forums (sometimes every night) is to stay in touch with the dodgeball community, discuss the issues, and schedule matches. I just feel like we as a group are capable of making educated decisions as a collective organization more than just once a year. I retract that statement. I know we are capable.
Sorry for the tangent, back to the issue at hand. I am not a fan of the mentality of wait till XX/XX/XXXX date because like i said earlier most people only get to play dodgeball for 4 years, if not less. IF the majority would like to change it then it seems like a waste of time to play with a rule we don't like for an 1/8th of our college career.
Another option, that i know won't be popular, but if two teams don't want to play with the current opening rush, then they don't have too. Is it going to be a war crime if i (hypothetically) uploaded a video of Kent vs someone playing a game that started with the old rush?
|
|
|
Post by kentuckybrown on Oct 19, 2011 9:33:08 GMT -6
Fitz, the counter argument for waiting is "because" we only have limited time. We should do it the right way for the future teams that play. That way we could say without a doubt "We tried that out, and it didn't work. This is what works best...(Insert option)."
I know a lot of people are concerned about getting ball advantage, but this break does have the potential to do that and more. One point that UK has played in the other team(Either UL or Miami...) sent 4 runners. We hit two of their runners before they had a chance to do anything with their balls, they dropped them and left. We beat another runner to the ball in the middle. And the other team retreated with one ball. I personally liked that this break has the potential to be a huge swing if you get a hit or two and ball advantage. (Now the majority of the time we end up with the one of our guys, the same, guy being hit out, and 4-7 balls in our hands)
A second point (WKU game if I recall correctly), we had the rush and hardly any throwing occurred right off the bat, (Hand signal, whistle, whatever you want to call it.) both teams grabbed the balls retreated then formed a strategy.
I just think that we should definitely give this rule a serious look. Things can grow on people and the initial strategy is a little different than it was with the original break. But, I think it is a lot more action and I personally enjoy it.
This could benefit teams by ball advantage and knocking out a couple opponents fast. Every team should have at least one or two guys who are fast on the break. And can pinpoint someone that they want to attack.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Raymer on Oct 19, 2011 9:45:36 GMT -6
This is kind of related. I've posted all 5 points from the WKU-UK game on our website along with a live blog that captures my reaction as I watch the first half. It's like a running commentary. In it, I talk about my thoughts on the new opening rush, which you can see live in game action for 5 points. I think everyone would benefit from watching and reading this: www.wkudodgeball.com/2011/10/wku-uk-video.html
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 19, 2011 22:05:29 GMT -6
Zac, since we know you like the 3-4-3 opening rush I was wondering how the majority of your team likes it? Would the majority rather stick with the 3-4-3, change it to something new, or go back to the old 0-10-0?
That goes for you as well Felix. What do you prefer and what does your team prefer?
|
|
cg
Full Member
Posts: 194
|
Post by cg on Oct 19, 2011 22:47:08 GMT -6
Zac, since we know you like the 3-4-3 opening rush I was wondering how the majority of your team likes it? Would the majority rather stick with the 3-4-3, change it to something new, or go back to the old 0-10-0? That goes for you as well Felix. What do you prefer and what does your team prefer? NO ONE expects the Dodgeball Inquisition!
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on Oct 20, 2011 3:21:44 GMT -6
Voting teams regarding an Opening Rush Revote:
For: BGSU, CMU, DePaul, EMU, Kent, MSU, Moody, LCC, SVSU, WIU (10 member-teams) Against: GVSU, UK, WKU (3 member-teams) Honourable mentions For: JMU, UMD (2 upcoming teams)
No quorum has been reached, eleven member-teams were needed to bring up a revote. So this means we were short by one team voting "for a revote" and consequently the current 0-3-4-3-0 Balls Live Opening Rush formation stands as is.
Thank you to the teams that participated in this email vote, no matter what side you were on.
|
|
|
Post by kentuckybrown on Oct 20, 2011 7:22:46 GMT -6
McCarthy,
Fair question. For the first few practices back in September everyone was against it. (Myself included) After we have played with it more and more I haven't heard any complaints for the last month or so and everyone seems to be liking it more and more. There is only one person I can think of out of the 30 regulars who is against it. (Or was last time I talked to him about it, which was before our Miami game.)
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Oct 20, 2011 8:22:57 GMT -6
We just don't think it effects the game that much and since we voted to change it, it should stay, plus it's kind of exciting. Last Sunday at practice we tried out all of the different options for change. None of them really effected how the point was played. The opening rush has always sucked, I've never enjoyed that aspect of the game. I run as fast as I can, only to run into someone, fight for a ball, and start the game off in a standoff. At least with this new one, you can implement some strategy, and something happens right off the whistle.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Oct 20, 2011 9:22:50 GMT -6
So Zig, explain to me how the vote is over when only 15 teams voted and we have somewhere between 20-25 teams in the league? It sounds to me as if there are still 9 teams by my count that have to get back to you on the vote. And if you are only counting the 15 then the majority easily called for a revote.
Zac and Felix thanks for the input!
|
|