<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Committee Approach</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.razorbloggers.net/index.php/2008/07/the-committee-approach/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.razorbloggers.net/2008/07/the-committee-approach/</link>
	<description>Arkansas Razorbacks Sports Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:45:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: White Powdery Substance Trough &#171; Hawg Blawg</title>
		<link>http://www.razorbloggers.net/2008/07/the-committee-approach/comment-page-1/#comment-30500</link>
		<dc:creator>White Powdery Substance Trough &#171; Hawg Blawg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:50:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.razorbloggers.net/?p=1467#comment-30500</guid>
		<description>[...] College Football News says the SEC Title Game hurts the SEC. Here&#8217;s CFN&#8217;s 46 reasons to love SEC Football. Here&#8217;s a take from a SEC Gal In California. Here&#8217;s three sets of SEC predictions. The Razorbloggers are looking at the new NCAA football rules in two posts. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] College Football News says the SEC Title Game hurts the SEC. Here&#8217;s CFN&#8217;s 46 reasons to love SEC Football. Here&#8217;s a take from a SEC Gal In California. Here&#8217;s three sets of SEC predictions. The Razorbloggers are looking at the new NCAA football rules in two posts. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SEC This Week &#187; Blogging the SEC&#8211;Arkansas</title>
		<link>http://www.razorbloggers.net/2008/07/the-committee-approach/comment-page-1/#comment-30487</link>
		<dc:creator>SEC This Week &#187; Blogging the SEC&#8211;Arkansas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:37:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.razorbloggers.net/?p=1467#comment-30487</guid>
		<description>[...] Razorbloggers.net examines the new football rule changes. Two rules of special interest is the facemask change (Razorbloggers.net believes it will spark disputes.) The other rule is the chop block change. Was it sparked by Auburn’s repeat chop block violations? Razorbloggers provides helpful Youtube videos of the Tiger’s chop blocking ways. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Razorbloggers.net examines the new football rule changes. Two rules of special interest is the facemask change (Razorbloggers.net believes it will spark disputes.) The other rule is the chop block change. Was it sparked by Auburn’s repeat chop block violations? Razorbloggers provides helpful Youtube videos of the Tiger’s chop blocking ways. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GonzoHog</title>
		<link>http://www.razorbloggers.net/2008/07/the-committee-approach/comment-page-1/#comment-30495</link>
		<dc:creator>GonzoHog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:40:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.razorbloggers.net/?p=1467#comment-30495</guid>
		<description>If they want an all or nothing approach to the face-mask rule change, then make it 10 yards.  At least that way the officials won&#039;t penalize a team 15 yards for a flagrant foul.  Officials will always be in controll of a game&#039;s outcome no matter what you change.   Also, I agree that the interference call should be reviewable.   What make&#039;s it so different than any other call that could be made.   The coaches should have a limitation of 3 reviews per game, in which if the call is over-turned, the review doesn&#039;t count against him.   Sound&#039;s pretty simple to me. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If they want an all or nothing approach to the face-mask rule change, then make it 10 yards.  At least that way the officials won&#039;t penalize a team 15 yards for a flagrant foul.  Officials will always be in controll of a game&#039;s outcome no matter what you change.   Also, I agree that the interference call should be reviewable.   What make&#039;s it so different than any other call that could be made.   The coaches should have a limitation of 3 reviews per game, in which if the call is over-turned, the review doesn&#039;t count against him.   Sound&#039;s pretty simple to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Daly Sr.</title>
		<link>http://www.razorbloggers.net/2008/07/the-committee-approach/comment-page-1/#comment-30492</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Daly Sr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:58:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.razorbloggers.net/?p=1467#comment-30492</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not safety first, but the integrity of the game.  Any rules changes should first and foremost be to keep subjectivity out of the hands of the officials.  Safety of the players is enormously important, but what use if the fans don&#039;t trust the honesty of the game.  I believe changing the face mask rule was designed to keep the refs from slanting their officiating and changing the outcome of a game. Incidental face mask inside the 5 was an invitation for mischief, considering that the ratio of players per unit of field increased the probabilty of  &quot;incidentlal&quot; contact,. Now it will be obvious or not.  Incidental face mask was designed so the players would practice keeping their hands from going into a more serious infraction, and possibly injuring the player.  We&#039;ll see if the new rule works, There are always unintended consquencess lurkiing in the shadows of any decision.  The use of TV replay has made a big difference in the game today and I tjhink it should be expanded.. It would have  won a Liberty Bowl against Tennessee and may have given the Razorbacks a shot at a national title.  The interference call in the SMU game was one of the worst in NCAA history for a major contest.  (I know, pass interference is not reviewable - they need to tackle that problem next).  The NFL is very well officiated and the replay rule has led to it&#039;s reputation for fair play (to a certain extent - at least during a game) </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#039;s not safety first, but the integrity of the game.  Any rules changes should first and foremost be to keep subjectivity out of the hands of the officials.  Safety of the players is enormously important, but what use if the fans don&#039;t trust the honesty of the game.  I believe changing the face mask rule was designed to keep the refs from slanting their officiating and changing the outcome of a game. Incidental face mask inside the 5 was an invitation for mischief, considering that the ratio of players per unit of field increased the probabilty of  &quot;incidentlal&quot; contact,. Now it will be obvious or not.  Incidental face mask was designed so the players would practice keeping their hands from going into a more serious infraction, and possibly injuring the player.  We&#039;ll see if the new rule works, There are always unintended consquencess lurkiing in the shadows of any decision.  The use of TV replay has made a big difference in the game today and I tjhink it should be expanded.. It would have  won a Liberty Bowl against Tennessee and may have given the Razorbacks a shot at a national title.  The interference call in the SMU game was one of the worst in NCAA history for a major contest.  (I know, pass interference is not reviewable &#8211; they need to tackle that problem next).  The NFL is very well officiated and the replay rule has led to it&#039;s reputation for fair play (to a certain extent &#8211; at least during a game)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: basic (Requested URI is rejected)

Served from: www.razorbloggers.net @ 2012-02-09 07:22:13 -->
