George Schroeder

USA TODAY Sports

A proposed rule to control pace of play in college football is set to go to vote March 6

There are questions whether a faster pace of play increases injury risk

National Coordinator of Football Officiating says Nick Saban%27s pushing for rule has been %22overstated%22

South Carolina's Steve Spurrier has joined the chorus of college football coaches opposed to the rule proposal that would force offenses to wait 10 seconds to snap the football. And that chorus could lead to the proposal's early demise.

"So, you want to talk about the 'Saban Rule'?" Spurrier asked Thursday, chuckling. "That's what I call it. (It) looks like it's dead now, hopefully."

That's not certain yet. Neither is the extent of Nick Saban's influence on the NCAA Football Rules Committee when it approved the proposal last week. Rogers Redding, the NCAA's coordinator of officiating and secretary-rules editor of the rules committee, said Saban's impact has been overstated.

The proposal is scheduled to be considered March 6 by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel. If approved, it would take effect next fall. It seems unlikely to pass, however, considering the blowback from several prominent coaches.

The reasoning behind the proposal was safety. But Air Force coach Troy Calhoun, chairman of the rules committee, appeared to backpedal during a conference call earlier this week, saying the proposal should not become a rule unless data shows increased injury risk.

Auburn coach Gus Malzahn, who told reporters this week there's "absolutely zero evidence" that faster pace increases injury risk, said he had spoken several times with Calhoun. Other coaches have, as well. Spurrier said he left a voicemail for Calhoun expressing his disapproval of the proposal.

"I just told him I was against it," Spurrier said. "It's ridiculous. Let's let everybody keep playing the way they've been playing."

Redding said the football rules committee has the capacity, during a comment period that runs through March 3, to withdraw or modify the proposal with another vote, which could be conducted by conference call or even by email. Although no vote has been scheduled, Redding said, "the committee is probably gonna want to have a discussion about this one."

Several coaches, noting the involvement of Alabama's Saban and Arkansas' Bret Bielema – both outspoken critics of the trend toward ever faster offensive tempo – have questioned the real intent behind the proposal, suggesting it was a shot fired in a philosophical battle. Texas A&M's Kevin Sumlin, for example, told USA TODAY Sports it "is an attempt to limit the creativity of the game."

Last year during SEC media days, Saban asked: "Should we allow football to be a continuous game? Is that the way the game was designed to play?"

Both Saban and Bielema participated in the discussion on the topic during the rules committee meeting last week. Neither voted on the proposal. Bielema participated in his role as chairman of the American Football Coaches Association's rules committee. Saban asked to address the topic during the meeting.

Redding said Saban's presence was unusual but that it wasn't the first time a coach had asked to address the committee. More routinely, coaches have provided input through letters or by talking with members of the rules committee.

Redding said Saban's presentation was "effective," but said the topic was already under discussion.

"To a large extent, what he wanted to have the committee consider, the committee had been talking about for a half day already," Redding said, adding the rules committee had discussed the idea of whether offenses needed to be slowed down for safety reasons a year ago, as well.

"So it's not as if this was brand new, sailing in out of left field on the wings of Nick Saban," Redding said.

Quoting New York Times columnist David Brooks, Redding added: "Partisanship shapes the reality you choose to see. I think that's what's going on here to a large extent."

Saban has not commented publicly on the proposal or his involvement. Thursday night, after a meeting of the White County (Ark.) Razorback Club, Bielema told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette he and Saban had not discussed the issue before the rules committee meeting.

But Bielema said opponents of the proposal were "turning a blind eye to the fact."

Asked for evidence of injury risk, Bielema said: "Death certificates." The newspaper reported he was referring to the recent death of a Cal football player. On Feb. 7, senior defensive end Ted Agu collapsed and died at the end of a conditioning workout. CBSSports.com reported Agu had tested positive for the sickle cell trait – a condition which, anecdotally at least, was discussed during the rules committee meeting as a potential problem that could be exacerbated if a player with the trait could not be substituted for during an uptempo drive. Bielema told the newspaper he has "half a dozen" players with sickle cell trait.

A player could indicate to an official that he was struggling. Earlier this week, asked if a coach could simply call timeout, Calhoun said, "That's something you'd find as a counter-argument."

The topic of whether defenses should be allowed time to substitute before each play was broached, at least briefly, during a session at the AFCA's annual meeting last month. But like several of his peers, Spurrier said he was unaware of the proposal. And he said Saban's input had an effect.

"He took it upon himself to go before the rules committee and get it done," Spurrier said. "They tried to change the rules. But I don't think they're gonna get away with it."

Spurrier's offenses haven't been known for warp speed, but he said the strategy didn't bother him.

"To me, that's part of football," he said. "The 'no-huddle' has always been available. I don't see why we'd take it away right now."

Spurrier noted that South Carolina had successfully slowed rival Clemson's uptempo offense in the past by keeping it off the field. The Tigers averaged 81.5 plays a game in 2013, but managed only 57 in a 31-17 loss to South Carolina. In losses in 2011 and 2012, Clemson ran 60 and 59 plays, respectively.

"Our goal was to stay on the field and run that clock," Spurrier said. "Hopefully, your offense can stay on the field a long time, and all (the opposing offense) can do is sit on the sideline and look at each other."

Spurrier also noted that his defensive players became fatigued during long drives by traditional offenses.

"If they're out there for a 14-play drive, to me that's when they get tired," he said. "When the offense runs for 5 (yards), runs for 4, runs for 5. Not these 35-second drives."

Malzahn suggested the proposal should be tabled and a "healthy debate" should ensue on the idea.

"That's a debate I would really like the rules committee to have," Redding said. "Part of the rules committee's charge is the stewardship of the game. … What kind of a game do we want? That's a discussion the committee ought to have."