Saban and Malzahn.jpg

Nick Saban and Gus Malzahn are on opposite sides of the tempo debate in college football. (Julie Bennett/jbennett@al.com)

Count University of Arizona head athletic trainer Randy Cohen among the skeptics about the NCAA Football Rules Committee's proposal to slow down hurry-up offenses in the name of safety.

"If you want to do it for a competitive advantage, then come out and say you're doing it for a competitive advantage," said Cohen, who chairs the college committee of the National Athletic Trainers' Association. "Don't say it's a safety issue because right now we don't have any data about this. None."

The idea to make offenses wait 10 seconds before snapping the ball has caused widespread backlash by many up-tempo coaches. They claim it's a ploy to let defenses strategically substitute and slow down creative and productive offenses such as Auburn's. Alabama's Nick Saban and Arkansas' Bret Bielema, both defensive-minded coaches, participated in committee discussions about the proposal but did not have a vote, according to USA Today Sports.

So what does science say about hurry-up offenses? And are there truly medical benefits from this proposed rule? The answers appear to be speculative.

There could be health advantages to making offenses wait, according to several medical personnel and researchers in the sports world who were interviewed for this article. But some of them are scratching their heads over the NCAA proposal just like some coaches.

Yes, they say, fewer plays would lead to less chance of injury. But some question whether the number of plays would be reduced enough to have an impact, especially since the NCAA said "research indicated that teams with fast-paced, no-huddle offenses rarely snap the ball with 30 seconds or more on the play clock."

Yes, some medical officials and researchers say, fatigue can lead to poor technique and put players at greater risk for injuries, including concussions. But some point out players can leave a game now simply by falling down on the field -- lately in games against up-tempo teams this causes accusations of fake injuries -- and medical personnel and researchers question if there's data showing tempo causes more injuries.

Rogers Redding, the national coordinator of officiating, told CBSSports.com there wasn't much "hard data" to consider for the substitution rule, which must still be approved on March 6 by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel.

"What you don't want is that tired defensive player who is a liability in the game and you can't get him off the field," Louisiana-Monroe coach Todd Berry, a rules committee member, told CBSSports.com. "He's gonna get injured. That's what's driving this thing."

Because this is an off year in the NCAA football rules cycle, any new playing rule passed would have to be related to safety.

"From the outside looking in, it looks like they're using the health and safety initiative to pass it this year because that's the only way to pass it," said Harvard head athletic trainer Brant Berkstresser, a member of the NCAA Competitive Safeguards Committee. "That being said, I don't think there's any harm for the student-athlete. The longer players are on the field or play a set amount of plays longer than the previous norm, you certainly can make a theoretical assumption that would increase the risks of injury."

Patrick Larimore, who retired as a UCLA linebacker in 2012 due to suffering at least seven concussions, said it's "ridiculous" to think the 10-second rule is for competitive purposes. Fatigue from up-tempo offenses can absolutely result in injuries, he said.

"I think if you're a fan and you care about the players' health, especially at this level because we're not getting paid, then it's definitely necessary," Larimore said. "Player safety, especially with all this concussion information coming out, has to be put first. What is this, gladiators?"

Tired players can lose technique

Some members of the NCAA Playing Rule Oversight Panel did not know the proposal was coming. The same was true of some members of different NCAA groups involved with safety issues.

Thomas Talavage, a Purdue University biomedical engineer professor who studies brain trauma, is a member of the NCAA Concussion Task Force. He was blindsided by the 10-second runoff proposal until told by a reporter.

Kevin Sumlin and Johnny Manziel brought a creative use of tempo to the SEC when Texas A&M joined the conference.

"This did not even come up at our task force meeting two weeks ago," Talavage said. "That's why I say I don't think their motivation behind this is necessarily the head."

University of Georgia team physician Dr. Kimberly Walpert, a member of the NCAA Competitive Safeguards Committee, said the the rule proposal was not discussed at the last committee meeting. Walpert said the rule makes sense but stressed she doesn't know the reason behind it.

"I think it will keep our games safer and keep football part of our national culture," she said. "It certainly makes sense that the delays (before snapping the ball) allow you to ground yourself a little better both mentally and physically before the contact occurs. I'm sure that's got to be an advantage to the player."

There is widespread agreement that fatigued players can cause breakdowns in technique. Those mistakes can make a player more susceptible to lunging with his head or being out of position and sustain a high-impact hit to the head.

But Dr. Jeffrey Dugas, Troy University's team physician and a sports medicine surgeon at the Andrews Sports Medicine and Orthopedic Center in Birmingham, said an injured athlete already has an opportunity to leave the game by going to the ground. Making offenses wait 10 seconds for a possible injury substitution assumes the player will even take himself out, Dugas said.

"That's a stretch," he said. "I find it hard to believe they're really hanging this rule on injury prevention. There's no question a hurry-up offense is going to fatigue a defense. If this is all being hung on fatiguing a defense and injury risk goes up, that's fine if there's data that supports the case."

Talavage said the rule proposal might produce more of a slight reduction in orthopedic injuries than head injuries.

"However, we have to keep in mind the hits they take in the game may only represent less than 50 percent of the total number of hits they take on a given week," Talavage said. "A bigger benefit may be schools cutting down contact practices to twice a week."

NCAA chief medical officer Brian Hainline said earlier this week that he hopes to have unified hitting restrictions for football practices next season.

Correlations between up-tempo offenses and injuries are speculative at this point, said Steven Broglio, director of the University of Michigan's NeuroSport Research Laboratory.

Last year, Broglio published a study examining head injuries based on the types of offenses run by two high school teams. He found that 50 percent more head impacts occurred with a traditional run-first team than a spread, pass-first offense. But the higher-impact hits occurred in games with the pass-heavy team due to players being in more space to receive high-velocity hits.

"The only thing I can think of is (the NCAA rule proposal) will decrease the number of plays per game so you're decreasing the number of head impacts," Broglio said. "That's a maybe. That's not for sure. From a fan perspective, this doesn't make sense. From a safety standpoint, I don't know if there's any data to back it up."

As offensive records continue to fall and more teams go up-tempo, the truth is the numbers of plays per game for the entire sport hasn't changed much in 40 years. FBS teams averaged 71.8 plays per game in 2013, compared to 70.5 in 1973. The public debate over tempo so far has been shaped more by competitive balance than safety.

'It's the boy who cried wolf'

No football rule change today can be made in a vacuum, and this proposal is no different. There is now greater understanding of the longterm health risks associated with concussions. The NCAA has been criticized for not doing enough for player safety, a charge the NCAA has denied.

At least 71 current and former college athletes are suing the NCAA over concussion management. Northwestern football players are trying to form a union that would let college athletes collectively bargain with schools over issues such as injury protections.

National College Players Association executive director Ramogi Huma, who is leading the union efforts and pushing for NCAA concussion reform, supports the premise of the proposal to slow down offenses.

Former UCLA linebacker Patrick Larimore, who suffered at least seven concussions in college, on the rule proposal: "I think if you are a fan and you care about the players' health, especially at this level because we're not getting paid, then it's definitely necessary."

"If they slowed down the game a bit, there would be less snaps overall, which we know would reduce contact and reduce the risk of traumatic brain injury," said Huma, a former UCLA football player. "I would also say the committee would be negligent in its responsibilities if it doesn't consider reducing contact in practices, which is cited as the most effective way to reduce traumatic brain injury."

Even if it's true that the rules committee's intention for the 10-second runoff is due to competitive purposes, "you have to prioritize player safety," Huma said. "These coaches are paid enough to adapt and fully capable to comply with a rule like that and still be effective coaches."

Larimore, a three-year starting middle linebacker at UCLA and team defensive MVP in 2011, doesn't need data for him to believe offenses must slow down. He attributes a shoulder injury as a sophomore to a teammate accidentally tackling him while out of position due to fatigue against a hurry-up offense.

In another instance, Larimore said one concussion he sustained could have been due to UCLA's first installation of its no-huddle offense at practice. A safety broke technique by ducking his head to tackle a receiver and instead hit Larimore in the chin.

"There's an argument that if we didn't have the up-tempo offense he might not have been as fatigued and maybe kept his head up and saw me," Larimore said. "Football is a very dangerous sport as it is, but the reason athletes can play it is there's so much technique that goes into safety. When you're fatigued, your form goes right away. It's a totally different game now with up-tempo offenses."

Cohen, the Arizona head athletic trainer and a leader of the National Athletic Trainers' Association, agreed that tired players can theoretically result in more injuries. But he argued, for example, that knee injuries occur more in traditional offenses due to longer engagements at the line of scrimmage than in up-tempo offenses, when passes are generally thrown quickly.

"If you're running up-tempo offense, is that a higher risk or lower risk versus lining up two tight ends and a fullback for smashmouth football?" Cohen said. "I'd say our team gets beat up more when we play Stanford and smashmouth football than when we play Oregon and tempo."

Cohen said he fully supports changing rules to protect players, but needs to see the evidence first that shows tempo impacts injuries.

"It's the boy who cried wolf," Cohen said. "If you keep crying wolf about safety, safety, safety, yet it isn't about safety, when you really want to implement something for safety, it won't get done and that will be a tragedy."