The no-huddle offense in College Football has been a topic argued about over and over and over again concerning the safety of the players, the unfair advantages and more. It should not be removed, it has too many perks and makes the games more exciting. No-huddle offenses should not be banned because it creates an advantage for the the offense, gets the defense tired and makes the game more enjoyable. The no-huddle offense creates an advantage for the offense. In the article "Number of No-Huddle Offenses on the Rise" author John Marshall pints out an advantage that the No-huddle offense has by saying, "the no-huddle gave the defense no time to adjust, leaving coaches unable to make the substitutions they wanted and players to figure out what to do on the fly instead of having 40 seconds to get input from the sideline or think about the upcoming assignment" (Marshall). This is true! Football is a game of advantages. Teams are starting to see that the defense gets tired quickly while trying to keep up with the offense. Also, the defense can not get the signals from the coach and if they do they can not process it before the ball snaps. Some people think that it's 100% an offensive advantage, but they fail to realize that in some cases the defense is in better shape than the offense and can keep up with the offenses pace and up-tempo …show more content…
"But some coaches, including Alabama's Nick Saban and Arkansas' Brett Bielema, have criticized hurry-up offenses, arguing that they give offenses an unfair advantage and don't allow them to adequately substitute defensive players " which is right because when the offense is not huddling, no one can substitute unless the offense subs someone in, causing some of the defensive players on the field to get tired (Schlaback). Saban and Bielema make good points here, if your players are