I Hate the Box but I Can't Live...

[Reginald Rutledge]

without it!

How many times have you seen a team drive the ball down the field on about 10 plays 70 yards and the cornerback slips to let the receiver streak by. Now,the coverage had the safety not playing in the nickel or dime package so he had a lot of ground to cover for just one safety.

The pass is thrown. The reaction occurs -30,20,10, Touchdown!

The coach says "Shake the Box". The dice come up 6-6, 1, and 5. Clipping, flagrant, 15 yards, and loss of down (or something to that effect)! Three CRUCIAL penalties and a fumble took away 3 possible scores! Not only that, it gave the other team new life.

Call it "opportunistic". Wow, what excitement does this rattlesnake cause us! We've been shak'en em up for 17 years here and I can only remember once in the 17 years that somebody forgot to bring the Box! It's sacrilege! Games become boring when an action does not take place.

The players rest on every shake, anticipating something good or bad for your team. You try to play through it but it can be a gamechanger.

Sometimes, I do hate the box but honestly, I can not play without it. It brings such fun and a touch of chance. It helps you prepare for the unknown and teaches you how to weather the storm.

It got me tonite but it also got Pep, the FSU coach. I think in the course of 3 hours, it has a way of evening out for the most part. I can still hate that box though.

Reg

[Michigan Joe]

I actually was tuned in for a short while when you had the TD called back. The box sure makes it hard to take the game too seriously when the luck of the box continues to remind you that its just a game. It looked like you guys had a great game and a fun time. The stadium made for a nice looking broadcast.

There is no doubt the box can decide a game, just as critical calls do in real football. Have you ever considered allowing the coach to "challenge" the box? Say one time per half?

[Reginald Rutledge]

I really have no problem with "The Box". Yeah, we have challenges, two per half. They can be used on certain situations, usually an argued pass play or something to that effect.

I love what the Box brings us. It adds that element that is not always cut and dry. There is luck in football so this acts as it. It's rare during a game that 4 crucial infractions would occur on a team but the truth of the matter, my team was "undisicipline" to have made those infractions. I will not look at it as if this just disgust me.

Actually, just knowing how the Box work, I know it is an equal-opportunity killer and Pep had a few plays where it came back to bite him in the butt too.

I enjoy playing guys like Pep because although intense, he plays with great sportsmanship. There were some things that both Pep and I let go because we know, it's just a game and not life or death.

I am definitely happy you were able to hear the laughter. That's one of the first times I have laughed a lot in the last half year. It was good to play again and go through the emotion highs and lows of shake'en the box.

Thanks for asking Michigan Joe.

Reg

[MplsTom]

I'm going to preface my comments with some background as to not have them taken out of context:

1) I am about to play in a league for the first time that uses the box. I'm excited about it.

2) I'm always in favor of innovation and I applaud the creator of the box for bringing some of these events and excitement into play via the box.

3) I like also that the box gives some guys that have disabilities, etc a method of passing that seems to be statistically valid.

That being said, I really don't like how the box is administered. Most often, it is used to try to "take away" something after a coach has done something well. With it being a coach's discretion shake, that is definitely the intent. Now, true, the box can have adverse affects on the offense as well as the defense, but for the most part the practical uses of the box has evolved into what I stated above.

My thought is that events occur on any play so why isn't the box quickly shaken automatically after every play to see if a random event occurred. Percentages would probably have to be scaled down a bit, but that way there isn't the element of "I'm using this thing to try to negate you" instead of "hey, did something random (penalty, injury, fumble, etc) occur on either side."

I think that use would eliminate a lot of the criticism, not of the box but more in how it is being applied.

Again, this isn't "box hating"...it is just asking the question about fitting the box to the spirit of its original intent.

[Reginald Rutledge]

it is definitely good to see you in a league that will use "The Box". Usually, once a league uses it, they will never go back to any other simulation method. This has been our experience. So thanks for at least trying it.

There are two rules of thumb here. The Box is used at a coaches discretion and it separates Rookies from Veterans.

In most leagues, the Box is shaken on every play. The thought being is that something good does not happen for both teams on every play. For instance, if a team gains a positive 3 yards, is that good for the defense or is that good for the offense. I guess it depends more on down and distance. So one team should be telling the official to "Shake it up" depending on the down and distance.

What makes the Shootout style so exciting is it makes you aware of everything around you. It sharpens your skills because no crutches are used to matriculate the field to score the ball. So in doing so, you have to always stay aware of the potential for penalties, injuries, or fumbles. This constant uncertainty keeps you motivated to try to hurry up and score. You know, it's just a matter of time for a veteran coach to get a call against you. With the simulation of the box, we look at it as "Hoping the players can strip the ball or seeing a clip or holding to nullify a drive." Rookies forget these things. As they sharpen their skills in this method, they begin to see the importance of shaking up the box. It's a 50-50 proposition at that point. But until then, the rookies chances are less. Once the rookies understand its use, they "have arrived in the Shootout ways". With you having anywhere from 80-100 opportunities to shake the box, even a rookie will have his chances. The laws of averages gives even the most inept players chances (and that's what we want).

The funny thing is Tom, I know I can't convince you about what's fair. You will have to experience it to see for yourself. If you guys are able to get off a great amount of plays, it will truly give you chances. And yes, if you are playing in a league where it's new to every one, shaking it on every play evens up the playing field. But the reality is, everyone is not even in this game and you should have some players better than others and sometimes, this is distinguished by who knows when to "Shake that thang" or "the Showstopper" because it is not always black or white.

Reg

[Michigan Joe]

I'm kind of with Tom on this one...I like the idea of the box being an "automatic", a random part of every play and probably administered by the ref. Anything less penalizes a coach about forgeting to use it to try to "take away" the opponents play, which will happen far more to new coaches than to veterans. This is how I would vote on using it for a local league. Then give each coach one challenge per half to be used soley to try to reverse the call of the almighty box! I definately like the concept of the box, and haven't played any games with it before so my viewpoint comes mainly from conceptual theory than with experience.

[MplsTom]

I'll be the first to admit that my views on the box are like Michigan Joes - strictly based on opinion and not from first hand experience. I really am excited to try it and I like the idea of fumbles, injuries, penalties, etc working their way into MF just like the pros so for that we are 100% in agreement and it is all good.

I'm bringing up my ideas with the caveat that it isn't a sword worth falling on. The positive of the box being in play I believe outweighs any negatives. Reg, I always appreciate your innovations and passion. Most inventions in this country were always done by "monomaniacs on a mission" like yourself. Too many coaches I respect really enjoy the box for it to be seen in anything but an overall very positive light.

As for when a box should be shaken and should shaking the box be a coaching move or an automatic part of each play? I'm an avid golfer and I think of the box as "the rub of the green" - those things you can't control in a round...the ball hitting a sprinkler head, the wind gusting up right as you take your backswing, that bounce into the sand trap instead of going 5 feet away from the cup if it was just two inches more to the right, etc.

I guess I would fall on the position that the current use of the box does seem to fall on the "something bad happened to me so I'm going to shake the box" to try and offset it. It's that piece that still rubs me a bit the wrong way.

Now, if you put some more risk/reward in it - such as "you can shake the box or pivot your men" or something like that...then at least there is a risk/reward coaching decision as opposed to "will I remember or not".

I guess if I were starting a league from scratch, I would institute the box definitely, but I would just have it automatically shaken on every play. Just my $0.02. But, after playing some games in Michigan this fall, I'll report back and if I change my mind I'll be happy to be the first one to admit it. I've been wrong plenty in my life.

[Reginald Rutledge]

you even trying this. Like many of the people who you may respect in the hobby who now use the Box, they were ones who thought of the Box as "cheezy or hokie" at first. I respect those opinions because when in doubt, people continue to hold on to what they believe is true.

I will admit I am that "monomaniac" that often times stand alone in my belief on what I see as good for the game. Maybe in time, those beliefs can be appreciated because now others get enjoyment from those slings and arrows I endured about the game.

You are right in your analogies to golf "boo-boos". Last night Greg Hardmon called me about 11:00 to discuss his game. You could tell his excitement of playing and how he had to play through "The Box". He told me that the Box went against him about 3-4 times in crucial situations but it made him all the better for it.

In my time, I have lost 2 championships with the shake of the Box. The player was stripped of the ball as he was racing to score to win the game! Bad luck or a great shake by the opponent? I don't know, but I loved every second of the intrigue. At that time, the offense was shaking the box and neither the ref or him was looking at the box. I could have lied and said "nothing" but how would I have felt winning that way?

So the box giveth and sometimes taketh away. But you will have fun and at the end of the day, assess the box in its rightful place as just another element to help enhance the game. I will never play without the box again. It brings that much fun to my games. I wish you could have heard or saw the game that I played the other day against Florida. The Box was hot and the coaches were having the time of our lives. It don't get any better than that!


Reg

[Jim Davis]

THE BOX IS GOOD FOR EF.

[Treks1]

I too like the box and the "X-factor" that it incorporates into the game. But I like the idea of it being shaken on EVERY play, no just when you are trying to call a play back. This makes a lot of sense.