Jump to content

College Football (Not Big Ten)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 984
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, rico said:

Out of curiosity why did they shut it down to begin with?

Plenty of conspiracy theories. At it's core the President of UAB said program was losing $ and would continue to lose $. The conspiracy side says that Alabama had some bad blood with UAB dating back 20+ years when someone was accusing Bama of cheating. Bear Bryant's son said at the time his mission was to shut the program down. Plenty of decisions over the past decade about facilities funding, coaching $ for hires....have all been shot down from the flagship university in Tuscaloosa.

To answer your question the answer is $....but given the loony nature of Bama football. I can see the other side as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2018 at 1:16 PM, hoosiertildeath said:

Auburn is a 3.5. Favorite over.  the smellermakers !!! Go Tigers! Beat the Smellermakers !!! Kickoff is 15 minutes away !!! Auburn scores on  66 yard pass & run play ( Auburn 7-0 !)Auburn defense forces pee you punt ! Go tigers !

Looks like the decimal should have been moved to the right.

 

Seriously, can't believe Purdue was given that much respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rogue3542 said:

Is it just me, or have the replays overwhelmingly benefited Clemson and now Alabama today?  A few calls in these two games where the video evidence wasn't conclusive enough to overturn, yet they were overturned anyway in benefit of those two teams.

 

I did not see one replay in the ND game that they didn’t get right 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

I did not see one replay in the ND game that they didn’t get right 

I don't mean offense by this, but you seem a bit biased against ND.  Admittedly, I like to see ND win, but I'm hardly a fan and really have no dog in this fight.   When ND recovered it at the 10, you could not tell definitively whether that ball was out or not; call shouldn't have been overturned.

Later, the receiver caught the ball, turned, and then the defender forced a fumble.  Should have been left as it stands.  Not enough to overturn the call.  If anything, replay confirmed the initial call.

Don't even get me started on dead ball fumble recoveries.  If the play is whistled dead, and everybody has stopped playing/competing for the ball, how do you "recover" it?  It's inherently unfair to overturn that call.  If it's recovered before the whistle, fine, but it can't be recovered 2-3 seconds after the ball is whistled dead and everybody is just standing around.  IU got screwed that way last year against Wisconsin.

Just recently in the Alabama game; you couldn't tell when the ball came out or whether he was down.

I don't really care who wins these games, but I think there's been a bunch of calls where there wasn't enough evidence to overturn, but they got overturned anyway, and just because the announcers agree with the call doesn't make it right.  I just think if you're going to overturn key calls like this in playoff games, the evidence better be incontrovertible, and it just hasn't been.

ND and now Oklahoma are likely to get blown out anyway, but I'm also pretty cynical about sports and money, especially since the whole FBI investigation shed light on a small part of corruption in basketball, so there's that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was clear that the tip of the ball was out of bounds on the kick off fumble.

Book did fumble before his knee touched down. It was a delayed recovery, but I don’t recall hearing anything about the play being called dead.

Regardless of my rooting allegiances, or yours, on every replay, the announcers all agreed that they got the calls right. For 2-3 unbiased people to come to the same conclusions every time tells me that the replay system worked and the right calls were made 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

It was clear that the tip of the ball was out of bounds on the kick off fumble.

Book did fumble before his knee touched down. It was a delayed recovery, but I don’t recall hearing anything about the play being called dead.

Regardless of my rooting allegiances, or yours, on every replay, the announcers all agreed that they got the calls right. For 2-3 unbiased people to come to the same conclusions every time tells me that the replay system worked and the right calls were made 

Those plays from my perspective:

It was clear the tip of the ball was "over" the white line, but it wasn't clear whether the ball was actually touching out of bounds, and none of the camera angles showed conclusively whether it was actually touching.  It's too close to overturn the call.

Book did fumble it, but the refs whistled the play dead, and only after everyone from both teams stopped playing did a player from Clemson casually pick up the ball.  That's a bad call to overturn that.  Had the officials let the play go and actually given a chance to both teams to recover it, it would have been fine, but you can't recover a dead ball by its very definition.

I stopped really listening to or even "trusting" sports announcers awhile ago.  The announcers are more or less paid to agree with the "expert" that they defer to in every replay review, so I usually take their opinion with a grain of salt these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, rogue3542 said:

Those plays from my perspective:

It was clear the tip of the ball was "over" the white line, but it wasn't clear whether the ball was actually touching out of bounds, and none of the camera angles showed conclusively whether it was actually touching.  It's too close to overturn the call.

Book did fumble it, but the refs whistled the play dead, and only after everyone from both teams stopped playing did a player from Clemson casually pick up the ball.  That's a bad call to overturn that.  Had the officials let the play go and actually given a chance to both teams to recover it, it would have been fine,

Absolutely correct.  Breaking the plane only counts for touchdowns not for out of bounds.  The nose of the ball was less than an inch over the line while clearly not touching.  There wasn't enough to overturn that call.

Does it change the game drastically?  Possibly.  It certainly would have been different in that moment.

As for the Book fumble, overturning that is a gross miscarriage of officiating and encourages playing after the whistle.  As a former player and coach, it was stressed to play whistle to whistle.  If the refs are not doing that, it can make playing unsafe and as a coach you begin to wonder if you pull your kids.

Sure, I rooted for Notre Dame growing up, however, win or lose, I like to see the correct call made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

ND basically eliminated themselves from playoff conversation for years unless they are a dominant team. Anyone who follows football knows their undefeated record was fools gold. 

No.  Their performance this year has nothing to do with next year.  And they did go undefeated this year and earned their berth into the CFP.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, rico said:

No.  Their performance this year has nothing to do with next year.  And they did go undefeated this year and earned their berth into the CFP.  

Wish I could agree. Not because I like ND (I don't) but because as long as a human element remains intact for polls....voters will short ND in the near term (2-3 years). Did they deserve to be in the game because they ran the table. Sure. Are they one of the 4 best in college football...no. I mean they barely beat Ball St, Pitt, and Vandy and for the 8th straight time in a major bowl they get sent packing with another humiliating loss on the big stage. Voters will remember. Won't matter much next year. When Georgia hosts ND in week 3 and wins by 50....ND won't have to worry about F4 next year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seeking6 said:

Wish I could agree. Not because I like ND (I don't) but because as long as a human element remains intact for polls....voters will short ND in the near term (2-3 years). Did they deserve to be in the game because they ran the table. Sure. Are they one of the 4 best in college football...no. I mean they barely beat Ball St, Pitt, and Vandy and for the 8th straight time in a major bowl they get sent packing with another humiliating loss on the big stage. Voters will remember. Won't matter much next year. When Georgia hosts ND in week 3 and wins by 50....ND won't have to worry about F4 next year. 

LOL.  As long as ND goes undefeated they will be in the discussion.  1 loss then it depends on what the landscape looks like.  The Irish got fortunate this year, now next year?  I know they are at Georgia and I also believe they play at Michigan.  But next year is just that...next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...