First time we’ve had two decent playoff games in a while.
One score games? On NYE? Shocking.
|
|
|
|
|
First time we’ve had two decent playoff games in a while.
One score games? On NYE? Shocking.
Two very good games, and the two teams I was rooting for TCU and UGA won. More so TCU than UGA, and now I am all in for the Horny Frogs! Go TCU! Very happy for Sonny Dykes, the best coach Tech has had in a very long time, and maybe...forever. Maybe. Anyway, I like Coach Dykes and will be rooting for him and his guys next week.
Now, it's on to the Cotton Bowl and Roll Wave!
Oh...glad Notre Dame won their bowl game too.
Marred only by corrupt $EC officiating and bogus collaborative replay review in the first game.Originally Posted by Tech52
Michigan wouldn't be complaining if they didn't fumble on the one yard line, using a very inexperienced RB.
And, running a stupid trick play on fourth and goal on their first possession.
They should stop complaining and execute.
I really like Harbaugh but he didn't seem to call his best game, including poor use of timeouts at the end.
The Michigan trick play was D-U-M-B dumb. That's on them.
But the TD was incorrectly overturned by replay before the Michigan fumble because the receiver didn't have full control of the ball before the ball had crossed the goal line. And that play would have been a clear TD as run if the replay dumbos had noticed the on-field 2-yard spotting mistake at the end of the Michigan interception. The biggest lie in college football is to say that every play gets reviewed. They don't account for smoke and potty breaks the replay officials take during play.
And then we get back to our favorite targeting rule. The non-call at the end of the game was a blatant miss. A receiver on the ground is a defenseless player, so any forceful contact to the head or neck area is targeting the way the rule is written. Contact with the crown of the helmet wasn't required to confirm targeting there. If replay isn't going to enforce targeting on that type of hit, then the targeting rule needs to be taken off the books.
The only way I will ever support targeting calls is if the officiating crew calls offensive targeting when a ball carrier lowers his helmet into a defender. If they don’t call both then I say play on.
A defensive player who goes in with his head and arms by his side is not playing the game the way it’s meant to be played and this crap has only been around for a few years. A running back with the ball tucked has been using stiff arms and head down since the leather helmet days.
Exactly. The ball carrier has been guilty of tageting for a century and now we get mad that the guy tackling him does the same thing. I hate targeting calls. Remove the helmets and let’s go.
Not exactly, The ball carrier is protecting the ball to avoid being tackled. Nothing about going in with head leading and arms down is a football move.
How about the two pick 6’s, and a fumble at the one where they could’ve scored the TD that got taken away from them. Who do you blame for that?
I despise "intentional grounding" rules. Stupid. If a QB wants to throw the ball...anywhere...let him. Play the next down and move on. Period.
Agree. That is a dumb rule all around. There was another call, I think yesterday, that resulted in a 5 yard spot foul and loss of down that I hadn’t seen before. Struck me as overly punitive
Was that 5 yard penalty for illegal touching. I was surprised that included loss of down.
I agree and will add the running back/wide receivers that straight arm to the facemask and helmet of the defender.
The fumble would not have happened with competent officiating because the next play would have been an extra point. The two Pick 6s were all about plays TCU made and are not relevant to the officiating issues.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
