College Football Thread

[Brass Cannon]

17 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

How about the “targeting call” turned into fumble? Thoughts on that call and timing? I can’t remember if they were down 7 at that point but I felt like they were. Maybe 14. But an egregious call that ended the game.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

It was 14. But really they just didn’t want that kid to be suspended next week against Oregon. 
 

Do not get your hopes this year against OSU the refs will not let us a win. If we are somehow up late their will be mysterious holds or roughing the passer by breathing. 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

It was 14. But really they just didn’t want that kid to be suspended next week against Oregon. 
 
Do not get your hopes this year against OSU the refs will not let us a win. If we are somehow up late their will be mysterious holds or roughing the passer by breathing. 

I think there was 1 definite PI not called the drive or 2 before. DB reached out and grabbed the WR arm TWICE.

But Minnesota still had chances for sure. Gave up too many big plays in 2nd half.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

Kansas in 2017 went 12-1 and even got as high as #2 and was a legitimate national title contender in the BCS era. Since then...

 

They've had 1 winning season in 2008 at 8-5(4-4). Theyve won more than 1 conference game in a season since 2007 once and that was 2008. 

 

They are 34-120 since with 8 of the wins coming in 2008 and 5 coming in 2009. They 11-102 in conference play with 4 of the wins coming in 2008. 

 

They've had 2 seasons where they didn't win a game in 2015 and 2020. They've had 5 seasons without beating a Big 12 opponent (2011, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2020). 

 

They started off the 2009 season 5-0(so some promise), and since then they are 21-115.

[Dave from Dayton]

3 hours ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

How about the “targeting call” turned into fumble? Thoughts on that call and timing? I can’t remember if they were down 7 at that point but I felt like they were. Maybe 14. But an egregious call that ended the game.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

Wayne, that is an example of the controversial calls that I was talking about.  Seems to me that a case could be made on both sides of the issue.  Definitely helmet to helmet.  Why no call on OSU's 12 for targeting?

  Well, 12's hands and arms are involved apparently'in the tackle. His shoulder makes contact at same time.  Offensive receiver did have control of the ball so it was a reception.  Receiver saw the tackle coming and ducked his head.  

I believe that the receiver did not duck into 12's helmet.  The receiver did try to make something of the play in spite of 12's helmet leading the way into the collision...  But once again, there are other factors: the hands; the shoulder; prior recognition by receiver; and the duck.  No call is controversial but could be justified.

Yeah, but, 12 launched and went crown first...

What really pissed me off was that the refs reviewed the fumble and didn't say anything about the apparent targeting.  The receiver was temporarily knocked out for crying out loud.  Fix this rule!  Protect the players!

Sux, because I wanted a call, for sure.

 

[Lebowski]

1 hour ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

How about the “targeting call” turned into fumble? Thoughts on that call and timing? I can’t remember if they were down 7 at that point but I felt like they were. Maybe 14. But an egregious call that ended the game.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

By rule it was indeed targeting.  But I understand why it wasn't called. Keep in mind folks, IUFBs defense ain't no slouch and will be subject to these types of hits as well. 

Targeting is kind of a double edged sword for me.  On one hand the laws of physics just doesn't allow a defender to prevent it.  On the other hand CTE is a real thing and acknowledging it and trying to address it via rules like targeting is a good thing for humanity in general. 

I think the biggest beef I have with targeting is the rule is such a stiff penalty.  I wish the punishment would change to something like a flagrant 1 vs 2 in basketball or a yellow vs red card in soccer.

In regards to the game I don't think it would have made a difference in the outcome because they were down 14.  They may have cut it to a 7 point difference but then they'd have to get the ball back with not a lot of time left.  They'd have had a chance to tie the game, but not likely.

[Hovadipo]

[HoosierAloha]

We will have to absolutely shellack o$u to win the game. Just the way the Big 1.0 rolls.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Brass Cannon]

1 hour ago, Lebowski said:

By rule it was indeed targeting.  But I understand why it wasn't called. Keep in mind folks, IUFBs defense ain't no slouch and will be subject to these types of hits as well. 

Targeting is kind of a double edged sword for me.  On one hand the laws of physics just doesn't allow a defender to prevent it.  On the other hand CTE is a real thing and acknowledging it and trying to address it via rules like targeting is a good thing for humanity in general. 

I think the biggest beef I have with targeting is the rule is such a stiff penalty.  I wish the punishment would change to something like a flagrant 1 vs 2 in basketball or a yellow vs red card in soccer.

In regards to the game I don't think it would have made a difference in the outcome because they were down 14.  They may have cut it to a 7 point difference but then they'd have to get the ball back with not a lot of time left.  They'd have had a chance to tie the game, but not likely.

At that point the refs were helping out OSU against Oregon more that the gophers.  

[Stuhoo]

 

I've done some refereeing and umpiring, and I have a hard time with the narrative that on-field refs have an agenda for or against any particular team.

Referees are trained and hard-wired to see moving bodies colliding and interacting, and immediately react accordingly. They don't see uniform colors; they see an offensive lineman flinch and they throw a flag, or they see a late hit and throw a flag. When the play ends they attribute it to the uniform and uniform number.

Of course, there are many, many close calls during a game. One can cherry-pick the calls that go a certain team's way and conclude that the refs had 'a favorite', but it's just not so. 

 

[Lebowski]

44 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

At that point the refs were helping out OSU against Oregon more that the gophers.  

Maybe.  OSU will have their hands full against the Ducks next week.

[Hovadipo]

21 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

 

I've done some refereeing and umpiring, and I have a hard time with the narrative that on-field refs have an agenda for or against any particular team.

Referees are trained and hard-wired to see moving bodies colliding and interacting, and immediately react accordingly. They don't see uniform colors; they see an offensive lineman flinch and they throw a flag, or they see a late hit and throw a flag. When the play ends they attribute it to the uniform and uniform number.

Of course, there are many, many close calls during a game. One can cherry-pick the calls that go a certain team's way and conclude that the refs had 'a favorite', but it's just not so. 

 

It’s almost as if Ohio State kicks everyone’s ass because they have better players than everyone and not because of a cloak and dagger backroom agreement!

A lot of college football (and basketball) officials are bad. They’re bad for everyone and in big moments. Ohio State has never needed any help, didn’t last night, won’t this season, or any other season. 

[rcbowla]

It’s almost as if Ohio State kicks everyone’s @$$ because they have better players than everyone and not because of a cloak and dagger backroom agreement!
A lot of college football (and basketball) officials are bad. They’re bad for everyone and in big moments. Ohio State has never needed any help, didn’t last night, won’t this season, or any other season. 

Agree. When you have 90% of the top 10% of talent in a league on one team they will most often win and don't need the "help". This also is why I think Ryan Day is mediocre to bad as a coach. He has all of this talent and yet his teams struggle way more than they should at times.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Stuhoo]

2 minutes ago, rcs29 said:

Agree. When you have 90% of the top 10% of talent in a league on one team they will most often win and don't need the "help". This also is why I think Ryan Day is mediocre to bad as a coach. He has all of this talent and yet his teams struggle way more than they should at times.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
 

 

Don't know if I can agree with you about Ryan Day. He took a decent Minnesota team's best shot on the road, made halftime adjustments, and won by two touchdowns. Harbaugh (and others) also have "all the talent," but haven't gotten the results Day has.

Day is now 24-2 as a head coach.

 

[Brass Cannon]

40 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

 

I've done some refereeing and umpiring, and I have a hard time with the narrative that on-field refs have an agenda for or against any particular team.

Referees are trained and hard-wired to see moving bodies colliding and interacting, and immediately react accordingly. They don't see uniform colors; they see an offensive lineman flinch and they throw a flag, or they see a late hit and throw a flag. When the play ends they attribute it to the uniform and uniform number.

Of course, there are many, many close calls during a game. One can cherry-pick the calls that go a certain team's way and conclude that the refs had 'a favorite', but it's just not so. 

 

It get some plays are going to go wrong but last nights was not only the wrong call but then OSU got the ball. 
 

16 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

It’s almost as if Ohio State kicks everyone’s @$$ because they have better players than everyone and not because of a cloak and dagger backroom agreement!

A lot of college football (and basketball) officials are bad. They’re bad for everyone and in big moments. Ohio State has never needed any help, didn’t last night, won’t this season, or any other season. 

We literally had a back room deal last year to change the rules to help OSU. So let’s not pretend that people who think it happens are off base here.  
 

I get why they changed the rules. But they literally saw the rules were not good for OSU so they called a meeting and changed it.  Don’t tell me that attitude just stopped after that meeting 

[HoosierAloha]

We literally had a back room deal last year to change the rules to help OSU. So let’s not pretend that people who think it happens are off base here.  
 
I get why they changed the rules. But they literally saw the rules were not good for OSU so they called a meeting and changed it.  Don’t tell me that attitude just stopped after that meeting 

And it just started from that ruling.

Look, I get that refs “only see players” but their livelihoods depend on continuing to work. They do that by appeasing the conference. The blame isn’t on the officials. It’s on the Big 1.0. They like it a certain way and will maintain it as long as they can.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Stuhoo]

7 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

It get some plays are going to go wrong but last nights was not only the wrong call but then OSU got the ball. 
 

We literally had a back room deal last year to change the rules to help OSU. So let’s not pretend that people who think it happens are off base here.  
 

I get why they changed the rules. But they literally saw the rules were not good for OSU so they called a meeting and changed it.  Don’t tell me that attitude just stopped after that meeting 

Gawd I hate conspiracy theories. The league rule changes from last year's division title eligibility is somehow intertwined with a few roving certified football referees who are "in on it?" and make on-field calls accordingly?!?

Do you have any guess how likely it would be that if there was some "message sent to referees" one of them would leak it, or get the word to someone else who would leak the "fix"?!? That is a 100% likelihood.

GAWD i hate conspiracy theories.

[Hovadipo]

5 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

It get some plays are going to go wrong but last nights was not only the wrong call but then OSU got the ball. 
 

We literally had a back room deal last year to change the rules to help OSU. So let’s not pretend that people who think it happens are off base here.  
 

I get why they changed the rules. But they literally saw the rules were not good for OSU so they called a meeting and changed it.  Don’t tell me that attitude just stopped after that meeting 

You’re comparing a rules fiasco caused by a global pandemic and refs cheating teams on the field? Ok. 

[Hovadipo]

IU coaches weren’t even really mad about the B1G title rule change. No one was excited about getting in on a technicality. Sure, they’d take it, but they’d know how they got there and so would everyone else. 

[Stuhoo]

1 minute ago, Hovadipo said:

IU coaches weren’t even really mad about the B1G title rule change. No one was excited about getting in on a technicality. Sure, they’d take it, but they’d know how they got there and so would everyone else. 

Hova from the top rope!

Tag me in brother!!

[WayneFleekHoosier]

I get Stuhoo’s and Hova’s point. I do. Ohio state is the most talented team in the B1G. They don’t generally need help, but sometimes they do. Last nights missed PI calls didn’t hurt them, that’s for sure. Also agree the vast majority of refs do their best to call a fair game. I also believe the B1G has a nice financial incentive to get a team into the college playoff and OSU is our regular front running candidate. From my perspective they get the benefit of the doubt in decisions both on and off the field. How all that works out is anyone’s best guess. In my opinion, they can be both the best team in the B1G and also the “darling” of the conference.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners