Thoughts?

• sleeper

  

  Well after a short and brief hiatus from the college football forums, I am back. Here are some thoughts:
  
  The first thing I want to comment on is the "safety" that occurred during the sugar bowl. What a joke.
  
  Ok now that I got that off my chest the next important subject is the tattoo 5. The punishment is pretty severe for the crime and I bet it gets reduced down to 3-4 games and Ohio State goes undefeated in those games even without them. What they did was wrong, and they deserve the punishment, but really the rule is a stupid one. And to mark May who says if this happened to Mallet the SEC would suspend him, he is delusional. If this happened in the SEC, we wouldn't know about it for 4-5 years until after Mallet graduated and Arkansas would get a slap on the wrist.
  
  Congrats to Auburn on the Championship, they deserved it, for now. Cam Newton will probably be ruled ineligible in a couple years, I can't believe he had no knowledge of his dad seeking money for his services. What a joke.
  
  I'm embarrassed that Wisconsin, MSU, and Penn State got worked in their bowl games. I'd say Michigan as well, but we all know Michigan is garbage even with Denard Robinson. But oh well, the Big Ten still has a winning record against the SEC, so the Big Ten still carries the crown as the best conference, for now.
  
  That's all I can think of for now.
• Leonardo

  

  That is shockingly a good post, sleeper.
• vball10set

  welcome back, sleeper--it's good to have you upstairs again...now, about that avatar
• HitsRus

  

  I think the 'Sugar Bowl safety" was a joke too. In all seriousness, I think that the NCAA has to review that rule and make sure that a defense can't just push a runner back into the end zone and then release him before the whistle blows so as to tackle him in the end zone. If it doesn't, then that play goes into every defensive coordinator's play book tomorrow, if it already hasn't been put in.
• krambman

  

  That was lucid and surprisingly accurate. If you posted like that all the time this forum would be a much better place. The only thing you got wrong was about Penn State getting worked over. That game was close and they led most of the time.
• enigmaax

  HitsRus;643050 wrote:I think the 'Sugar Bowl safety" was a joke too. In all seriousness, I think that the NCAA has to review that rule and make sure that a defense can't just push a runner back into the end zone and then release him before the whistle blows so as to tackle him in the end zone. If it doesn't, then that play goes into every defensive coordinator's play book tomorrow, if it already hasn't been put in.

  
  Yes, I'll bet every defensive coordinator in the country is going to be rushing to teach their kids how to miss tackles so they can hope the runner goes backward then forward again. Not sure what the joke is, seems pretty easy to understand to me.
• HitsRus

  

  Well if it is so easy to understand, how come you don't get it? You are kind of on the right track though...the defense should not get an advantage in that situation by missing tackles either by poor technique or on purpose. Also, the runner should not be penalized for trying to get extra yards.
  
  Down by 9 with time running down....hell, yes that play goes in the book.
• enigmaax

  HitsRus;643595 wrote:Well if it is so easy to understand, how come you don't get it? You are kind of on the right track though...the defense should not get an advantage in that situation by missing tackles either by poor technique or on purpose. Also, the runner should not be penalized for trying to get extra yards.
  
  Down by 9 with time running down....hell, yes that play goes in the book.

  
  Amazing that no coach has ever thought of that in all these years.
  
  So, let's say this wasn't in the endzone. Say, the runner was hit at the 50 yard line and knocked backwards, but keeps going. Ends up running several yards the other direction while trying to avoid defenders, goes from sideline to sideline, and is finally tackled at his own 40 yard line. You want him to get those ten yards back because he shouldn't be penalized for trying to get extra yards?
• ytownfootball

  

  To be fair, I don't believe it's ever been called/not called quite like it was until the Sugar Bowl, at least not to my recollection. I think that is the point.
• enigmaax

  ytownfootball;643680 wrote:To be fair, I don't believe it's ever been called/not called quite like it was until the Sugar Bowl, at least not to my recollection. I think that is the point.

  
  I think you may not recollect because of a couple things: 1) it doesn't happen that way very often and 2) the impact of the call is rarely the same - putting points on the board as opposed to being a simple (and potentially insignificant) spot of the ball.
• dat dude

  The "safety" has already been discussed ad nauseum on another thread. It was a terrible call, no doubt.
• enigmaax

  dat dude;643728 wrote:The "safety" has already been discussed ad nauseum on another thread. It was a terrible call, no doubt.

  
  Sorry, didn't read that thread, just saw it referenced here. Which thread was it? I'm interested to read the other side because I don't even know why it is a question...wasn't terrible, at all.
• Pick6

  

  HitsRus;643595 wrote:Well if it is so easy to understand, how come you don't get it? You are kind of on the right track though...the defense should not get an advantage in that situation by missing tackles either by poor technique or on purpose. Also, the runner should not be penalized for trying to get extra yards.
  
  Down by 9 with time running down....hell, yes that play goes in the book.

  
  you really dont understand the situation.
• Pick6

  

  enigmaax;643733 wrote:Sorry, didn't read that thread, just saw it referenced here. Which thread was it? I'm interested to read the other side because I don't even know why it is a question...wasn't terrible, at all.

  
  the only thing bad about it was that the whistle should have been blown because forward progress was stopped. but in the events that occured, (boom breaking the tackle in the endzone), it was a safety.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  It was discussed in the Sugar Bowl in-game thread. Herron's forward progress was stopped at the 2 yard line. Even though he broke a tackle in the end zone, he never started moving forward again, he was immediately driven back again by 2 more defenders. Since the last point he progressed forward was the 2 yard line, that is where the ball should have been spotted.
• dat dude

  enigmaax;643733 wrote:Sorry, didn't read that thread, just saw it referenced here. Which thread was it? I'm interested to read the other side because I don't even know why it is a question...wasn't terrible, at all.

  
  If you look at the rulebook, the officials blew the call. I believe there was a thread titled "Safety or no safety" or something of the sort.
• enigmaax

  dat dude;643809 wrote:If you look at the rulebook, the officials blew the call. I believe there was a thread titled "Safety or no safety" or something of the sort.

  
  Thanks - I did find the thread, though I'm not going to read through all those pages.
  
  I understand the point of view that the whistle should have been blown and the play stopped before he went back into the endzone, even though I still don't agree. I also don't think any of you trying that as your argument would like the consequences if applied to every play. Basically, a runner would have no chance to break any reasonable attempt at a tackle because the whistle would have to be blown way before the ball carrier goes down.
  
  Certainly you'd be claiming it was the worst call in the world had they blown the whistle there a split second before the guy broke completely free and was off to the races.
  
  Anyway, that just comes down to a difference in how you saw the play happen versus how the officials (and some others) saw the play happen. The original post to which I responded was that the NCAA needs to re-evaluate the whole rule, which I still find to be silly. The fact that the officials determined his forward progress was not stopped while in the grasp and he subsequently was tackled in the endzone doesn't make the rule bad. And given the officials' perspective, they made the right call (as I did see several already pointed out on the other thread).
• jhay78

  

  sleeper;642996 wrote:Well after a short and brief hiatus from the college football forums, I am back. Here are some thoughts:
  
  The first thing I want to comment on is the "safety" that occurred during the sugar bowl. What a joke.
  
  Ok now that I got that off my chest the next important subject is the tattoo 5. The punishment is pretty severe for the crime and I bet it gets reduced down to 3-4 games and Ohio State goes undefeated in those games even without them. What they did was wrong, and they deserve the punishment, but really the rule is a stupid one. And to mark May who says if this happened to Mallet the SEC would suspend him, he is delusional. If this happened in the SEC, we wouldn't know about it for 4-5 years until after Mallet graduated and Arkansas would get a slap on the wrist.
  
  Congrats to Auburn on the Championship, they deserved it, for now. Cam Newton will probably be ruled ineligible in a couple years, I can't believe he had no knowledge of his dad seeking money for his services. What a joke.
  
  I'm embarrassed that Wisconsin, MSU, and Penn State got worked in their bowl games. I'd say Michigan as well, but we all know Michigan is garbage even with Denard Robinson. But oh well, the Big Ten still has a winning record against the SEC, so the Big Ten still carries the crown as the best conference, for now.
  
  That's all I can think of for now.

  
  You forgot "How about them Irish smashing the U in the (I forget which) Bowl!"
• ytownfootball

  

  When polled however, over 80% of officials felt the wrong call was made, (courtesy of sonofanump). That kinda removes the homer bias some feel exists on the matter. The wrong call was made, it cost points and possession...because forward progress wasn't blown dead.
  

  Originally Posted by Sonofanump
  It's been updated since I left this morning. It is now at 81% believe the safety to incorrect.

• enigmaax

  ytownfootball;643934 wrote:When polled however, over 80% of officials felt the wrong call was made, (courtesy of sonofanump). That kinda removes the homer bias some feel exists on the matter. The wrong call was made, it cost points and possession...because forward progress wasn't blown dead.

  
  Yeah, you know, I went back and watched it again. He was driven back awfully far in the first place. I can see why people feel it should have been blown dead before he broke free.
  
  Guess it really doesn't matter at what point a mistake was made if it leads to the same end result.
• ytownfootball

  

  The point was also made that the line judge raised his hand signaling the end of play/forward progress too, though not the whistle, still signals end of play. I don't consider it a big deal, though a different outcome of the game would have my opinion seen differently. I doubt those exact circumstances happen again in another 1000 games.
• HitsRus

  

  It really isn't hard to clarify the rule at all...and take whether the whistle blew or not out of the equation.
  
  here it is:
  
  When the ball carrier is driven into the endzone by defensive contact, he should be awarded forward progress in all cases.
  
  That way it is the defenses' responsibility to wrap the runner up, and the ball carrier is at no jeopardy for trying to advance the ball. This has no other bearing on any other plays anywhere else on the field.
• Pick6

  

  ^you are really thinking wayyyyyyyyyyyyy too much if you think defenses are going to have a "plan" to drive a ball carrier back in the endzone and let them go for another teammate to tackle them to get a safety.
• enigmaax

  HitsRus;644067 wrote:It really isn't hard to clarify the rule at all...and take whether the whistle blew or not out of the equation.
  
  here it is:
  
  When the ball carrier is driven into the endzone by defensive contact, he should be awarded forward progress in all cases.
  
  That way it is the defenses' responsibility to wrap the runner up, and the ball carrier is at no jeopardy for trying to advance the ball. This has no other bearing on any other plays anywhere else on the field.

  
  Yeah, this is the part I just find ridiculous in the conversation. There's no problem with the rule.
• believer

  

  sleeper;642996 wrote:I'm embarrassed that Wisconsin, MSU, and Penn State got worked in their bowl games. I'd say Michigan as well, but we all know Michigan is garbage even with Denard Robinson.

  I agree in general but I wouldn't say Penn State got worked. They actually played a surprisingly good game against Florida yet got homered on several occasions.