Tennessee Message Board Meltdown

optionqb said:
I did think that the helmet to helmet call against Tennessee at the end of the game was unnecessary, but it was within the realm of reason to call it.
Click to expand...
You're joking right? The launching call was clear, the late hit afterwards was even clearer, both should have been called and UT should have lost in regulation.

Also, Butch Davis showed the entire world what a freaking clown he is by running the ball with no timeouts and 15 seconds left. What a nitwit. It's amazing he still has a job.
 
Wow, there's lots of interesting stuff going on over on volnation.

Apparently the fans pelted UNC players and refs with bottles after the game?

Apparently the UNC coaches in the press box went screaming out of the box when the game ended singing "sloppy top" ..?
 
beej67 said:
You're joking right? The launching call was clear, the late hit afterwards was even clearer, both should have been called and UT should have lost in regulation.

Also, Butch Davis showed the entire world what a freaking clown he is by running the ball with no timeouts and 15 seconds left. What a nitwit. It's amazing he still has a job.
Click to expand...

This is right on da mark!
 
Apparently they don't think Bray is a punk. A head-case QB rarely wins anything. Have fun for the next few years, UT.
 
beej67 said:
You're joking right? The launching call was clear, the late hit afterwards was even clearer, both should have been called and UT should have lost in regulation.

Also, Butch Davis showed the entire world what a freaking clown he is by running the ball with no timeouts and 15 seconds left. What a nitwit. It's amazing he still has a job.
Click to expand...

"Launching" is what a DB does when he is trying to hit an airborne receiver. It is virtually impossible to make contact with the shoulder pads without making contact with some part of the helmet. It only looked bad because he absolutely cleaned the guys clock. Oh and the receiver was "defenseless"? Spare me.

If you think NC was on the short-end of bad calls you probably did not watch the game. What did you think about the referee actually calling the came...as in calling over and done with...and then reversing his call after the coaches has already come out to shake hands? The guy then called for a review of the play. Now, don't get me wrong, the crew got the final call right (giving NC as shot a a FG with one second left). But in my entire life of watching football, I've never seen a game officially called by a referee and then restarted again.
 
optionqb said:
"Launching" is what a DB does when he is trying to hit an airborne receiver. It is virtually impossible to make contact with the shoulder pads without making contact with some part of the helmet. It only looked bad because he absolutely cleaned the guys clock. Oh and the receiver was "defenseless"? Spare me.

If you think NC was on the short-end of bad calls you probably did not watch the game. What did you think about the referee actually call the came...as in calling over and done with...and then reversing his call after the coaches has already come out to shake hands? The guy then called for a review of the play. Now, don't get me wrong, the crew got the final call right (giving NC as shot a a FG with one minute left). But in my entire life of watching football, I've never seen a game officially called by a referee and then restarted again.
Click to expand...

There is no rule which specifies how many times an official can declare the game "over"...at least that's what i heard...

and they got the call right.
 
optionqb said:
"Launching" is what a DB does when he is trying to hit an airborne receiver. It is virtually impossible to make contact with the shoulder pads without making contact with some part of the helmet. It only looked bad because he absolutely cleaned the guys clock. Oh and the receiver was "defenseless"? Spare me.
Click to expand...

It used to be. Now it's what a DB does if he wants to get flagged for 15 yards. The interpretation of the rules has changed over the past year. Players need to take notice or they'll get flagged.

If you don't keep at least one foot on the ground when making the hit, you're probably going to get flagged.
 
andrew said:
It used to be. Now it's what a DB does if he wants to get flagged for 15 yards. The interpretation of the rules has changed over the past year. Players need to take notice or they'll get flagged.

If you don't keep at least one foot on the ground when making the hit, you're probably going to get flagged.
Click to expand...

The rule applies to a "defenseless player". This term has been controversial, but has historically never included a back or receiver who has caught the football. This year, there has been confusion due to the Desean Jackson hit and perhaps a few others. The rule cannot stand the test of consistency. If Desean Jackson is defenseless when facing a defender while airborne, then isn't a running back who performs a goaline plunge "defenseless" when he's airborne? Isn't the goalline back even more likely to be hit in the head since he's leaping head first?

Sorry. I realize the theory behind it. I even realize that players will potentially get flagged for doing it in the short-run, but you are asking DBs to tentatively tackle a WR who has caught the football. It just won't work. As a rule, it should be ignored until pressure forces the league to render sane rulings. Any team that tries to teach their DBs to approach airborne receivers with a "feet on the ground" tackling technique will suffer far more from completed passes than they will from penalties.
 
optionqb said:
The rule applies to a "defenseless player". This term has been controversial, but has historically never included a back or receiver who has caught the football. This year, there has been confusion due to the Desean Jackson hit and perhaps a few others. The rule cannot stand the test of consistency. If Desean Jackson is defenseless when facing a defender while airborne, then isn't a running back who performs a goaline plunge "defenseless" when he's airborne? Isn't the goalline back even more likely to be hit in the head since he's leaping head first?

Sorry. I realize the theory behind it. I even realize that players will potentially get flagged for doing it in the short-run, but you are asking DBs to tentatively tackle a WR who has caught the football. It just won't work. As a rule, it should be ignored until pressure forces the league to render sane rulings. Any team that tries to teach their DBs to approach airborne receivers with a "feet on the ground" tackling technique will suffer far more from completed passes than they will from penalties.
Click to expand...

All of your points are valid. However, the fact remains that players are going to get flagged for doing it and this flag may have cost Tennessee the game.

As for pressure forcing the league/NCAA to change the way they interpret the rule...I think the reverse is going to happen. Pressure is going to force football to make even more hits illegal as more and more concussion studies are done and the inevitable death/full paralysis of a high profile player occurs.

In my opinion this is going to become a major crisis for the sport of football and we are going to see the sport hit a major crossroads sometime within the next decade.
 
optionqb said:
What did you think about the referee actually calling the came...as in calling over and done with...and then reversing his call after the coaches has already come out to shake hands? The guy then called for a review of the play. Now, don't get me wrong, the crew got the final call right (giving NC as shot a a FG with one second left).
Click to expand...

Pretty sure it's out of his hands at that point. After the 2 minute mark all reviews are called from "upstairs," not from officials on the field. But if they got the call right, I'm not sure what your point is. Are you just mad because the review hurt your team? Sorry, it happens.

optionqb said:
But in my entire life of watching football, I've never seen a game officially called by a referee and then restarted again.
Click to expand...

Wait. I thought you were a UTk fan? Did you miss the LSU game earlier this year? :dunno:
 
I certainly am not objective. I wanted Tennessee to beat UNCheaters. But, I question the "launch" personal foul. If an offensive player has the football, is it illegal to leave your feet to hit the player? It seems the UT defender left his feet and hit the guy hard, more on the shoulder pads than the head. It was a vicious hit. But, illegal?

Then, on the spike with one second left. On any spike play one or two seconds usually runs off. As I look at the play, did Yates receive a snap, get control and spike the ball? No. The snap occurs with one second and Yates bats it to the ground with the :01 just barely on the clock. If you look at this play, the refs allowed Cryolina to to snap and spike all with one second on the clock. Amazing.

Finally, roughing the kicker should be an option to either decline and go to overtime or take the penalty and go for a win via touchdown. Giving half the distance is a terrible result in my opinion. (I understand penalties for unsportsmanlike conduct, but not roughing the kicker). The option should have been exlained to the captain at the coin toss, "Do you want the ball at the 40, first and ten, or for UNC to have the ball at the 12 and a half, first and ten". This was a miserable end to a football game.
 
77GTFan said:
... UNCheaters
Click to expand...

Hehe, maybe you're around too many Carolina fans that talk smack (just remember we did beat them!).

I think UNC got what they deserved out of the NCAA investigation with all the suspensions and ineligible players. I've followed the UNC scandal pretty close and some of the things that their players were suspended for (like Deunta Williams getting picked up at the airport and staying overnight at a friend's house) were stepping on the "harsh penalty" boundary. Don't forget that technically, this isn't over for them. The NCAA has yet to rule on the penalties/sanctions UNC's football program will get because of these problems.

In light of the scandal at Ohio State (*ahem* and Auburn), I would say that UNC got the bad end of the NCAA stick.
 
77GTFan said:
I certainly am not objective. I wanted Tennessee to beat UNCheaters. But, I question the "launch" personal foul. If an offensive player has the football, is it illegal to leave your feet to hit the player? It seems the UT defender left his feet and hit the guy hard, more on the shoulder pads than the head. It was a vicious hit. But, illegal?
Click to expand...

Yes, as of this year. Much of the confusion comes from the NFL's refusal to release their handbook on how to interpret the rules of football, which is in effect the real rulebook. They are the "trendsetters", if you will, and they have made it a point of emphasis to make this type of play illegal. Thus the NCAA imitates it. They definitely need to work on defining this penalty and calling it consistently, but the type of hit seen here is an egregious example and will get called 10/10 times this year.

Then, on the spike with one second left. On any spike play one or two seconds usually runs off. As I look at the play, did Yates receive a snap, get control and spike the ball? No. The snap occurs with one second and Yates bats it to the ground with the :01 just barely on the clock. If you look at this play, the refs allowed Cryolina to to snap and spike all with one second on the clock. Amazing.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are saying here? Are you just complimenting Yates? The clock was running for a significant amount of time before the snap (no refs involved), and you just said yourself that the ball hits the ground with 1 second left. Therefore there's one second left on the clock as confirmed by replay.

Finally, roughing the kicker should be an option to either decline and go to overtime or take the penalty and go for a win via touchdown. Giving half the distance is a terrible result in my opinion. (I understand penalties for unsportsmanlike conduct, but not roughing the kicker). The option should have been exlained to the captain at the coin toss, "Do you want the ball at the 40, first and ten, or for UNC to have the ball at the 12 and a half, first and ten". This was a miserable end to a football game.
Click to expand...
This one is interesting. Like you said, unsportsmanlike should certainly carry over as it represents a deliberate penalty outside the flow of the game (ie not a hold, pass interference, etc.)

The question is whether roughing the kicker is an avoidable foul that basically represents a "cheap shot" on the kicker (like roughing the passer.) Football has decided that it is, so the carry-over is proper as defined by the rules, but it doesn't normally seem like that to me, certainly not in this case.

In my opinion, there should be two levels of roughing the kicker: one for incidental contact which would be a five yard penalty and not carry over (this would be the type of play we saw at the end of this game), and one for the "roughing the passer equivalent" which would be a 15 yard penalty and would carry over (basically just a cheap shot on the kicker).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top