Those slide-roughing calls are generally a bunch of shit - they give the defender no possible way to avoid a penalty
Bowl Games? Bowl Games! Game thread 2016-17
- Thread starter InstaFace
- Start date
Agreed. That one was particularly bad because it was totally clear the defender had committed before the guy slid, and it was after being a runner too. Just terrible officiating.
So, now they threw a guy out on a so-so targeting call too? That was not clearly wrong (like the others were) but tough.
Where is this crew from, conference-wise?
Where is this crew from, conference-wise?
PSU has seemingly always got calls when they were playing well (this coming from a person that grew up in Central PA - me).
They didn't call it in the Pitt bowl game against Northwestern and it lead to an interception.
To be fair, non of these refs are perfect.
I don't think there is much question that that was targeting.
The penalty on the slide was as bad as it gets, however.
The penalty on the slide was as bad as it gets, however.
Joe Moorehead will get a big time power 5 head coaching job in 2018. Actually in 2017, he'll get hired before the bowl season.
Arguable---it's a high hit but not obviously a crouch or leading with crown. Though like I said, not clearly a wrong call either. I support concept of targeting calls but the enforcement has been very erratic.
We had this debate in a college game thread a few weeks ago---people's gut on what the rule is differs from what the rule actually is on the books.
Well, looks like Wisconsin and Penn State were the two best teams by season end in the conference.
I think my only issue with that call is more the 'targeting is an automatic ejection' rule than 'that was a penalty'. There's much much worse penalties in every game than that one that aren't ejections.
It did look a bit like the QB got pushed into him faster than he thought, I don't think he was intending to hit him there... was definitely a rulebook targeting penalty, though
His offensive creativity is out of this world. Those heaves downfield are all scripted, which is just nuts.
Wisconsin? What did they do to be considered better than OSU or Michigan? (Both of which beat them...and both of which would have been solid favorites vs western mich)
He turned down jobs already, he is back this next season but he will get hired before the inevitable bowl game.
Your comment perfectly illustrates the problem---by rule, if he wasn't intending to hit him in the head then it is not targeting. I think that is more likely the case on that one, but it is arguable.
The letter of the rule includes "to take aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with an apparent intent that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball"
What you say above is how many interpret the rule, and it simply is not the actual rule. Or how it is often called---that's why a well-intentioned rule (imo) that gets at a real, actual problem ends up being a bad thing.
Any chance he leaves sooner?...please
(I'll be at mich @ beaver stadium next year with my psu wife and in laws. Go blue)
Agreed on the erratic part. My sss experience from watching this year tells me the call on the field matters more than the review.
Anybody else catch the Red Sox championship ring in the play board pictures they use on the sidelines to send in plays from the Penn St. sideline?
It is the picture below the pacman symbol.
It is the picture below the pacman symbol.
Agreed. And look, actual targeting happens and is terrible so I'm ok with some overly-conservative calls getting made generally speaking. But some work probably needs to be done on enforcement still...
Yeah there were a number of replays this year that seemed to indicated no targeting only for refs to uphold the call.
Just to be clear, I hate USC and am indifferent to Penn State....but the calls are really awfully one-sided tonight.