They would have still needed to gain more yards and kick a FG. It wasn’t a certainty. But it definitley cost them a chance to win in regulation. I would have been livid if that happened to ISU.
***2024-25 CFB Playoff/Bowl (Dec. 17-Jan. 20) Games Thread***
- Thread starter BigJCy
- Start date
I watch a lot of games that aren't my team. I mean I watch/listen to maybe 300 NBA games a year and I don't really even have a team.
What I don't get is people that aren't Lakers/Celtics fans who got more excited to watch Lakers/Celtics than say the year the Kings were better than the Lakers and beat them if not for dubious refs. I mean, the Kings being NBA champion is REALLY exciting to me. The lakers or celtics getting another one is the most boring thing in the universe I could possibly imagine. But apparently casual fan is exactly opposite of me.
It is changing for me in college football that I can no longer watch games that just involve SEC/Big Ten when they're forces actively trying to destroy the sport and my program. Years ago I'd have been fine watching a Big Ten great matchup or BIg Ten/SEC in the national championship, now it's really gross, feels like cheering for the Soviet Union, why would I bother?
I don’t think it’s that deep.
It’s clear Targeting. It was obvious in real-time, it was obvious after review, and its crystal clear an hour later. It would have been a HUGE call that went against Texas. A business decision was made to ensure a call of that magnitude would NOT go against Texas. And there will be ZERO repercussions for it. The officials (and the powers that be) will sleep well tonight.
Majority of people that watch the Super Bowl aren't what I would call fans of football. Its kind of an American tradition to watch the Super Bowl.
Look at it this way. If the ball got batted down and someone hit a receiver like that, wouldn't it be a penalty? I sure if it was a burnt orange jersey the call would be made.
I said the defenseless receiver is waved due to it being tipped. I don’t think it was crown of the helmet. Was it helmet to helmet, yes. I also agree that this targeting rule is poor. I don’t think the defender was intentionally trying to target the receiver, if they would have called targeting I would not have been surprised. I have seen that specific hit being waved off more and more.
It's less defensible as a replay call. I really cant blame any call for being wrong live.
There's also kind of a crazy double standard that some things can be reviewed and some can't. The NBA has actually improved in that, not every play gets reviewed, but when a coach uses a challenge they can review really absolutely anything including blown foul calls.
Not really sure what this has to do with the Targeting call. To reiterate, the Targeting on the play today (that should be been called, very obviously) has no relation - in any way - to the ball being tipped. It is silly and disingenuous to keep referencing a tipped pass.
To add, a player does not have to be a “receiver” to be deemed “defenseless”. It’s part of the core of the Targeting rule and the long history of how it’s evolved.
You aren't getting it.... yes you can interfere with a receiver if the ball is tipped... but you still cannot lower your head and hit them helmet to helmet and target them. It's two different things. It was targeting... plain and simple. He did lower his head before contact.
Everyone knows that farts smell best at sunset. Peak fart sniffing is desired at the transition between 3rd and 4th quarter.
This is exactly why you give preferential seeding to the conference champions.
The ranking is mostly subjective given the dearth of head-to-head results. This is exactly where bias can play an outsized effect.
The story was that the Big 12 far inferior to the Big 10 and SEC.
Without autobids and preferential seeding ASU would have been the #12 seed. They would have opened on the road at ND and faced a well-rested PSU if they won.
Texas would have been given a bye (along with Georgia and Oregon).
Tennessee and Indiana would have opened with home games.
A total of 7 Big 10 and SEC teams would have had massive advantage in the first round (only ND spoiling their private party).
Only Alabama (Alabama!) would have played a road game.
If you get rid of the byes for the top 4 CCG winners then you should at least play the games on neutral fields.
Aside: Given how it is playing out it may be seen as an advantage to avoid the layoff and start off with a home game.
I'm going to post this text again. The targeting rule is:
=============
(1) A player takes aim at an opponent for the purposes of attacking with forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.
or
(2) A player takes aim at a defenseless opponent for the purposes of attacking with forcible contact to the head or neck area.
=============
Note that it says "player" and "opponent", not "receiver".
=============
(1) A player takes aim at an opponent for the purposes of attacking with forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.
or
(2) A player takes aim at a defenseless opponent for the purposes of attacking with forcible contact to the head or neck area.
=============
Note that it says "player" and "opponent", not "receiver".
Texas has reached their ceiling. Their offense went silent for two and a half quarters. ASU missing that player who had to sit out half the game because of targeting may have cost them the game on Texas first touchdown. iMHo. Don’t know how finnebaum will spin this and I don’t care. SEC has been exposed this year.
I feel like Oregon doesn't even belong in the playoffs. horrible showing.
am i doing this right?
am i doing this right?
I'd love to believe that me watching or not makes a difference but I know it doesn't.
ASU earned its wings as a Big 12 member.
Getting absolutely ****** by bad calls against Texas is a rite of passage.
