OmarComing25 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 Stop playing crappy teams close or you're going to get burned, I don't feel bad for MSU at all. And Bama is just too good, this is why I had no issue with them at #4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daa84 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 if a play is obviously called incorrect upon video review, it should be reviewable. Don't know what more to say about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 11:07 PM) Stop playing crappy teams close or you're going to get burned, I don't feel bad for MSU at all. And Bama is just too good, this is why I had no issue with them at #4. Disagree on the first part but agree on the second part. I never understand why people try to discount s***ty officiating in those types of situations. Bottom line is that while MSU should have played better they were very very likely to win that game if that play is called correctly and it was clearly the incorrect call and also not even a difficult call. That type of s***ty officiating should not be excused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmteam Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 06:07 PM) Indiana the best 0-5 Big Ten team in many years, and Sudfield a very effective QB. Gave Iowa their best shot...were in the game until the final Iowa first down on the Beathard run. Coleman had a really nifty td catch on fourth down. I just want a bowl. Definitely possible with Maryland and Purdue as the last two games. Today was the first Big Ten game where both Howard and Sudfeld were healthy the entire game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 09:45 PM) What a bulls*** way for MSU to lose their undefeated season. They aren't that great but that is hores***. That official shouldn't have a job on Monday as that is just an inexcusable call to miss and it wasn't even a difficult judgment call. Replay rules are just stupid. Replay should exist to get the call right. There shouldn't be restrictions on what they can change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 (edited) So can any Missouri fans/students/graduates fill us in on why a number of their black athletes are saying they won't play until the university's president is fired? Edited November 8, 2015 by whitesoxfan99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarComing25 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 11:18 PM) So can any Missouri fans/students/graduates fill us in on why a number of their black athletes are saying they won't play until the university's president is fired? http://www.themaneater.com/special-sections/mu-fall-2015/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 11:18 PM) So can any Missouri fans/students/graduates fill us in on why a number of their black athletes are saying they won't play until the university's president is fired? Isn't what they are doing kind of racist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 11:18 PM) So can any Missouri fans/students/graduates fill us in on why a number of their black athletes are saying they won't play until the university's president is fired? From the article I read, there was ONE racist incident on campus (two if you count the poop swastika) that didn't go punished, possibly because they have no idea who did it. But they want the president to apologize on behalf of the white student I guess? Or apologize for not doing something about it incident, to which again, I don't even know if they identified the students other than being white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 11:40 PM) From the article I read, there was ONE racist incident on campus (two if you count the poop swastika) that didn't go punished, possibly because they have no idea who did it. But they want the president to apologize on behalf of the white student I guess? Or apologize for not doing something about it incident, to which again, I don't even know if they identified the students other than being white. Why are the football players excluding their other teammates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Fan In Husker Land Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 09:45 PM) What a bulls*** way for MSU to lose their undefeated season. They aren't that great but that is hores***. That official shouldn't have a job on Monday as that is just an inexcusable call to miss and it wasn't even a difficult judgment call. QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 7, 2015 -> 10:47 PM) Replay rules are just stupid. Replay should exist to get the call right. There shouldn't be restrictions on what they can change. Rough season this year but GBR!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danman31 Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 I don't really think that solves anything. It was a s***ty call, bottom line. Finding technicalities within the way the rules are written doesn't change that. That just shows the rules are written poorly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 It was and it didn't seem like they took very long to review it nor had a good camera angle to do so, unless they had closer shots than what we were shown at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Brian @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 06:48 AM) It was and it didn't seem like they took very long to review it nor had a good camera angle to do so, unless they had closer shots than what we were shown at home. Since there apparently was contact, enough to push the receiver out of bounds, it makes me wonder why the official didn't throw a flag. That is a definite penalty. Granted it would have been declined, but the lack of a flag indicates to me no one was forced out. What a brutal call. Edited November 8, 2015 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 My favorite part of that post is the expert that was asked was the former ACC coordinator of officials. So you asked the guy who ran the absolute worst group of officials on the planet. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Fan In Husker Land Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 07:43 AM) My favorite part of that post is the expert that was asked was the former ACC coordinator of officials. So you asked the guy who ran the absolute worst group of officials on the planet. Nice. The guy who tweeted it works for ESPN, not myself. He tweeted it after he talked to the ESPN rules expert. All of college football officials suck, not just the ACC. The official correctly threw his hat, signaling that Reilly went out of bounds. He came back in and caught it and scored a touchdown. After conferring with the other officials to get the call made they said that the Michigan St. DB had made contact with Reilly. By the rule he doesn't have to be shoved out, just contact made. Therefore by the rule he is able to catch the ball with no penalty after reestablishing himself in bounds. It maybe a very dumb rule open to a lot of interpretation, but it was technically the correct call. The DB did NOT shove him forcefully out of bounds, but there is contact. Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds and returns in bounds during a down shall touch a legal forward pass while in the field of play or end zones or while airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R. 7-3-4-I, II and IV). [Exception: This does not apply to an originally eligible offensive player who immediately returns inbounds after going out of bounds due to contact by an opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-III)]. If he touches the pass before returning in bounds, it is an incomplete pass (Rule 7-3-7) and not a foul for illegal touching. Mike Pereira chimes in More from Pereira Pereira Pereira again But then again what does Pereira know. Notice how Pereira says contact. He may not think he was forced out, but he says there was contact. "Exception: This does not apply to an originally eligible offensive player who immediately returns inbounds after going out of bounds due to contact by an opponent" Edited November 8, 2015 by Sox Fan In Husker Land Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (Sox Fan In Husker Land @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 08:21 AM) The guy who tweeted it works for ESPN, not myself. He tweeted it after he talked to the ESPN rules expert. All of college football officials suck, not just the ACC. The official correctly threw his hat, signaling that Reilly went out of bounds. He came back in and caught it and scored a touchdown. After conferring with the other officials to get the call made they said that the Michigan St. DB had made contact with Reilly. By the rule he doesn't have to be shoved out, just contact made. Therefore by the rule he is able to catch the ball with no penalty after reestablishing himself in bounds. It maybe a very dumb rule open to a lot of interpretation, but it was technically the correct call. The DB did NOT shove him forcefully out of bounds, but there is contact. Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds and returns in bounds during a down shall touch a legal forward pass while in the field of play or end zones or while airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R. 7-3-4-I, II and IV). [Exception: This does not apply to an originally eligible offensive player who immediately returns inbounds after going out of bounds due to contact by an opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-III)]. If he touches the pass before returning in bounds, it is an incomplete pass (Rule 7-3-7) and not a foul for illegal touching. Mike Pereira chimes in More from Pereira Pereira Pereira again But then again what does Pereira know. Looking at your video, some officials should never call a college game again. Nebraska was due for a break, but watching it again makes it an even more ridiculous call. There is a ton on the line for MSU, and having it blow up with that.....I agree with whoever stated it earlier, there should not be limitations when looking at replay. Replay should be used to get the call right, and that wasn't right. on the other hand had MSU not used a TO when the were on defense seemingly because they just had them remaining, they might have been able to get a FG and continue Nebraska's nightmare of last second losses. Edited November 8, 2015 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Fan In Husker Land Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 08:33 AM) Looking at your video, some officials should never call a college game again. Nebraska was due for a break, but watching it again makes it an even more ridiculous call. There is a ton on the line for MSU, and having it blow up with that.....I agree with whoever stated it earlier, there should not be limitations when looking at replay. Replay should be used to get the call right, and that wasn't right. on the other hand had MSU not used a TO when the were on defense seemingly because they just had them remaining, they might have been able to get a FG and continue Nebraska's nightmare of last second losses. It is a vague rule left open to interpretation. Is it how we wanted to win, no. But we will take the W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (Sox Fan In Husker Land @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 08:43 AM) It is a vague rule left open to interpretation. Is it how we wanted to win, no. But we will take the W. I think a packed stadium in Lincoln should get the credit for that call. If they were in East Lansing or there were 25k in the crowd, I bet they call it differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 08:54 AM) I think a packed stadium in Lincoln should get the credit for that call. If they were in East Lansing or there were 25k in the crowd, I bet they call it differently. Agreed. MSU still shouldn't have let a sub par offense drive down the field that quickly and easily anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Fan In Husker Land Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 09:11 AM) Agreed. MSU still shouldn't have let a sub par offense drive down the field that quickly and easily anyway. Agree on the home field call. Memorial was rockin' last night. LOL at the subpar offense comment though. NU is 34th in Total Offense YPG despite all the injuries this year and a complete change in the offense we run. If being in the top 1/3 of Total Offense YPG is subpar then sign me up. We also put up the most points and yards on Michigan St. all year in that game with 499 yards and 39 points. Dantonio said they had a communication error which lead to a couple big plays on that last drive. I agree that no team should let another Offense go 91 yards in 38 seconds with no timeouts, that easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 How bout them Mizzou Tigers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan49 Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 If Oklahoma wins out, as in beats Baylor, TCU and Oklahoma State (and then the Big 12 title game), they have to be in the top 4, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 QUOTE (soxfan49 @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 07:44 PM) If Oklahoma wins out, as in beats Baylor, TCU and Oklahoma State (and then the Big 12 title game), they have to be in the top 4, right? There is no big 12 title game which could hurt them. If Clemson, Bama, OSU, and Stanford win out, then no. If ND beats Stanford, then maybe. That being said, those teams won't win out because college football happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan49 Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 8, 2015 -> 08:09 PM) There is no big 12 title game which could hurt them. If Clemson, Bama, OSU, and Stanford win out, then no. If ND beats Stanford, then maybe. That being said, those teams won't win out because college football happens. Huh. Totally forgot they got rid of the title game for the Big 12. Still, you have to think if they beat 3 top 15 teams in 21 days that they get in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts