I was pretty impressed with Burrow's arm and judgment. I'm not sure what was up with Lawrence, though. At times, he was putting the ball right on the money. For much of the game, though, everything was high. He's lucky he didn't get picked a few times. And then he threw that groundball late in the game. What the heck?
The play of the game may have been the spearing penalty. The guy almost got away with it. There seems to be an instinct that causes guys to lead with their helmets. Teams try to coach that instinct out of players, but sometimes you see players do stupid things in the heat of the moment. After that guy got ejected, the Clemson defense didn't seem the same.
I agree on the ejection changing the momentum of the game. I think the guy was kind of screwed. It looked like he saw he was going to hit helmet to helmet and tried to avoid by dropping down a bit and hit with the crown of the helmet instead. The things you are asking defensive players to do on the fly is sometimes impossible. Whereas an offensive player can lead with his head and even stiff arm to the face mask with no call being made.
I was pretty impressed with Burrow's arm and judgment. I'm not sure what was up with Lawrence, though. At times, he was putting the ball right on the money. For much of the game, though, everything was high. He's lucky he didn't get picked a few times. And then he threw that groundball late in the game. What the heck?
The play of the game may have been the spearing penalty. The guy almost got away with it. There seems to be an instinct that causes guys to lead with their helmets. Teams try to coach that instinct out of players, but sometimes you see players do stupid things in the heat of the moment. After that guy got ejected, the Clemson defense didn't seem the same.
I agree on the ejection changing the momentum of the game. I think the guy was kind of screwed. It looked like he saw he was going to hit helmet to helmet and tried to avoid by dropping down a bit and hit with the crown of the helmet instead. The things you are asking defensive players to do on the fly is sometimes impossible. Whereas an offensive player can lead with his head and even stiff arm to the face mask with no call being made.
I hear you, but he didn’t need to be diving in like that. I’m sure that his coaches trained him not to do that. But sometimes players wind up doing it anyway.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31910 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:12 pm Post subject:
The college rule that calls for an automatic ejection for targeting is just beyond stupid. I understand calling a penalty for it. I really do. But even I know, as someone who never played tackle football but who has been around the game a bit and have close relatives who have played and who are immersed in the culture, that it's really hard to make a lot of tackles without the head/helmet being in front of your body. Think about it: if you're moving forward or running to make a tackle, it's not easy to just stand 100% straight up while you do so. You're probably going to have the head out in front. So, there's a chance that the head/helmet is going to make contact before the rest of you does. Especially on bang-bang plays where the defender is running fast and has to make a play. Now, again, call the penalties. I get it. But some of these ejections for what clearly are not egregious plays are stupid. It's football. We aren't playing tiddlywinks here. The Clemson player's conduct wasn't close to an egregious play. He wasn't using his helmet as a weapon. He was just trying to make a tackle.
Disagree. There are hundreds of tackles and attempted tackles in every game. Somehow, players manage to get through games without targeting or spearing. Some people used to whine that we were outlawing defense. Well, when kids started getting ejected, we found out they could play defense after all. The ejection/suspension rule is essential as a deterrent.
The Clemson player led with his helmet. He was not just making a tackle. That is an egregious play. In part, the rule is for his own protection. We don’t need more Marc Buonicontis.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31910 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:22 pm Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Disagree. There are hundreds of tackles and attempted tackles in every game. Somehow, players manage to get through games without targeting or spearing. Some people used to whine that we were outlawing defense. Well, when kids started getting ejected, we found out they could play defense after all. The ejection/suspension rule is essential as a deterrent.
The Clemson player led with his helmet. He was not just making a tackle. That is an egregious play. In part, the rule is for his own protection. We don’t need more Marc Buonicontis.
I didn't see it as egregious at all. It was a foul, yes. I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that they should not be ejecting people for plays like this. He was not attempting to injure the player and it wasn't over the line, in my eyes. Not at all. Delpit's play earlier in the game was way more of a spearing attempt, and they didn't even review it. I say this as someone who was rooting hard for LSU, by the way.
Seems to me that a player's helmet is leading, or ahead of their body, when making a tackle often. Sometimes, you get helmet-to-helmet contact or your helmet making contact first with the offensive player. It's inevitable. I think ejections should be warranted only for truly egregious plays. I didn't think this one warranted it. I just don't agree with the rule for how they eject players automatically if they call targeting.
He lowers his helmet and drives into the receiver with the crown. That isn't something that happens all the time. Players are coached not to do that. I understand that you don't think it was egregious. We can disagree about that. But even if I agreed with you, this is a rule with an intended deterrent effect. This is a situation where the danger to the defender is just as great as the danger to the receiver. We just can't allow these kinds of hits, egregious or not.
A kid can shrug off a 15 yard penalty. Players get called for personal fouls and pass interference multiple times every game. But when a kid has to make the perp walk to the locker room and can't play the first half of the next game, that's a whole different matter.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31910 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:07 pm Post subject:
^
It's too punitive, in my estimation. Yes, we can agree to disagree. There are some plays on a football field that are unavoidable where I've seen guys get ejected. Perhaps this play wasn't unavoidable.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31910 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:38 pm Post subject:
epak wrote:
Can we just ban Oklahoma from ever playing in the college playoffs? I'd rather have Bama with 2 losses over an Oklahoma team.
It would have been a very interesting debate if Tua doesn't go down and if they had beaten Auburn in the Iron Bowl. I still think they would have taken OU though (I just think there would have been Alabama fatigue, since they would not have even won their own division of their own conference), but we all know that a 'Bama team with a healthy Tua on a neutral field is probably a 7-point favorite on OU.
At least seven points, and that is with Alabama being subpar even with Tua. However, I disagree with the other poster in part. We can’t let the CFP turn into the SEC-Clemson-OSU tournament. That would start to diminish the whole process. What needs to happen is the inevitable eight team expansion (possibly with an interlude at six teams). This year, the Pac 12 teams would have gotten spanked as bad or worse than OU, and the Group of 6 team (Memphis?) would have been obliterated. But at least OU wouldn’t be the token “other” team.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3 ... 36, 37, 38
Page 38 of 38
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
