NCAA Football, 2014-2015

[derspiess]

of course when one is a hurritard like dorsey, one must go against the noles even if it means becoming a domer for a week

Talk about selling your soul...

[alfred russel]

You should watch the play, ignoring the commentary.  You will see, as everyone has who has looked at this without knowing what they will see ahead of time, that the call is so obviously correct as to need no weaselly commentary.

Clearly you are the all knowing fount of college football wisdom. Some of your highlights from earlier this year:

The Michigan-ASU game was highly unusual in that I never once thought "why the fuck did they call that play?"  It's been at least ten years since I last saw a Michigan game that didn't feature at least one boneheaded offense play call.  I think Nussmeier is a keeper.

This Michigan defense is for real.  When the first string was in, ASU averaged something like 2.3 yards per play (and zero third down conversions).  Sure, it is just ASU, but that's still good football play.

So, how you feeling about the ND-UM game?  I can't imagine what is going through gamblers' minds that ND is a 5.5 point favorite.  I think Michigan wins this outright.  Golsen is a great QB, but everything he does well has to go against a Michigan strength. 

I actually think that ND would start just about anybody in Michigan's defensive backfield 3-deep.  ND will be able to run some, but they won't be able to pass.  Michigan won't be able to run except to keep ND honest, but they will pass at will against ND's secondary.  ND has nobody that can cover Funchess (height+speed+athleticism = #1JERSEYFORTHEFIRSTTIMEINTENYEARS), and Chesson wide and Funchess inside means ND can't double-team Funchess without going dime giving up the run game.

ND doesn't have the horses to handle Michigan this year.  Only a total breakdown of the Michigan O-line (which isn't inconceivable; look at last year) can save the Domers.

QB v Safeties:  Michigan, big
OL v DL: Domers, big
RB v LB: Michigan, big
Receivers v DB: Michigan, huge

That's the Tale of Two Cities.

Yep.  That's what has Michigan fans snickering over all the "hot seat" comments regarding Hoke.  Everyone knew that the team was going to pass through Attrition Valley after the woeful retention of RR's last two classes at Michigan; there were nine RS Juniors/seniors in the two-deep last year, and only six this year; on the offensive line, two and one, respectively. But next year, the O-line will have ten redshirt juniors and seniors available, lose one single player from the defensive two-deep,  AND have all the rivalry games at home.   It is almost impossible to imagine a scenario in which the AD throws all that away chasing a new coach.

[alfred russel]

I did. The idea that the receiver was just trying to get open and the mean DB initiated the contact is giggly.

It takes a serious and dedicated lack of understanding of football to believe that ND was running trips to one side with a pass to the receiver behind the other two just over the LOS...and they were not trying to run a screen.

I've seen this play a thousand times - the difference between a receiver trying to run a route and a receiver trying to stop a DB from covering is obvious.

The ND QB made a mistake and threw the ball a yard or so too long. He shortens that throw as designed, and this is a great play.

The DBs did initiate contact. Both DBs that were "blocked" jammed their receiver. The DB closest to the play actually made a move inside to get a jam even though the guy he was supposed to be covering was going outside.

You have a quick pass out from the QB, and are calling pass interference related to two defenders that jammed other wide receivers off the ball.

The play looked similar to a bubble screen but that does not mean it is what it was.

[grumbler]

You should watch the play, ignoring the commentary.  You will see, as everyone has who has looked at this without knowing what they will see ahead of time, that the call is so obviously correct as to need no weaselly commentary.

Clearly you are the all knowing fount of college football wisdom. Some of your highlights from earlier this year:

The Michigan-ASU game was highly unusual in that I never once thought "why the fuck did they call that play?"  It's been at least ten years since I last saw a Michigan game that didn't feature at least one boneheaded offense play call.  I think Nussmeier is a keeper.

This Michigan defense is for real.  When the first string was in, ASU averaged something like 2.3 yards per play (and zero third down conversions).  Sure, it is just ASU, but that's still good football play.

So, how you feeling about the ND-UM game?  I can't imagine what is going through gamblers' minds that ND is a 5.5 point favorite.  I think Michigan wins this outright.  Golsen is a great QB, but everything he does well has to go against a Michigan strength. 

I actually think that ND would start just about anybody in Michigan's defensive backfield 3-deep.  ND will be able to run some, but they won't be able to pass.  Michigan won't be able to run except to keep ND honest, but they will pass at will against ND's secondary.  ND has nobody that can cover Funchess (height+speed+athleticism = #1JERSEYFORTHEFIRSTTIMEINTENYEARS), and Chesson wide and Funchess inside means ND can't double-team Funchess without going dime giving up the run game.

ND doesn't have the horses to handle Michigan this year.  Only a total breakdown of the Michigan O-line (which isn't inconceivable; look at last year) can save the Domers.

QB v Safeties:  Michigan, big
OL v DL: Domers, big
RB v LB: Michigan, big
Receivers v DB: Michigan, huge

That's the Tale of Two Cities.

Yep.  That's what has Michigan fans snickering over all the "hot seat" comments regarding Hoke.  Everyone knew that the team was going to pass through Attrition Valley after the woeful retention of RR's last two classes at Michigan; there were nine RS Juniors/seniors in the two-deep last year, and only six this year; on the offensive line, two and one, respectively. But next year, the O-line will have ten redshirt juniors and seniors available, lose one single player from the defensive two-deep,  AND have all the rivalry games at home.   It is almost impossible to imagine a scenario in which the AD throws all that away chasing a new coach.

Wow!  The ultimate ad hom argument of the long, distinguished Languish history of ad hom arguments!  I'm touched that you went to all the effort to compile such an ad hom, but wouldn't the effort have been better-spent just conceding that you are wrong about the issue at hand?

[alfred russel]

Wow!  The ultimate ad hom argument of the long, distinguished Languish history of ad hom arguments!  I'm touched that you went to all the effort to compile such an ad hom, but wouldn't the effort have been better-spent just conceding that you are wrong about the issue at hand?

It wasn't hard to find a bunch of quotes or remember a guy getting super confident about his team after beating App State.

[Berkut]

Well, i officiate college football. And I think it is an obvious OPI. The director of all NCAA officials who is responsible for all college officiating thinks it was an obvious OPI call. The covering officials thought it was OPI, and the director of the ACC officials thought it was obvious OPI.

Against that we have some radio tool and you. The radio tool has more credibility that you, for sure, but I think you plus radio tool doesn't trump my own eyes and the opinions of those who are actual experts on officiating college football. Sorry.

[Admiral Yi]

Assuming the offending player was in fact running a slant after a jab step out, and that the DB did in fact jump the slant, what should the offending player have done differently to avoid the flag?

[CountDeMoney]

Well, i officiate college football. And I think it is an obvious OPI. The director of all NCAA officials who is responsible for all college officiating thinks it was an obvious OPI call. The covering officials thought it was OPI, and the director of the ACC officials thought it was obvious OPI.

Against that we have some radio tool and you. The radio tool has more credibility that you, for sure, but I think you plus radio tool doesn't trump my own eyes and the opinions of those who are actual experts on officiating college football. Sorry.

If the offensive pass interference had been aged, would it have made a difference?

[sbr]

Assuming the offending player was in fact running a slant after a jab step out, and that the DB did in fact jump the slant, what should the offending player have done differently to avoid the flag?

Put his hands up in the air to show he wasn't engaged with the defender at all.

[Barrister]

Well, i officiate college football.

You know, I think appeals to authority can sometimes be perfectly valid rhetorical tools.

And I think this is one of those times.

[alfred russel]

Well, i officiate college football. And I think it is an obvious OPI. The director of all NCAA officials who is responsible for all college officiating thinks it was an obvious OPI call. The covering officials thought it was OPI, and the director of the ACC officials thought it was obvious OPI.

Against that we have some radio tool and you. The radio tool has more credibility that you, for sure, but I think you plus radio tool doesn't trump my own eyes and the opinions of those who are actual experts on officiating college football. Sorry.

You are right. It is just some radio tool and me. There aren't hordes of people that think the same way, including neutrals. 

I'd also be far more prone to listen to the NCAA and ACC officiating directors if they didn't back up the calls made on the field basically every time there is any justification to do so. Ie, a misapplication of the rules or blatantly not supported by video evidence.

You claim you know it was a screen and the QB threw the ball too long. I don't think that is obvious. The offensive line did not block as though it was a screen (they were forming a pocket rather than trying to block downfield or aggressively knock back the defenders). The receiver's route was actually past the line of scrimmage and going toward the endzone by the time the ball was thrown.

You have a pass thrown quickly--probably within 2 seconds of the snap. There were 3 receivers on the right of the formation, along with 3 DBs. It is worth keeping in mind that this was a play that was probably anticipated, deliberated, and practiced for a moment like this--the ball was on a hash, at about the 2.5 yard line. One would think this was one of the 2 point plays ND had in for the game. The FSU DBs were predictably playing aggressively. If you have the outside guy fake going out and then go in, while the inside guy goes out, that puts incredible pressure on both the outside corners to switch coverages.

Darby, the FSU DB, clearly took the wrong guy. He attacked the wrong receiver at the line when he should have been going out to cover the receiver who scored the touchdown. How do you tell the difference between blocking and trying to continue running a route against press coverage when the contact is sustained for just a second or so? This is why Brian Kelly was bitching about FSU getting rewarded for blowing their coverage. You press receiver x when you should be covering y, a collision results, and when receiver y is wide open the ref thinks it was a pick because receiver x was blocking you.

[alfred russel]

Holy shit, I just saw this. It seems there was a plot to screw Notre Dame over.

The conspirator indicated here is junior cornerback Ronald Darby, the player against whom Will Fuller was falsely accused of committing pass interference. The media wants you believe Darby was just playing a game and not part of a larger concerted effort to destroy Notre Dame football. The media is nothing but L I A R S  W I T H  B A D  F A S H I O N  S E N S E, as you will see:

1. "Ronald Darby" is an anagram for "A brandy lord."

2. The Romanovs were known to have one of the world's most impressive collections of brandy.

3. Scientific consensus is that there are no surviving members of the Romanov dynasty, but careful thinkers know that this is likely a convenient fiction. According to that fiction, the Romanovs were all executed together in Yekaterinburg.

4. Yekaterinburg is a sister city of Genoa, Italy, population 594,904.

5. 5+9+4+9+4 = 31. 1931 was the year Knute Rockne died in a plane crash that W A S  O R C H E S T R A T E D  B Y  T H E  G O V E R N M E N T to create competitive balance in college football and undermine Notre Dame's deserved dominance of the sport.

It goes even deeper.

David Epperley is the head referee who oversaw the P U B L I C  F R A U D perpetrated against Notre Dame last Saturday night in Florida. Epperley is not the mastermind of this C O N S P I R A C Y, but he is one of its puppets, and there is proof.

1. "EPP-ERLE" on a telephone keypad gives you the number 377-3753.

2. In Boise, Idaho, 377-3753 is the number of a Blimpie Subs & Salads.

3. The most famous blimp in the W O R L D is operated by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company.

4. Goodyear Tire & Rubber is headquartered in Akron, Ohio.

5. The head football coach at the University of Akron is Terry Bowden, son of FSU legend Bobby Bowden.

Sweet Jesus.

[Berkut]

Well, i officiate college football. And I think it is an obvious OPI. The director of all NCAA officials who is responsible for all college officiating thinks it was an obvious OPI call. The covering officials thought it was OPI, and the director of the ACC officials thought it was obvious OPI.

Against that we have some radio tool and you. The radio tool has more credibility that you, for sure, but I think you plus radio tool doesn't trump my own eyes and the opinions of those who are actual experts on officiating college football. Sorry.

You are right. It is just some radio tool and me. There aren't hordes of people that think the same way, including neutrals. 

I'd also be far more prone to listen to the NCAA and ACC officiating directors if they didn't back up the calls made on the field basically every time there is any justification to do so. Ie, a misapplication of the rules or blatantly not supported by video evidence.

Wow - that is a pretty interesting comment. So you think all the people who officiate for a living are all in some grand conspiracy to hide officiating mistakes that are obvious to the like of you and South Bend radio talk show hosts?

The video I linked, and which you obviously did not watch, is a video put out by Redding every week addressed to officials primarily to highlight mistakes and procedural errors. Officials constantly, and I mean that literally, CONSTANTLY highlight mistakes that are made to each other. We watch video every single week where coordinators point out things done wrong. Hell, just last week I got to have the enjoyable experience of reviewing clips from my game and invited to explain why I didn't make some calls I should have, and this was as a result of clips sent into my boss by the losing coach. And I was wrong. Well, on one of them I was wrong anyway.

The idea that they all sit around lying and telling everyone nobody makes mistakes is so completely ignorant it pretty much destroys any credibility you never had on the subject. Hell, the other situation I pointed out (because it had to do with Arizona) on that very video was Redding telling the officials they screwed up the play!

Finally, I find it kind of amazing that your whine is that they don't say the officials screwed up except when their is evidence that the officials screwed up. Gosh, what a bunch of assholes, they don't throw their officials under the bus based on something other than actual video evidence or clear mis-application of the rules! Why, that is ridiculous! Doesn't Redding listen to South Bend radio hosts?

You claim you know it was a screen and the QB threw the ball too long. I don't think that is obvious.

I think it is rather obvious. This is not some special unique play, it is run all the time in college football.


If those receivers were there to catch passes rather than block, they sure do a bad job of getting open since they both run directly into defenders.

The offensive line did not block as though it was a screen (they were forming a pocket rather than trying to block downfield or aggressively knock back the defenders).

Why would they - this is a 2 yard play. They don't need to block downfield, the play will have failed or succeeded long before any block they place downfield will matter. They just need to give the QB time to dump the quick screen. You should watch more college football. This is a very common goal line play.

The receiver's route was actually past the line of scrimmage and going toward the endzone by the time the ball was thrown.

So? Of course his route goes towards the end zone. That is kind of normal for football, there are few routes that go away from the end zone, even on screen plays.


The QB let the play develop too long, or the WR didn't delay long enough, and the timing was a little off. They ran this same play earlier in the game, and the ball was caught right at the LOS, maybe just slightly over, but not enough to pull a flag.

You have a pass thrown quickly--probably within 2 seconds of the snap. There were 3 receivers on the right of the formation, along with 3 DBs. It is worth keeping in mind that this was a play that was probably anticipated, deliberated, and practiced for a moment like this--the ball was on a hash, at about the 2.5 yard line.

I am sure that is the case. And I don't doubt that part of that practice includes instruction to the 2 WRs to seal of the DBs to make sure they cannot get to the intended target.

One would think this was one of the 2 point plays ND had in for the game. The FSU DBs were predictably playing aggressively. If you have the outside guy fake going out and then go in, while the inside guy goes out, that puts incredible pressure on both the outside corners to switch coverages.

So?

Darby, the FSU DB, clearly took the wrong guy. He attacked the wrong receiver at the line when he should have been going out to cover the receiver who scored the touchdown. How do you tell the difference between blocking and trying to continue running a route against press coverage when the contact is sustained for just a second or so? This is why Brian Kelly was bitching about FSU getting rewarded for blowing their coverage. You press receiver x when you should be covering y, a collision results, and when receiver y is wide open the ref thinks it was a pick because receiver x was blocking you.

That was not a collision, it was the receiver going out and creating contact - both of them. Easy call, except for the situation. Only question is whether the pass would cross the LOS.

Look at the contact on the DBs - both of them are in the endzone, the outside DB doesn't even get contacted by the WR until they are BOTH in the endzone! He is actually backing away! The idea that this receiver was trying to get open and just kind of happened to Oopsie! run right into the DB who is the only defensive player in position to make any play on the WR is laughable. Pass interference restrictions for the offense start when the ball is snapped - they know it is going to be a pass and are responsible for blocking accordingly.

[Berkut]

Assuming the offending player was in fact running a slant after a jab step out, and that the DB did in fact jump the slant, what should the offending player have done differently to avoid the flag?

Run around the DB, go another direction.

OPI restrictions start with the snap for the offense, but not until the ball is thrown for the defense for a reason - the offense knows the play, the defense does not.

The defense has every right to interfere with the route before the ball is in the air, as long as they don't actually hold the receiver. The defender has the right to his spot on the field if he gets there first. The offensive player doesn't get to say "Hey, I was running a slant, and he was where I wanted to go, so I ran over him". If that was the case, offensive players could just find the nearerst defender and run them down, because of course there is always some route that would take them that way. He was inside! I was running a slant! He was outside, I was running a fade! It was right in front of me! I was running a go!

[derspiess]

Assuming the offending player was in fact running a slant after a jab step out, and that the DB did in fact jump the slant, what should the offending player have done differently to avoid the flag?

Put his hands up in the air to show he wasn't engaged with the defender at all.

Correct answer.  Also he could maybe turn his head to at least pretend to look back at the QB.