Jump to content

Dahobbs

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    19715
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Dahobbs

  1. Interesting strategy...
  2. Watching the replay, it appears to actually be over and past his hands rather than through them. Agree with the Brett Favre-ish analogy, but not necessarily in a bad way. I think Sark would focus on him hitting the corner route that appeared open a moment before he bailed the pocket rather than worrying about that throw.
  3. Where do you see him hating on Arch? I don't understand posts like this. You're seeing something that simply isn't there.
  4. I understand the rule. As Twice indicated, the intent is to identify those sorts of forcible contact that go beyond making a normal football tackle. The examples listed as "indicators of targeting" are meant to be objective indicators of that. I don't think this play qualifies. He didn't lead with his helmet. Contact with the helmet may have been first, but it wasn't because he had his helmet down or out in front such that he was leading with it. His helmet was in a natural position for his body, upright, and his eyes facing forward. If you actually go and look at the NCAA's example books, that sort of play is specifically called out as not targeting. I think the closest indicator the play qualified for is "launching," but even then it wasn't a particular clear example of it.
  5. Contact doesn't make it a penalty. There has to be an "indication of targeting" and there really wasn't. It was a normal football tackle where forcible contact to the head/neck area occurred incidentally.
  6. Great job Kansas State. You cost yourself a minute for no fucking reason. Wait until you see his Epstein frequent flyer card.
  7. They are just costing themselves time. Utah is getting a TD here. What, no. Announcers are crazy. You take OT here as the favored team.
  8. I don't understand what you're upset about. I'm not defending anything. Our defense sucks. That doesn't mean we are running prevent. Again, if you got players covering the short zones, which we did, you aren't running prevent. We just have a lot of holes in our zone defense.
  9. Again, they weren't running a prevent defense. You can tell because we actually had players in the short zones. We just suck at covering.
  10. Well, at least our defense will have no reason to feel full of itself going into A&M.
  11. I don't understand why he did that.
  12. Wow. Just embarrassed on third and long.
  13. That isn't prevent.
  14. I wish we were playing prevent. We just don't know how to cover anyone.
  15. So what is the coverage there that leads a receiver with no one within 10 yards of him near the middle of the field?
  16. Grass can sneak up on you anywhere.
  17. And showing some tripping on a blade of grass.
  18. I don't know. The money seems to be helping Tech.
  19. The defense just gave up a TD in about a minute?
  20. Thamel looks like he has a literal stick up his ass.
×
×
  • Create New...