Jump to content

Magus Ossis

Full Members
  • Posts

    2409
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Magus Ossis

  1. Someone should make a Texags account ArtVIIsec10to13 and see how long it takes those functionally illiterate and delusional lemmings to notice the significance of the reference. Hint: 1876.
  2. For aggy it’s all about living in the middens with occasional visits to the poop deck.
  3. Of course, 5-7 is a better win % than Patterson had his last year at TCU. He’s good, but we’re not losing Lombardi Saban.
  4. *costeded 😉
  5. If I (and apologies if I do not) understand correctly, 1. FSU has granted broadcast rights to ACC 2. FSU would like to be able to leave ACC, presumably to join SEC 3. ESPN has purchased the broadcast rights from ACC 4. ESPN has purchased the broadcast rights from SEC 5. ESPN is potentially both the damaged party and the beneficiary should FSU bolt 6. ESPN is therefore somewhat in the driver's seat for telling FSU and ACC who goes where and when
  6. My favorite would be to adjust the record for years the NCAA determined a team to have committed major infractions. Without the Jackie/RC FedEx era, whoops.
  7. Our home games were on the LHN because the LHN by its nature was supposed to have Texas games. They were not on LHN, as a rule, for lack of demand for them in better media. I would expect to see relatively few Texas games relegated to ESPN+.
  8. [1] Icing. Calling a single defensive time-out before a game-changing, end-of-half, longer-than-34-yard FG attempt has been found to decrease the likelihood of making the attempt. The new rule would only limit multiple TOs, which to my knowledge have not been shown to make any greater difference. I hate waiting for the end of a game when I know there is only a snap and kick remaining. This rule would not significantly reduce number of snaps or injuries, but it has little evidence to suggest it makes trouble, and I would certainly not cry if it were implemented. [2] Untimed Downs. Removing the rare untimed down to end and odd-numbered quarter will do little to shorten the average game. It would likewise not necessarily affect the game negatively. Play could continue in the following quarter with the appropriate penalty applied. This doesn't remove any particular pet peeve of mine, but neither does it bother me. [3] 1st Down Clock. This rule would significantly change the feel of CFB, shorten games, and reduce plays. Playing less football results in fewer football-related injuries. And in less football-watching enjoyment. Keeping the old rule in place in the final 2 minutes of halves preserves the greater comeback score potential of college ball somewhat. I am not a fan of the need to move the clock along, but I could see considering this if other options weren't available. First of all, we have decided injuries are an acceptable risk: we still play the game. Secondly, there are other ways to accommodate those who need the 2:30 game over by 5:55. See below. I'm against it but think it's coming anyway. [4] Incompletions. This rule would likewise change the feel, shorten the games, and reduce plays. I like watching football and still prefer looking for alternatives that do not result in fewer snaps played. Even so, I can see a reasonableness to expecting an offense to be at the line ready to run a play when the ball is spotted or deal with the clock winding down. Teams get time-outs. In the end, I come down here as on [3]: I would go along more were this the only way to help manage routine game length in real time. [+1] Reviews. Reviews are frustrating because they ruin the rhythm of the game and because even with them, obviously or seemingly wrong calls (or non-calls) are left to stand with great frequency. The average game has 4 minutes waiting on review results. More camera angles (including always having goal-line and side-line cameras in place) with officials watching every angle from the booth would allow rapid response when a review official sees something obviously contradicting the call on the field. If no official buzzes in before the next snap, play continues. If he does, the senior booth official has 30 seconds max to agree with the call or the booth objection. [+2] Officials. If they are too out of shape to hustle running the ball back for the next snap, let them do something else on Saturdays. Proliferating cameras in the venues that host D1 games is a trivial expense compared to the revenue this sport generates and the cost of bringing in officials. Some calls such as out-of-bounds, offsides, false start, etc are easily seen by cameras and can even be automated like the dreaded tennis line alarm. [+3] Injuries. Stopping play for an injury automatically uses a time-out. A team that has failed to preserve a time-out in case of injury is charged with unsportsmanlike conduct on the bench each time (with one "grace injury stoppage" per game) the officials must stop play anyway. The penalty is not applied if the injury is associated with a foul by the opposing team. [+4] Dynamic rules. Some or all of the accelerated clock rules to be considered could be used only in the event that a game is running long. This would have the drawback of confusing people who barely keep up now, but the precedent is set in differing timing rules in the final 2 minutes already. Once, for example, 3 hours have elapsed since kick-off, rules [3] and [4] apply; 4 hours after kick-off, a running clock is initiated. While more susceptible to confusion, it would limit the effect of the new rules on games that otherwise were going to end on time anyway with the old rules. TLDR : While more football causes more injuries, I reject this as a reason to eliminate plays. Carried to its logical conclusion, this rationale leads one to cancel the season. I do see the need to have some predictability for when games will end, and the game has changed a great deal in terms of what offenses do compared to the NCAA of the 20th century. We don't need another NFL, though. In the end, the networks are going to get what they want, so there is little point to our forming or stating opinions anyway.
  9. Well spoken, sir.
  10. Ultimately, I think the combination of Texas to the SEC, moving to NIL, and expanding the playoff field to 12 teams is good for almost everybody errbody from the old 12: 1. Athletes may be better compensated for their talents and efforts. 2. Texas leverages the wealth of its donor base to support our recruiting, and sponsors have more avenues. 3. Texas and SEC both improve their TV revenue situations in the marriage. 4. Texas is still virtually guaranteed a playoff berth and chance at redemption in seasons marred by one frustrating loss. Finishing in the top 3 in the SEC is basically an autobid, and 4th still looks not-bad. 5. The Big 12 remnants will have a clear path to the playoffs that does not require beating a single traditional power. 6. Sadly for teams that benefitted from the limited policing of under-the-table money previously, not everyone can be a winner in this. Boo hoo.
  11. No college competing in the same leagues is going to be purely fans of another. There is always some degree of rivalry. ISU has never been particularly hateful or small compared to some other schools (Nebraska, aggy certainly). The AD expands in that interview that he's tired of having to do two versions of everything as a conference, not knowing how many teams will be involved. He doesn't rag on UT at all. You guys calling him a nothing and cussing him are part of the reason why so many are ready to hate Texas and call us all arrogant. And in many cases people from the same crowd later complain that we are hated and called arrogant. Thanks for representing us well. Good riddance to Baylor. To ISU: I want to congratulate you on your new business and I'm sure you'll do very well and good luck to you. Especially since your interests don't conflict with mine.
  12. Or Kliavkov is doing what increasingly desperate men do.
  13. The 71.3% of Texas applicants who are rejected largely go to less selective colleges and have someone else for whom to cheer. The slough from the aggy applicant pool go to Blinndergarten or McDonalds.
  14. A man who earns a living juggling lizards at birthday parties is no herpetologist. Football writer’s job is not football.
  15. Can the Big12 schools left behind or joining now afford to pay the exit penalty with the money they'd get for going ACC? GOR aside, there is a significant payment ostensibly required to depart.
  16. I’m not so sure we’ll see OU/aggy as rivals. They don’t have a super-rich history together, and aggy is going to cry and whine not to have to play OU. With enough time they’ll come up with 77 different excuses.
  17. Mahomes brings something to the table as an NFL quarterback that Elway, frankly, never could. An ACL in his left knee. Playing a postseason on a high ankle sprain was impressive. Playing a career on a blown ACL is crazy.
  18. There will be no blue bloods, but I strongly suspect there will be haves and have nots. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  19. Sadly, some actually were upsets over the last/lost decade.
  20. I don’t know about anyone else here, having myself no particular NFL allegiance. I for one though always look forward to reading well-thought-out arguments that rest on propositions such as, “that admitted infraction doesn’t meet my unstated personal preferred threshold of egregiousness,” or better still, “blah blah blah fans of team that didn’t play in the game.” These posts make this place interesting and educating, and they demonstrate the insight of their authors.
  21. Aggy should have the two schools we least worry about recruiting Texas as its other two "rivals," if we are wish casting what's best for Texas. Keep those other schools out of our backyard as much as possible.
  22. Yeah, I'm pretty new to watching football, so maybe you can help me. It will be little effort on your part, I have little doubt, to post representative stills of the Philly Jersey sticking out on an illegally held receiver on each of the Eagles' offensive plays-- I won't ask you to do it for KC. Your blanket statement about holding is a commonly accepted one, but in the context of offensive holding at the LOS, not defensive holding when the receiver makes a cut in the secondary. I would be interested to see your objective criteria for "pretty egregious" defensive holding which facilitate fair and reproducible snap officiating decisions at the time of the foul.
  23. To summarize Bow: 1. Yes, I know the defender held an eligible receiver running a route in the secondary 2. Yes I know it turned out to be the intended target of the pass. 3. Yes I see the still frame of the jersey sticking out proving the hold. I get that this is a way refs are trained to identify holding. 4. Yes I know the refs saw the foul and flagged it. 5. Yes I know the defender admitted unequivocally he was holding. 6. Yes I know the defender knows holding is a penalty but did it anyway to try to impede the rout, hoping to get away with it and influence the game. 7. Yes I know an improvised play when timing is off is more susceptible to error. 8. Yes I know defensive holding is holding before the pass and thus is not penalized based on its EFFECT, even when the player held is never considered for a target. 9. Yes I know it rewards and encourages rule-breaking and conspiracy theories to ignore penalties. 10. I have judged the style of this hold unworthy of a flag, based on my vast expertise of skiing technique. I also think Jimbo would never have put his team in such a vulnerable position. That’s why he’s got a natty.
  24. Or affect and effect 😀
  25. We’d scream it because we know holding isn’t pi. Defensive holding isn’t judged on catchability
×
×
  • Create New...