|
|
Post by yodayote on Nov 19, 2017 9:50:24 GMT -6
In regards to the Gray targeting call, in the slow motion replay there is the collision and he drives up with his helmet into the chin, uppercut style. That is targeting, I’m amazed an official saw it in real time. There were plenty of holds on both teams yesterday that they failed to see. Cramping issue, I can only remember different 2 guys that cramped up. The fact that Cox was the one that cramped several times is your indicator. Even your former player/color commentator said in a high stakes rival game your juices are flowing. Anyone who’s played or exercised should know once you cramp you’re susceptible to them the rest of the game. 3rd and long Cox generally isn’t in there so that’s why you wouldn’t see it then. There’s a difference beteeen cramping and injury. To suggest a player sits a certain amount of time is asinine. By rule the Gray hit was targeting, but so was the late hit by Logan Backhaus it was targeting as well. |
|
|
|
Post by jackedforlife on Nov 19, 2017 10:00:30 GMT -6
If a player cannot go a few plays without cramping up then he should be held out of the game. It's a safety issue. I don't believe any of it though. It was a planned tactic used to slow our tempo offense and throw us off. It was obvious the deceit going on there. Would a majority of trainers or MDs agree that it’s a safety issue? It’s not like concussion protocol, it’s a muscle cramp. I know marathon runners that cramp up...they stop, stretch it out...continue on and stop when they cramp again. They don’t quit the race...neither should a football player. Believe what you want, but Cox has battled his way to get playing time. He’s not the kind of kid to want to sit out plays. |
|
|
|
Post by jackedforlife on Nov 19, 2017 10:02:38 GMT -6
In regards to the Gray targeting call, in the slow motion replay there is the collision and he drives up with his helmet into the chin, uppercut style. That is targeting, I’m amazed an official saw it in real time. There were plenty of holds on both teams yesterday that they failed to see. Cramping issue, I can only remember different 2 guys that cramped up. The fact that Cox was the one that cramped several times is your indicator. Even your former player/color commentator said in a high stakes rival game your juices are flowing. Anyone who’s played or exercised should know once you cramp you’re susceptible to them the rest of the game. 3rd and long Cox generally isn’t in there so that’s why you wouldn’t see it then. There’s a difference beteeen cramping and injury. To suggest a player sits a certain amount of time is asinine. By rule the Gray hit was targeting, but so was the late hit by Logan Backhaus it was targeting as well. Hmmm, not sure. I was thinking he was blocked into the play. Thats at least what I remember. But if he wasn’t blocked into it I may agree with you there. |
|
|
|
Post by coyote70 on Nov 19, 2017 11:41:43 GMT -6
Unfortunately, I didn't see the game yesterday but there seems to be some grumping about bunny players cramping up during the game. Hmmm. I watched nearly all seven SD high school football championship games on TV last week and don't recall one player cramping up.
If I were looking at this as a potential recruit, I'd wonder if the coaching staff is providing the right nutrition and stretching regime to its athletes. Of course, this is given that the players/coaches weren't demonstrating a lack of character and faking it.
|
|
|
|
Post by gopheryote on Nov 19, 2017 12:26:45 GMT -6
In regards to the Gray targeting call, in the slow motion replay there is the collision and he drives up with his helmet into the chin, uppercut style. That is targeting, I’m amazed an official saw it in real time. There were plenty of holds on both teams yesterday that they failed to see. Cramping issue, I can only remember different 2 guys that cramped up. The fact that Cox was the one that cramped several times is your indicator. Even your former player/color commentator said in a high stakes rival game your juices are flowing. Anyone who’s played or exercised should know once you cramp you’re susceptible to them the rest of the game. 3rd and long Cox generally isn’t in there so that’s why you wouldn’t see it then. There’s a difference beteeen cramping and injury. To suggest a player sits a certain amount of time is asinine. By rule the Gray hit was targeting, but so was the late hit by Logan Backhaus it was targeting as well. Still not sure - If you watch it in slow mo, it looks like it could have been targeting. If you watch it in real time, the O lineman was running at Gray, not the other way around. To say Gray 'launched' would be technically true on one level, but that would ignore the OL guy was 6-8 inches taller, so Gray's only other options were to dive at his midsection (more cruel) or roll-up in a ball and get steamrolled. Again, in real time, if that is targeting, then every OL and DL commits targeting on each play. |
|
|
|
Post by gopheryote on Nov 19, 2017 12:30:11 GMT -6
PS - I'm happy about making the playoffs. Miffed we don't get to play the bunnies again.
|
|
|
|
Post by usdtator on Nov 19, 2017 12:44:21 GMT -6
By rule the Gray hit was targeting, but so was the late hit by Logan Backhaus it was targeting as well. Still not sure - If you watch it in slow mo, it looks like it could have been targeting. If you watch it in real time, the O lineman was running at Gray, not the other way around. To say Gray 'launched' would be technically true on one level, but that would ignore the OL guy was 6-8 inches taller, so Gray's only other options were to dive at his midsection (more cruel) or roll-up in a ball and get steamrolled. Again, in real time, if that is targeting, then every OL and DL commits targeting on each play. Anyone know if we can appeal this ruling before next Saturday? If that Oline man doesn't doesn't go down, thus allowing the game to continue, the review would never have happened. So unfair to expect Gray to just take getting steamrolled considering he was a few inches shorter and a 80-100lbs lighter. |
|
|
|
Post by jackedforlife on Nov 19, 2017 13:59:36 GMT -6
Hmmm, maybe he puts his head to the side or maybe he avoids contact. Regardless he engaged, drove up through the contact under the face mask with the crown of his helmet. If it was a Jack I’d see it the same. Maybe he didn’t have a choice to avoid the contact but he has the option not to drive upward.
I do not believe there is an appeal on this call, that’s why they review it during the game.
I’m out on this subject now...
|
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 19, 2017 16:00:09 GMT -6
It's a defensive back taking on a block from a charging offensive lineman who outweighs him by 100 pounds. Holy Christ, are we really debating this? That is the kind of bizzaro call that only a MVFC officiating crew can make. Has anybody ever seen a call like that made in any football game ever?
|
|
|
|
Post by lakescoyotes on Nov 19, 2017 16:07:19 GMT -6
Stats on the game:
Passing Yds: SDSU 299 USD 286
Rushing Yds: Cow School 90 USD 297
Cramps in the last half of the game: Wabbits 4 USD 0
State won the Cramp Bowl 2017.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 19, 2017 16:13:26 GMT -6
SDSU training staff just forgot to pack these.  |
|
obc
Senior Member
Posts: 784
|
Post by obc on Nov 19, 2017 18:47:43 GMT -6
I just finished watching the replay of the game.
Cramp plays:
53 went down three separate times - 2nd quarter, early in the third quarter and again later in the game. The final time he went down Jay Elsen noted that he wasn't even involved in the play and if you watch he does nothing on the play and just drops. Of course that was right before a crucial 3rd and 1 play for USD. Good time to regroup.
#96 dropped down with cramps before another critical 3rd down in the 3rd quarter.
I couldn't see the player but another time in the third quarter when play was stopped the announcers said number 31 was down with what appeared to be cramps right after a big catch and run by BVR. Another good opportunity to regroup. Even if #53 has some kind of malfunction and needs an IV before games to keep from cramping every game (call me skeptical of that too btw - how many times has he cramped in previous games?)
On what turned out to be an impressive SDSU goal line stand - Streveler looked like he got into the EndZone on the 4th and 1. Judgement call for sure and I am biased so.....
#82 is emerging as quite the player. Ripping the ball out of the air and running well after catch. The receiver group should be healthy heading into the playoffs. Will Streveler be healthy enough is the question. I think Case getting healthy will help a lot too. 86 and 81 are damn good TEs - not only effective runners after they catch, they are devastating blockers. Really fun to watch.
Definitely a hold on Streveler's long run that would have either been ruled a TD or given USD 1st and goal from the 1 yard line. That was a good call. Another example of a penalty that if USD executed with good technique, had potential to be a game-changer.
The targeting call on 22 hitting the SDSU OL, is the type of play that happens frequently. The fact the SDSU OL got hurt is the only reason that foul was called. If they are going to call that type of play targeting, LBers are in trouble. An unethical team could just fake like they have a head injury if a LBer hits them helmet to helmet, lay on the ground long enough and maybe the official will look at the play and call targeting. I am not saying that is what happened, just possible that in the future an unscrupulous team could do that. Perhaps a good idea for SDSU to employ as a compliment to cramps.
The USD OL and USD DL controlled the LOS most of the game. On Offense they did it with OL that will all return next year. On defense, Lambert is the only DL that is not returning that played a lot of snaps. Future is bright there.
LBs are not where we need them to be. Still inconsistent - played much better against SDSU than against NDSU and ISU. Not sure if that is due to them playing with better technique, or if NDSU and ISU just had superior RBs to SDSU. Probably some of both is my assessment.
SDSU had open receivers that TC missed a lot and when TC put it on the money Weineke missed some catchable balls. What is going on with him? He didn't use to do that. Goedert is a beast and I think USD did what they could against him. That one-handed catch, besides being a highlight catch, was a back breaker - key 3rd down conversion on a drive they went on to score a TD.
Ducker had his best day as a KR / PR. He was much less hesitant and was focused on bursting up field. Well done by him.
The blocked punt by SDSU should not have occured. USD looked really confused at the line - had a player run on the field late. Not a surprise it got blocked. Have to be better than that.
Penalties by the offense took USD out of scoring position on a drive they had a good chance to score. They were 1st and 10 from the SDSU 25 and ended up having to punt. They had two penalties that got them off schedule. Costly.
On Weineke's long TD reception early in the game - two Yotes tried to knock him down at the same time with their shoulders and Weineke being a good player just bounced out and ran for a score. Wrap up and that is just a 10-15 yard reception and you live to fight another play.
The USD pass rush really put a beating on TC. Seemed to get to him. Without that successful pass rush, I think he connects on many of those passes to the open receivers.
We all knew USD was at risk of losing a close game due to missing a FG. This week it certainly hurt the Yotes.
The season starts over starting now. Streveler getting healthy enough to throw a good vertical ball will be key this week. He is a stud and playing with the hand the way it was is really a performance for the ages.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackedforlife on Nov 19, 2017 21:45:27 GMT -6
It's a defensive back taking on a block from a charging offensive lineman who outweighs him by 100 pounds. Holy Christ, are we really debating this? That is the kind of bizzaro call that only a MVFC officiating crew can make. Has anybody ever seen a call like that made in any football game ever? Yeah, can't quite let it go I guess. Yes we're debating this or at least I will as sensibly as possible if you're open to said debate. Go to the espn3 replay, 2:21:13 mark is when the play happens. First off it was your LB 6'3 225# vs an OL 6'4 300#, he gave up some weight but could have chosen not to engage. He was a pulling guard looking to kick out the LB which would be Gray. Gray diagnoses it rather well and engages Genant, turning the RB inside. The trouble is as Gray engages he leads and launches with the crown of his helmet, delivering what is essentially an uppercut punch. Hence Genant dropping to his knees. A hit like that is as dangerous for Gray in regards to neck and spinal cord injuries. What I find interesting is that at the conclusion of the play Gray immediately turns and looks back to where Genant is. I believe he knows that hit was a hard hit. Do I think Gray was fully intentional in trying to injure, not at all. He did intend to deliver a blow though, he wasn't trying to shed the block. The speed of the game is crazy. Bizarro call? No, it was the correct call, that's why it is reveiwed. Someone mentioned the Backhaus hit should've been targeting. I'd like to know when that happened to see the replay. I'm remembering he was blocked into that play. I'd like to see it again though The definition of the targeting rule: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: Launch—a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet" |
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Nov 19, 2017 21:50:02 GMT -6
Targeting is such a dumb rule. They've gone way too far with it. There wasn't even a flag on the play (right?), it's too much for me that they can review for something that wasn't even called on the field and then eject the player for the next half of a game.
|
|
obc
Senior Member
Posts: 784
|
Post by obc on Nov 19, 2017 21:52:21 GMT -6
And that type of Helmet to Helmet contact happens every game multiple times between LBers Safeties and OL - Never gets called. Technically I agree with you - it fits the definition. It is just never called. So it should only be called if the receiving party is injured and play stops long enough for the refs to check the film?
|
|
