GAME Hey OSU.

NewPhoneWhoDis said:
You obviously haven't watched Michigan's offense yet this year. It is as bad as I've ever seen it and we had some bad offenses in the past.

I also think Will Johnson may sit out the rest of the year instead of risking any more injuries, as he will be a top 5 pick and I don't blame him at all, as Michigan has nothing to play for.
Click to expand...
I was wondering if that's possible about Will Johnson? I agree with you that maybe that would be a smart move on his part with you guys out of it. He's a lock for the top CB in the draft. My guess in top 10.
 
mall3013 said:
I was wondering if that's possible about Will Johnson? I agree with you that maybe that would be a smart move on his part with you guys out of it. He's a lock for the top CB in the draft. My guess in top 10.
Click to expand...
I'd sit out if i were him. No reason to play. He has been banged up twice this year. Why risk a bigger injury.
 
osubuckeye89 said:
I’d be shocked if him and Loveland don’t end up hanging it up at some point.
Click to expand...
Loveland won't sit, but Will Johnson absolutely should. Mason Graham should as well. Those two are guaranteed locks to go in the 1st round.
 
mall3013 said:
Don't be surprised if PSU loses tonight at Camp Randall. They may be looking ahead as well. Nothing on PSU scares me. Offense is not as good as ours, despite our LT issues. That will be fixed by next week my guess. They do have a good defense. It's going to be a close game, but we will win.
Click to expand...
Lol so much for that PSU loss at Camp Randall

If the Buckeyes can play to their potential, then it should be a good game with us winning. If they play like they did today (or anything close to it), they will get skullfucked by PSU
 
Ojb81 said:
Lol so much for that PSU loss at Camp Randall

If the Buckeyes can play to their potential, then it should be a good game with us winning. If they play like they did today (or anything close to it), they will get skullfucked by PSU
Click to expand...
PSU backup QB is better than Allar.
 
Sgt Brutus said:
No targeting

Catch and fumble
Click to expand...
Here's what I don't get.

1) On the field, the pass was called a catch and a fumble with a clear recovery by Ohio State.
- The ref did not say "The runner was down so no fumble" (at least that I heard from this clown show crew). As far as I could tell, they did not address the fumble at all.
- IF it was a fumble with a clear recovery and there was a penalty, the penalty should have been marked from the line of scrimmage, not from the spot of the foul.

2) Reese's head was up so he could see what he was hitting and was to the side, so no crown of the helmet contact.

3) Reese didn't launch.

4) Reese's shoulder/forearm were planted solidly in the receiver's chest. It should not have been a penalty at all.

All that being said, I am now going to have a chocolate/peanut butter cup.
 
cwerph said:
Here's what I don't get.

1) On the field, the pass was called a catch and a fumble with a clear recovery by Ohio State.
- The ref did not say "The runner was down so no fumble" (at least that I heard from this clown show crew). As far as I could tell, they did not address the fumble at all.
- IF it was a fumble with a clear recovery and there was a penalty, the penalty should have been marked from the line of scrimmage, not from the spot of the foul.

2) Reese's head was up so he could see what he was hitting and was to the side, so no crown of the helmet contact.

3) Reese didn't launch.

4) Reese's shoulder/forearm were planted solidly in the receiver's chest. It should not have been a penalty at all.

All that being said, I am now going to have a chocolate/peanut butter cup.
Click to expand...
It wasn't a catch and fumble. It was called an incomplete pass, unless they changed it on review. I missed what happened when it went to review.

Targeting on a defenseless receiver doesn't have to lead with the crown of the helmet -- it is any contact to the head of the player, whether it be with the helmet, shoulder or forearm. He definitely hit him with his shoulder to the head. Look at the 10 second mark.


You don't have to launch to get called - it just has to be deemed forcible, which is simply tackling thru the player. On plays like that, where the guy is already going down -- they are trying to stop players from putting on that last hit, because it is almost always high and to the head.

It is a tough call to have go against you, because in the past, the player would have been celebrated for a play like that. Heck -- those are the plays I couldn't wait to watch growing up. Now they are trying to eliminate those plays, which I understand, but I don't think there was anything malicious about that play.
 
cwerph said:
Here's what I don't get.

1) On the field, the pass was called a catch and a fumble with a clear recovery by Ohio State.
- The ref did not say "The runner was down so no fumble" (at least that I heard from this clown show crew). As far as I could tell, they did not address the fumble at all.
- IF it was a fumble with a clear recovery and there was a penalty, the penalty should have been marked from the line of scrimmage, not from the spot of the foul.

2) Reese's head was up so he could see what he was hitting and was to the side, so no crown of the helmet contact.

3) Reese didn't launch.

4) Reese's shoulder/forearm were planted solidly in the receiver's chest. It should not have been a penalty at all.

All that being said, I am now going to have a chocolate/peanut butter cup.
Click to expand...

It's complicated.

1. Was ruled incomplete on the field.
2. If targeting occurs on incomplete pass, yardage marked from LOS
3. Replay determined it was catch and fumble. Fumble was caused by the targeting hit.
4. Yardage is marked from the fumble. You don't get the benefit of the fumble because of the illegal hit.
 
NewPhoneWhoDis said:
It wasn't a catch and fumble. It was called an incomplete pass, unless they changed it on review. I missed what happened when it went to review.

Targeting on a defenseless receiver doesn't have to lead with the crown of the helmet -- it is any contact to the head of the player, whether it be with the helmet, shoulder or forearm. He definitely hit him with his shoulder to the head. Look at the 10 second mark.


You don't have to launch to get called - it just has to be deemed forcible, which is simply tackling thru the player. On plays like that, where the guy is already going down -- they are trying to stop players from putting on that last hit, because it is almost always high and to the head.

It is a tough call to have go against you, because in the past, the player would have been celebrated for a play like that. Heck -- those are the plays I couldn't wait to watch growing up. Now they are trying to eliminate those plays, which I understand, but I don't think there was anything malicious about that play.
Click to expand...


The rule should be changed “Targeting” should only apply to clearly malicious type hits (like launching and using the helmet like a missle)

Also why is it always only on the defender? So many times a offensive player falls or ducks at the last second when the defender is already engaging which creates the “targeting” under the current rules.

The rule as it is is just stupid.
 
You can't highlight just one controversial call.

The officiating was terrible throughout the entire game and both teams either benefitted from it or were screwed over by it at times.

Nebraska was called for offensive pass interference twice on bullshit calls. One of which was when the OSU defender clearly had a hand full of the receivers jersey.
Both of the offensive pass interference calls were in the endzone and the penalties shut down Nebraska drives.
OSU DB's got away with defensive pass interference multiple times.

1730042572598.png

^^ That's offensive pass interference? ^^ LOL


That being said, Nebraska had multiple opportunities to win the game and once again came up short. Raiola overthrew wide open receivers in the end zone twice.

Then again if he'd been on target and completed the passes, the refs could have always thrown a flag for holding (or something else) to negate them.
 
This was NOT a 1st down at the end of the 1st half.

Instead of getting a couple more shots at the endzone, the result was Nebraska having to use it's final timeout to stop the clock so they could kick a field goal to go into halftime down 14-3.

 
Red_Alert said:
You can't highlight just one controversial call.

The officiating was terrible throughout the entire game and both teams either benefitted from it or were screwed over by it at times.

Nebraska was called for offensive pass interference twice on bullshit calls. One of which was when the OSU defender clearly had a hand full of the receivers jersey.
Both of the offensive pass interference calls were in the endzone and the penalties shut down Nebraska drives.
OSU DB's got away with defensive pass interference multiple times.

View attachment 127162

^^ That's offensive pass interference? ^^ LOL


That being said, Nebraska had multiple opportunities to win the game and once again came up short. Raiola overthrew wide open receivers in the end zone twice.

Then again if he'd been on target and completed the passes, the refs could have always thrown a flag for holding (or something else) to negate them.
Click to expand...

The officiating was bad all around but targeting once again showing it’s head as the worst rule overshadows everything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top