Hit of the Year.

[T Town Tommy]

If the QB doesn't want to get hit after throwing an INT, then they should run to their sideline. If they choose to fade into the play... even slightly... then they get what they get. Why does people think they should get a free pass? Because they're a QB? I call BS. I saw nothing wrong with the hit.

I did see quite a few targeting plays from OSU against Va Tech. None were called however. Don't think they were intentional but them Buckeye defenders were leading with their heads.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

From Phork's gif linked above, you can also see clearly that it wasn't a block in the back. Gardner got spun before falling on his side. He then rolled over on to his stomach. That motion doesn't happen if he was blocked in the back. Simple physics.

 

[PANDFAN]

If the QB doesn't want to get hit after throwing an INT, then they should run to their sideline. If they choose to fade into the play... even slightly... then they get what they get. Why does people think they should get a free pass? Because they're a QB? I call BS. I saw nothing wrong with the hit.

I did see quite a few targeting plays from OSU against Va Tech. None were called however. Don't think they were intentional but them Buckeye defenders were leading with their heads.

leave it the Bama fan for the voice of reason! the only Bama fan i like!!!

 

[Rhode Irish]

No one seems to be mentioning that if Max didn't hit Gardner, James O. would have. Either way, Devin was going to get laid out. Why? Because he was close to the play and actively jogging towards Shumate. His angle of pursuit proved that while he may not have made the tackle, he was at least going to be in the vicinity. It's a horseshit call and the scoreboard should say 37-0.

Actually, I did mention that. The fact that Onwualu had him lined up for a clean and legal block is part of the reason I think Max's hit was a waste.

As far as it being a horseshit call, there are three ways Max's hit qualified as unnecessary roughness (which is a thing defined in the rule book, not a judgment call by the official about how necessary and/or rough a play was, as some here seem to think). Gardner was (1) a QB after a change of possession, (2) out of the play and (3) blind-sided as blind-sided is defined in the rulebook (hit in the back or the side by a player running toward his endline). So even if you think the QB thing is bullshit, and even if you think Gardner was in the play (which he clearly wasn't - look at the video of the play shot from the sideline in the ICON video), there is no question it was a blind-side hit as that term is defined in the rulebook.

You guys are being complete homers about this. In my however many thousands of posts on this site, I don't think I've ever made an argument against a ND player. But in this case I think our fans are being a little stubborn about this. Maybe you think it was cool to crush the guy and worth giving up the TD. After all, he wasn't injured or anything. So reasonable minds can differ on that. But to say it was a bullshit call shows either a complete lack of objectivity or a lack of knowledge about the rules of football.

 

[Rhode Irish]

If the QB doesn't want to get hit after throwing an INT, then they should run to their sideline. If they choose to fade into the play... even slightly... then they get what they get. Why does people think they should get a free pass? Because they're a QB? I call BS. I saw nothing wrong with the hit.

I agree that the QB on a change of possession shouldn't be protected any differently than any other player. But that isn't why I have a problem with it. It was quite clearly a blind-side hit as that concept is defined in the rulebook. It was correctly flagged by the official (even if they stupidly called it roughing the passer). I don't think the play was dirty and I'm not morally offended by it. I just would've rather had the six points to end the game.

 

[BobD]

It's not being a homer to like big hits in football. It's just being a fan of football. Its always best when you or your team is the giver, not the receiver.

We would spend time after every game in high school comparing helmet damage. Whoever had the biggest, baddest smear of the opposing teams color was always recognized in the post game talk.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I like big hits too. As much as anyone here. I just prefer ones that don't cost me a touchdown.

 

[T Town Tommy]

I agree that the QB on a change of possession shouldn't be protected any differently than any other player. But that isn't why I have a problem with it. It was quite clearly a blind-side hit as that concept is defined in the rulebook. It was correctly flagged by the official (even if they stupidly called it roughing the passer). I don't think the play was dirty and I'm not morally offended by it. I just would've rather had the six points to end the game.

I hear ya.

I would gladly give up the six points at the end of the game to have the hit in the next recruiting video. Put a disclaimer in the video stating such then follow up with BVG giving a two thumbs up and a clinched fist attaboy.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Rhode, I completely appreciate your posts and how you've outlined the rules, but referees are notorious for making the wrong call. Look no further than the missed targeting call on Trumbetti or the ball placement debacle after C. Robinson's catch near the goal line (and that was after review!). Some rules of the game aren't always black and white. Some are pure judgement calls. Which means that if you're the ref in position to make that call, you're throwing the flag. If it's me, I'm not. I've stated my reasoning above. After seeing numerous replays and looking at the play as a whole, I see no foul play. I see a big, legal hit on a QB after he threw and INT and jogged towards the returner. I call it a horseshit call because like you, I'd rather have the points. I still think 37-0 should've been the final of that game.

 

[kmoose]

Personally, I thought it was a bit bush league play. Cost us a TD that would have been an awesome way to end the game. Gardner wasn't in the play, the game was over, and honestly it was a pretty dangerous play as far as they go. I don't think it was a big enough deal to take anything away from an awesome game or take anything away from Max, who had a nice night. I just would have preferred he didn't do that. I think if the shoe was on the other foot, people on this board would be saying similar things to whatever the people on mgoblog are saying. It definitely wasn't the hit of the year; it isn't hard to take someone out when you blindside them running full speed.

I've only seen a choppy gif, and not the full video replay of the hit, but it looked to me like a legal, aggressive, "send a message" type of play. That's EXACTLY what I want out of my defensive. I want them to put the notion into the opposing players, that they are putting their health at risk by simply stepping on to the field. I don't want a bunch of cheap shot artists, or guys stomping on players that are already down or trying to choke a guy out at the bottom of a pile. But, given the opportunity to lay a vicious, legal hit; I want my guys applying maximum force each and every time.

 

[BobD]

Let's have less talk and more hits

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1tBkPxrQ9dQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[BobD]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/xQuElXh3Ngw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[tussin]

<iframe class="vine-embed" src="https://vine.co/v/Oza1WdKOJEg/embed/simple" width="600" height="600" frameborder="0"></iframe><script async src="//platform.vine.co/static/scripts/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Can't stop laughing at this.

 

[GoldenIsThyFame]

Everything is better when Jim Ross is added in.. Went all Shawn Michaels on him.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/WHxxSKJP6HU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[kmoose]

Because you can never see too much of this play:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/l93D-MBFALw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[phork]

Actually, I did mention that. The fact that Onwualu had him lined up for a clean and legal block is part of the reason I think Max's hit was a waste.

As far as it being a horseshit call, there are three ways Max's hit qualified as unnecessary roughness (which is a thing defined in the rule book, not a judgment call by the official about how necessary and/or rough a play was, as some here seem to think). Gardner was (1) a QB after a change of possession, (2) out of the play and (3) blind-sided as blind-sided is defined in the rulebook (hit in the back or the side by a player running toward his endline). So even if you think the QB thing is bullshit, and even if you think Gardner was in the play (which he clearly wasn't - look at the video of the play shot from the sideline in the ICON video), there is no question it was a blind-side hit as that term is defined in the rulebook.

I don't get how you can't see from that gif that A> Gardner was actively pursuing the ball, B> Was still in the play, he was 10 yard from the sideline and the ball carrier wasn't in the frame yet. C> The blind side is subject to interpretation. He was clearly hit in the shoulder and to the front by Redfields arms and hands, as noted above physics dictates he doesn't spin if hit in the back. SCIENCE BITCH.

 

[Irishman77]

Kelly's response on redfield hit:

Q. I know on one specific penalty Saturday night, it wasn't something that affected the outcome. But Max Redfield felt like he did what he was coached to do and felt like he had a clean hit. How did you see that? Is that what you want Max to do on an interception?
COACH KELLY: You know, we didn't think he took a shot at a kid who is 6'4", 220 pounds. Max did not size up somebody or target a player. We felt like in that situation he was doing his job.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I don't get how you can't see from that gif that A> Gardner was actively pursuing the ball, B> Was still in the play, he was 10 yard from the sideline and the ball carrier wasn't in the frame yet. C> The blind side is subject to interpretation. He was clearly hit in the shoulder and to the front by Redfields arms and hands, as noted above physics dictates he doesn't spin if hit in the back. SCIENCE BITCH.

I wouldn't dare argue with science, so no argument from me that he was hit in the back. I think it is pretty clear he was hit in the side, though, and since Max was running back toward his endline (in the opposite direction of the way the play was going), by rule that is a blind-side hit.

As far as Gardner being in the play, different angles will show you different things. The gif you're talking about doesn't show Elijah, but that isn't because he so far down the field. The video taped from the sideline shows that Elijah was going by Gardner at about the same time as Max took him out, and Gardner was at least 10 yards away from Elijah as he ran past him.

Anyways, doesn't really matter. I was disappointed we didn't get the score. I'm not mad at Max. It wasn't a cheap play. But I do think the penalty was deserved and I don't think the hit was really necessary. But it's all good. Really didn't set out to argue/debate every other poster.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I wouldn't dare argue with science, so no argument from me that he was hit in the back. I think it is pretty clear he was hit in the side, though, and since Max was running back toward his endline (in the opposite direction of the way the play was going), by rule that is a blind-side hit.

As far as Gardner being in the play, different angles will show you different things. The gif you're talking about doesn't show Elijah, but that isn't because he so far down the field. The video taped from the sideline shows that Elijah was going by Gardner at about the same time as Max took him out, and Gardner was at least 10 yards away from Elijah as he ran past him.

Anyways, doesn't really matter. I was disappointed we didn't get the score. I'm not mad at Max. It wasn't a cheap play. But I do think the penalty was deserved and I don't think the hit was really necessary. But it's all good. Really didn't set out to argue/debate every other poster.

The bolded couldn't be more wrong. The Vine that has been linked in this thread shows the best angle. Look at the direction every UM player is looking and running. All of those guys got blocked on the play because they're closing in on Shumate.

Your only argument is the "blind side rule" and even that, imo, is subjective because it's basically a judgement call based on whether or not the ref believes the blocked player had any chance of defending himself and if the blocking player targeted said player. I can think back to Golden Tate's block on Sean Lee. He hit him in the front, but he lead with his helmet and tried to de-cleat him. Flag. Max hit Devin in the side/front with his hands first. It's no one's fault but Devin's that he didn't see it coming. No flag. You shouldn't punish a player for trying to legally block another player just because said player didn't see it coming.

 

[Wild Bill]

Trumbetti got lit up in the first quarter. Huge hit - glad he wasn't hurt.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Trumbetti got lit up in the first quarter. Huge hit - glad he wasn't hurt.

LOL... I saw that when I was watching the replay and said to myself "welcome to CFB young man." But agree, glad he wasn't hurt.

 

[GoldenIsThyFame]

Trumbetti got lit up in the first quarter. Huge hit - glad he wasn't hurt.

Straight helmet to helmet


<iframe class="vine-embed" src="https://vine.co/v/OuVAAEnM9K7/embed/simple" width="600" height="600" frameborder="0"></iframe><script async src="//platform.vine.co/static/scripts/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Yes I was leveled. Yes we won the game.</p>— Andrew Trumbetti (@AndrewTrumbetti) <a href="https://twitter.com/AndrewTrumbetti/status/508451908944936960">September 7, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>I got twitter famous for all the wrong reasons...</p>— Andrew Trumbetti (@AndrewTrumbetti) <a href="https://twitter.com/AndrewTrumbetti/status/508707883484450816">September 7, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Irish YJ]

Is this the Ray Rice thread?

 

[RDU Irish]

Easy on Rice. I need him back in action in week 5 to propel my fantasy team to the playoffs.

 

[BobD]

Easy on Rice. I need him back in action in week 5 to propel my fantasy team to the playoffs.

He's been fired.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Easy on Rice. I need him back in action in week 5 to propel my fantasy team to the playoffs.

Well.... since the Ravens just terminated his contract I think you may be out of luck.

 

[BobD]

Ok back to hits!

From the king of pain:
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/VVKVHvMJKT8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[IrishLion]

I made this for you guys:

 

[IrishLion]

Another angle:

 

[phork]

I wouldn't dare argue with science, so no argument from me that he was hit in the back. I think it is pretty clear he was hit in the side, though, and since Max was running back toward his endline (in the opposite direction of the way the play was going), by rule that is a blind-side hit.

As far as Gardner being in the play, different angles will show you different things. The gif you're talking about doesn't show Elijah, but that isn't because he so far down the field. The video taped from the sideline shows that Elijah was going by Gardner at about the same time as Max took him out, and Gardner was at least 10 yards away from Elijah as he ran past him.

Anyways, doesn't really matter. I was disappointed we didn't get the score. I'm not mad at Max. It wasn't a cheap play. But I do think the penalty was deserved and I don't think the hit was really necessary. But it's all good. Really didn't set out to argue/debate every other poster.

If he was hit straight on the shoulder his shoulder wouldn't have whipped back like it did. The camera angle I show, gives you a better layout of where everyone is at. Shumate is not running by as Gardner is levelled, you can see Green (27) eyeballing the ball carrrier and he is not even in the frame.