Postgame Thoughts

[IrishBoognish]

Is there a way to post JPGs from your phone to the forum?

 

[Valpodoc85]

Rich Eisen speaking truth

 

[Rack Em]

Is there a way to post JPGs from your phone to the forum?

Booty pics or GTFO

 

[IrishBoognish]

Booty pics or GTFO

Well... she is a girl. And super adorable.

http://imgur.com/gallery/dnmrjFi


GF surprised me with that right before the game.

Super super super.


Thought the thread could use adorable girls and positive waves...

 

[IrishLax]

Is there a way to post JPGs from your phone to the forum?

I'm like 95% sure there is, but I don't really post from my phone so I don't know. clashmore_mike should know.

 

[tussin]

I'm like 95% sure there is, but I don't really post from my phone so I don't know. clashmore_mike should know.

I made a few posts on this in the Testing thread. I think the typical iPhone image is too big to post on the site.

 

[Dale]

It works through Tapatalk app

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Well... she is a girl. And super adorable.

http://imgur.com/gallery/dnmrjFi


GF surprised me with that right before the game.

Super super super.


Thought the thread could use adorable girls and positive waves...

I have added the image to the post. Easy enough from web browser.It just needs to be a jpeg format and you do the following:


1. If your picture is web based copy jpg or whatever pic format and paste into "URL" and make sure the "retrieve remote file and reference locally" box is unchecked.

2. If your picture is on your device go to the upload tab and brwose to file you want to upload and select " upload to server". Then go to step 1. and hit ok.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

Gif should be done the same way. Open gif in its own page and copy url same steps as pic.

 

[Cackalacky2.0]

I made a few posts on this in the Testing thread. I think the typical iPhone image is too big to post on the site.

You can adjust the file size on the window where you paste the url

 

[Irishize]

Good stuff from Rich Eisen.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xgUW3d4dao8

Agreed from start to finish. So am I understanding him correctly…the NFL no longer acknowledges the Tuck Rule? I don’t watch enough NFL to be up to date on their rules but assumed it was still in effect.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

Good stuff from Rich Eisen.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xgUW3d4dao8

Yeah he really nailed it in the video.

• Overtime rule:
  • The NCAA took a crappy overtime in college football even worse. The only thing I like about the OT rules in CFB is that both teams get a fair shake, as opposed to the NFL where an offensive dominated league can score and end it without the other team even having a chance to do the same. People retort "well, they had a shot to stop them and didn't do it." But that's total BS in my mind with how the rules continue to change and make it so hard to play defense legally in this game. Player safety is obviously important, but if you're in the post-season and it's win or go home, and Pat Mahomes has the ball to start OT, we all know how that's going to end, and it's criminal the other team doesn't have an equal chance to score.
  • Two point conversions after the second overtime? Are you kidding me? As he said, that's just a nod to whoever has the best dive play and that seals it. Forget about systems that rely on spreading out the field and their elite speed at skill positions. FB dives FTW!
• Tuck Rule
  • This was squashed by the NFL in 2013 but we just saw it come roaring back on Sunday. It was embarrassing for those refs and even the commentators in the booth who saw that as an incomplete pass. The Tuck rule makes literally no sense and needs to gtfo of football. It adds more grey, doesn't remove the grey area. He was no longer trying to pass and it was *ucking obvious. The ACC should be embarrassed.
  • Also, BK shouldn't be off the hook here. He should've been in refs ear from the get-go that if they overturn it, where is the eligible receiver in the area? but he just sat there and awaited a result. He should've done his best to manipulate that conversation by adding that to the discussion.
  • Thought it was beautiful, sweet justice that Norvell iced his own kicker after he drilled that 50 yarder. AND hooked it left

 

[dad4aa]

Not sure why people keep saying “BL should have done more” when he was constantly in the refs ear on the roughing the punter, overturned fumble without conclusive evidence and the incomplete pass that should have been a fumble. Very rarely will a coach bitching change the refs opinion but I thought he gave a hell of an effort on all three instances.

 

[Reaper97]

Yeah he really nailed it in the video.

• Overtime rule:
  • The NCAA took a crappy overtime in college football even worse. The only thing I like about the OT rules in CFB is that both teams get a fair shake, as opposed to the NFL where an offensive dominated league can score and end it without the other team even having a chance to do the same. People retort "well, they had a shot to stop them and didn't do it." But that's total BS in my mind with how the rules continue to change and make it so hard to play defense legally in this game. Player safety is obviously important, but if you're in the post-season and it's win or go home, and Pat Mahomes has the ball to start OT, we all know how that's going to end, and it's criminal the other team doesn't have an equal chance to score.
  • Two point conversions after the second overtime? Are you kidding me? As he said, that's just a nod to whoever has the best dive play and that seals it. Forget about systems that rely on spreading out the field and their elite speed at skill positions. FB dives FTW!
• Tuck Rule
  • This was squashed by the NFL in 2013 but we just saw it come roaring back on Sunday. It was embarrassing for those refs and even the commentators in the booth who saw that as an incomplete pass. The Tuck rule makes literally no sense and needs to gtfo of football. It adds more grey, doesn't remove the grey area. He was no longer trying to pass and it was *ucking obvious. The ACC should be embarrassed.
  • Also, BK shouldn't be off the hook here. He should've been in refs ear from the get-go that if they overturn it, where is the eligible receiver in the area? but he just sat there and awaited a result. He should've done his best to manipulate that conversation by adding that to the discussion.
  • Thought it was beautiful, sweet justice that Norvell iced his own kicker after he drilled that 50 yarder. AND hooked it left

Nothing Kelly could do. They can’t go to replay then throw a flag, even if they wanted to. That’s not part of the review process. Even if they acknowledge it should be grounding, they can’t throw the flag after replay.

 

[greyhammer90]

Nothing Kelly could do. They can’t go to replay then throw a flag, even if they wanted to. That’s not part of the review process. Even if they acknowledge it should be grounding, they can’t throw the flag after replay.

Can you provide a citation with that? That's the first time I heard this, and I would be surprised if that was the rule.

 

[Some Irish Bloke]

Not sure why people keep saying “BL should have done more” when he was constantly in the refs ear on the roughing the punter, overturned fumble without conclusive evidence and the incomplete pass that should have been a fumble. Very rarely will a coach bitching change the refs opinion but I thought he gave a hell of an effort on all three instances.

He certainly did give them hell after the calls were made, and for the record I'm a big BK supporter, just to preface this minor criticism.

Idk maybe I'm off base but I thought it couldn't have hurt to try and have that discussion at the beginning of the review process but not sure if I missed it.

 

[Dale]

It was a good old fashioned home whistle for FSU. Really not more complicated than that. Expecting whistles to go your way in a packed house road night game is unrealistic

 

[Reaper97]

Can you provide a citation with that? That's the first time I heard this, and I would be surprised if that was the rule.

This is the first time you have heard that the replay process can’t be used to throw a flag? (Other than targeting).
So, the replay can show a hold on the OL, and if the replay official sees it, they can throw a flag then? No.
A replay is conducted for a define set of conditions. If the officials see something else, like offsides, face mask, etc, that arent part of those defined replay conditions, they don’t matter.
You can be surprised if you want, but that’s the rule. Think about it, where do you stop during a review? Are they going to review all 22 players each for the entire play?

Here is your citation (the NCAA rule book on review):
And I will copy & paste the section that discusses what can and cannot be reviewed for penalties:

“Limitations on Reviewable Plays
ARTICLE 7. No other plays or officiating decisions are reviewable. However, the replay official may correct egregious errors, including those involving the game clock, whether or not a play is reviewable. This excludes fouls that are not specifically reviewable (See Article 8, following).
Reviewable Fouls
ARTICLE 8. The following plays are reviewable and the replay official may create a foul when there is no call by the on-field officials:
a. Player making a forward pass or forward handoff when beyond the neutral zone or after a change of possession (Rule 12-3-2-c and –d).
b. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball (Rule 12-3-4-b).
c. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch the ball on an onside kick
(Rule 12-3-4-e).
d. The number of players on the field for either team during a live ball (Rule 12-3-6-a).
e. Illegal touching of a forward pass by an originally eligible receiver who has gone out of bounds.
(Rules 12-3-2-b and 12-3-3-h).
f. Player who is out of bounds touching a free kick that had not been touched inbounds (Rule 12-3-
4-a).
g. Forward pass that becomes illegal as a second pass after an on-field ruling of a backward pass is
reversed (Rule 12-3-2-e).
h. A clear and obvious targeting foul (Rule 12-3-5-b).”

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/ch...tball/d2/2019-20D2MFB_InstantReplayManual.pdf

 

[DONTH8]

Can you provide a citation with that? That's the first time I heard this, and I would be surprised if that was the rule.

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/MikePereira/status/407281404502765569[/TWEET]

https://sportsfanfocus.com/intentional-grounding/

Intentional grounding is not a reviewable play. Illegal forward passes are a reviewable play, but that is only applicable to when a quarterback attempts to throw a forward pass when he is already past the line of scrimmage. Intentional grounding does not qualify to be reviewed under the current NFL review system.

Now I have no idea if college allows it. I have searched and can't find anything. I feel like I have seen them review for it before though... but maybe I'm just thinking about when they throw the flag and then all come together and talk about it for awhile before determining if it should be picked up or not. Like I can remember the commentators drawing the tackle box and breaking it down before, so obviously there have been situations where there is ample time happening in the discussion.

I know they'll review plays like illegal forward passes, laterals, etc and call it afterwards. I really do feel like grounding should be reviewable. It's different from other flags such as holding, encroachment, and others that you probably don't want to open Pandora's Box for.

 

[DONTH8]

Has anyone here brought up the fact that on the shovel pass late in the 4th quarter, there were 2 ineligible receivers downfield? That was one where the refs blew it. They actually ran that same play on the first drive but our DL stopped him from being able to shovel it, and then he rolled out and threw it for a nice gain, but they threw the flag for the inelgible man downfield.

Same thing happened on that play. It was so slow being developed that the linemen were too far. I was ticked that we didnt get that one called either because it was so obvious they had their lineman on our linebackers 7 yards downfield. That was when I knew the fix was in and the money had left the Escrow accounts and been deposited.

 

[Reaper97]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/MikePereira/status/407281404502765569[/TWEET]

https://sportsfanfocus.com/intentional-grounding/



Now I have no idea if college allows it. I have searched and can't find anything. I feel like I have seen them review for it before though... but maybe I'm just thinking about when they throw the flag and then all come together and talk about it for awhile before determining if it should be picked up or not. Like I can remember the commentators drawing the tackle box and breaking it down before, so obviously there have been situations where there is ample time happening in the discussion.

I know they'll review plays like illegal forward passes, laterals, etc and call it afterwards. I really do feel like grounding should be reviewable. It's different from other flags such as holding, encroachment, and others that you probably don't want to open Pandora's Box for.

I linked the rule above. It is not a reviewable play. There are only a few (all listed above) penalties that are reviewable.
I’m surprised more people didn’t know this? Penalties are not reviewable except for a few specific exceptions, all of which are not left up to discretion by the officials. If a player gets facemasked and his helmet goes flying 10 rows up but the official didn’t call it, it’s over. Nothing can be done. If a player runs 5 yards offsides, and the officials don’t call it, then that’s that. If it’s not part of the above exceptions, penalties aren’t reviewable.

 

[Reaper97]

Has anyone here brought up the fact that on the shovel pass late in the 4th quarter, there were 2 ineligible receivers downfield? That was one where the refs blew it. They actually ran that same play on the first drive but our DL stopped him from being able to shovel it, and then he rolled out and threw it for a nice gain, but they threw the flag for the inelgible man downfield.

Same thing happened on that play. It was so slow being developed that the linemen were too far. I was ticked that we didnt get that one called either because it was so obvious they had their lineman on our linebackers 7 yards downfield. That was when I knew the fix was in and the money had left the Escrow accounts and been deposited.

If the RB catches the ball behind the line of scrimmage the OL can be down field. Milton was about 5-7 yards behind the LOS & shoveled it 3-5 yards in front of him, so I’m guessing the RB was behind the LOS?

 

[DONTH8]

Penalties are not reviewable except for a few specific exceptions, all of which are not left up to discretion by the officials.

I guess this is where I get rubbed the wrong way. I'm ok when there are clearly definied rules that you can look at and correct mistakes. Seeing if the QB was across the line, laterals, If a receiver stepped out of bounds, etc. I think Grounding falls under that category as well. I mean, the refs will literally meet together after a play for 10 seconds and then a guy will throw a flag after the action is all over. They dont do that for other penalties like holding, facemasks, etc. So Grounding I think could (and also should) be a reviewable call.

If the RB catches the ball behind the line of scrimmage the OL can be down field. Milton was about 5-7 yards behind the LOS & shoveled it 3-5 yards in front of him, so I'm guessing the RB was behind the LOS?

Ahh, I stand corrected. I thought the back was in front of the line but definitely was behind.

I very much appreciate your responses here and clarifications

 

[Reaper97]

I guess this is where I get rubbed the wrong way. I'm ok when there are clearly definied rules that you can look at and correct mistakes. Seeing if the QB was across the line, laterals, If a receiver stepped out of bounds, etc. I think Grounding falls under that category as well. I mean, the refs will literally meet together after a play for 10 seconds and then a guy will throw a flag after the action is all over. They dont do that for other penalties like holding, facemasks, etc. So Grounding I think could (and also should) be a reviewable call.



Ahh, I stand corrected. I thought the back was in front of the line but definitely was behind.

I very much appreciate your responses here and clarifications

I agree on grounding should be reviewable. Because the clock is stopped & it doesn’t hurt the flow of the game & it can be determined without discretion (man in area, ball across LOS, inside tackle box).
But that has not been included in the reviewable plays yet. Just like if a player runs offsides, it’s pretty clear, but they still can’t review it.

 

[pumpdog20]

They didn't have to review the play to later throw the flag though correct? Once the play was ruled incomplete, the refs could have re-huddled to discuss the intentional grounding. They do it all the time for that penalty.

 

[Reaper97]

They didn't have to review the play to later throw the flag though correct? Once the play was ruled incomplete, the refs could have re-huddled to discuss the intentional grounding. They do it all the time for that penalty.

Yes, before the next play, the officials can converse & throw a flag. But, and this is the big thing here, they ruled it (correctly) a fumble in the field, not an incomplete pass. If they ruled it an incomplete pass, then one of the officials disagreed & they all come together & discuss it, they can change their decision & throw a flag. But in this case, it was ruled a fumble, then review overturned it. That same review cannot rule on intentional grounding. It would have to have been done beforehand by the field officials.

P.S. See you have Gable on your pic. A former coach of mine was the only other combat sport (boxing) Gold Medalist in ‘72 from team USA & is friends with Dan. Since everybody in our gym were high level grapplers & strikers (including some on team USA), we used to ask him about Dan. He said Dan was the only guy on team USA all the boxers were terrified of. LOL

 

[Luckylucci]

O'Malley's Snap count article. He also adds ST's snaps which is very interesting because you can start to see how fatigue might have played a significant role here. At LB especially.

Bertrand played an additional 20 snaps on ST's, Bauer 27, Simon 20, and Kiser 16. This is what happens when you lose guys like Moala (opening kickoff), Liufau, and Botelho misses the game. But it wasn't just LB. Foskey played an additional 15 ST's snaps.

Every Snap Counts: Notre Dame at Florida State (247sports.com)

They need to get this figured out. I don't see how we can be sending our starting players out for that many ST's snaps. I realize in-game it's hard to make those adjustments and they probably didn't plan on playing that many snaps. But, that should be a priority now. When snap counts start getting this high, they need to be able to make the change on the fly.

 

[Luckylucci]

I'm fairly worried about depth at this point. We need Botelho back in the worst way. We need to stay healthy at the LB spot from here on out. We need Kollie to rise to the occasion. We need Freshman to start impacting ST's. And, we need a time machine so Freeman can go back in time and make Ovie the priority. Not too much to ask for, right?

 

[Reaper97]

I'm fairly worried about depth at this point. We need Botelho back in the worst way. We need to stay healthy at the LB spot from here on out. We need Kollie to rise to the occasion. We need Freshman to start impacting ST's. And, we need a time machine so Freeman can go back in time and make Ovie the priority. Not too much to ask for, right?

Luckily with Toledo & Purdue they can get some younger guys reps. I’m not talking throwing the 3’s out there together, but putting Kollie in the game with the veterans every now & then so they get rest & he is protected by starters.
Freeman want to look at going 4-2-5 also the next two weeks. Having only 2 LBs on the field can help with keeping them fresh, & then you play Wisconsin with a heavy look, more LBs, but they will be fresh by then.

 

[tussin]

I'm fairly worried about depth at this point. We need Botelho back in the worst way. We need to stay healthy at the LB spot from here on out. We need Kollie to rise to the occasion. We need Freshman to start impacting ST's. And, we need a time machine so Freeman can go back in time and make Ovie the priority. Not too much to ask for, right?

Marist injury hurt but at that point we were talking about LB as the deepest position on defense. It's still deep, but Marist seems to have been the most dynamic player in that group (by a wide margin). So really the worst injury we could have had there in regards to overall performance at that position.