Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

FBS games


darell1976

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Kleiman is finding out that FBS is 1000% more difficult than FCS.

His team was 3-0 and ranked top 15 in the country.  
 

They are also two years removed from a New Year’s Day bowl.  
 

I think he is aware….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

is there a bigger spaz in fbs than pj fleck

says u of mn has the greatest fans in nation and talked about a sellout....(empty sections in some ofthe shots)...

AND they don't rule it a TD on 4th....replay shows no angle with the football crossing the line (yes it looks like he was in but the ruling on the field was short of endzone)...but no shot of the ball crossing the line......after further review with espn bets they rule it a td?  wtf

same with miami and va tech.....replay is out of control

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

is there a bigger spaz in fbs than pj fleck

says u of mn has the greatest fans in nation and talked about a sellout....(empty sections in some ofthe shots)...

AND they don't rule it a TD on 4th....replay shows no angle with the football crossing the line (yes it looks like he was in but the ruling on the field was short of endzone)...but no shot of the ball crossing the line......after further review with espn bets they rule it a td?  wtf

same with miami and va tech.....replay is out of control

I'm a Gopher fan in everything but hockey so I disagree with most of what you have here obviously. I've had my problems with PJ's conservative philosophy over the years and it is nice to see him actually evolving a little this season. I watched every minute last night and didn't see any huge empty sections. Not only was Brosmer easily in on 4th down but he was in on 3rd. Those officials were horrible all night especially when it comes to spotting the ball. They made no effort to hustle in and look to see if Brosmer was in and looked like they didn't even want to make the call. USC's first TD was because a 3rd down play at the 10 was spotted a yard and a half off because the ref was way behind the play so it becomes a 1st down instead of 4th and 1+, Driver stepped out at the 1 pretty clearly and they ruled it a TD on the field but review caught that one, numerous times DEs were tackled and no holding call but they throw one on a WR on a big play and there was nothing here.

My biggest problem with replay is this stupid part that says you need conclusive evidence. Half the time you can see the guys on the field have no idea what the actual call should be so why do we then need conclusive evidence to change that? I'm more than fine using common sense in a lot of these situations and I'm happy we are starting to see that more like the 2 situations you mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, SiouxScore said:

I'm a Gopher fan in everything but hockey so I disagree with most of what you have here obviously. I've had my problems with PJ's conservative philosophy over the years and it is nice to see him actually evolving a little this season. I watched every minute last night and didn't see any huge empty sections. Not only was Brosmer easily in on 4th down but he was in on 3rd. Those officials were horrible all night especially when it comes to spotting the ball. They made no effort to hustle in and look to see if Brosmer was in and looked like they didn't even want to make the call. USC's first TD was because a 3rd down play at the 10 was spotted a yard and a half off because the ref was way behind the play so it becomes a 1st down instead of 4th and 1+, Driver stepped out at the 1 pretty clearly and they ruled it a TD on the field but review caught that one, numerous times DEs were tackled and no holding call but they throw one on a WR on a big play and there was nothing here.

My biggest problem with replay is this stupid part that says you need conclusive evidence. Half the time you can see the guys on the field have no idea what the actual call should be so why do we then need conclusive evidence to change that? I'm more than fine using common sense in a lot of these situations and I'm happy we are starting to see that more like the 2 situations you mentioned.

what's funny is blandino on third down ..." you can't see the ball so you have to go with the call on the field"

on 4th down...."you can't see the ball but you have to assume the ball crossed the line bc it looks like his head/upper body was over the line so i would overturn the call on the field"....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...