Re: USC v ND
 

Meh, you're probably right. With Matt Leinart underneath a pile, they probably couldn't get it done.

Re: USC v ND
 

Awesome game! That's why USC is ranked number 1!

Re: USC v ND
 

As an objective observer who had no money on the game, that was the greatest college football game Ive ever seen.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
As an objective observer who had no money on the game, that was the greatest college football game Ive ever seen.

[/ QUOTE ]

As an unobjective observer, I fully agree!!!! I go to USC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-ptmusic

Re: Fumble=clock stop
 

So why don't teams do this intentionally - have the RB fumble the ball out of bounds if they can't get out themselves? (I know they have the no forward fumble rule in the NFL in the last 2 minutes - kind of similar.)

Re: Fumble=clock stop
 

[ QUOTE ]
So why don't teams do this intentionally - have the RB fumble the ball out of bounds if they can't get out themselves? (I know they have the no forward fumble rule in the NFL in the last 2 minutes - kind of similar.)

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a few screwed up rules in football. For example, if a team false starts with the clock running, the clock starts again after the ball is spoted. It is only a matter of time until a team with the lead at the beginning of the fourth quarter intentionally false starts until the game is over. After this, the rule will be fixed.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
Awesome game! That's why USC is ranked number 1!

[/ QUOTE ]

For a second there I saw Texas #1. Dammit!

Re: USC v ND
 

What was hilarious is that one of the announcers said that when Leinart fumbled the ball out of bounds one of the refs signaled Touchdown.

Re: USC v ND
 

I haven't read any of this thread, but is what Bush did on the final play a penalty? Or is that only illegal when an offensive lineman pushes someone across? Only got to watch the final 2 minutes, but it sure looked like an awesome game. The Union was going crazy.

Re: Fumble=clock stop
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So why don't teams do this intentionally - have the RB fumble the ball out of bounds if they can't get out themselves? (I know they have the no forward fumble rule in the NFL in the last 2 minutes - kind of similar.)

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a few screwed up rules in football. For example, if a team false starts with the clock running, the clock starts again after the ball is spoted. It is only a matter of time until a team with the lead at the beginning of the fourth quarter intentionally false starts until the game is over. After this, the rule will be fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Check page 115--"Unfair Acts" B
NCAA rule book

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't read any of this thread, but is what Bush did on the final play a penalty? Or is that only illegal when an offensive lineman pushes someone across? Only got to watch the final 2 minutes, but it sure looked like an awesome game. The Union was going crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a penalty but realistically that kind of thing is never going to be called in that situation.

Re: Fumble=clock stop
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So why don't teams do this intentionally - have the RB fumble the ball out of bounds if they can't get out themselves? (I know they have the no forward fumble rule in the NFL in the last 2 minutes - kind of similar.)

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a few screwed up rules in football. For example, if a team false starts with the clock running, the clock starts again after the ball is spoted. It is only a matter of time until a team with the lead at the beginning of the fourth quarter intentionally false starts until the game is over. After this, the rule will be fixed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Check page 115--"Unfair Acts" B
NCAA rule book

[/ QUOTE ]

In a way, I am disapointed to see this. It means that some screwed up rules will never be fixed.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't read any of this thread, but is what Bush did on the final play a penalty? Or is that only illegal when an offensive lineman pushes someone across? Only got to watch the final 2 minutes, but it sure looked like an awesome game. The Union was going crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a penalty but realistically that kind of thing is never going to be called in that situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

It really never gets called period, let alone in a huge situation like that.

The main purpose for the rule is to stop what they used to do. You'd line up 2 big guys and a little ass dude in the backfield. The little guy would get the ball and the 2 big guys would grab the little guys belt loops on the little guys pants and throw him over the endzone.

Re: USC v ND
 

I hope you all enjoyed it. It got preempted here for East Carolina-SMU [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

It sounds like it was an awesome game.

Re: USC v ND
 

It's funny to see ND fans complaining about refereeing when ND gets more calls in marginal situations than any team in the history of college football.

For example, it's miraculous how those holding calls seem to happen right when ND needs momentum.

Funny that ND didn't want replays for the game when it turned out it might have benefitted them with a spotting of Leinert's fumble.

Re: USC v ND
 

It was USC who didn't allow the use of replays. You really think Weis wouldn't want replay?

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
For example, it's miraculous how those holding calls seem to happen right when ND needs momentum.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not an example.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For example, it's miraculous how those holding calls seem to happen right when ND needs momentum.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not an example.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yea, its funny how people who hate certain teams always think that team gets the breaks 100% of the time. Uhh.. it happens to everyone at one time or another.

Re: USC v ND
 

Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope all of you who are saying this realize it doesn't matter. Cry all you want, we would have won anyway.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope all of you who are saying this realize it doesn't matter. Cry all you want, we would have won anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

RIGGGHTTT.... Pass over some of that wacky weed, it must be good.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope all of you who are saying this realize it doesn't matter. Cry all you want, we would have won anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

RIGGGHTTT.... Pass over some of that wacky weed, it must be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Don't kid yourself. There's no way we would have lost in OT. USC is the best conditioned team in the entire nation, we have proven that time and time again. You can count on USC winning the Rose Bowl by a large margin.

Wacky weed... Good one.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope all of you who are saying this realize it doesn't matter. Cry all you want, we would have won anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

RIGGGHTTT.... Pass over some of that wacky weed, it must be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Don't kid yourself. There's no way we would have lost in OT. USC is the best conditioned team in the entire nation, we have proven that time and time again. You can count on USC winning the Rose Bowl by a large margin.

Wacky weed... Good one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about OT? If your precious Leinert doesn't fumble the clock keeps ticking and the game is over. ND wins 31-28. Your star QB f'd it up and got lucky. It's the equivilent of catching runner-runner to make a higher quad hand.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope all of you who are saying this realize it doesn't matter. Cry all you want, we would have won anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

RIGGGHTTT.... Pass over some of that wacky weed, it must be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Don't kid yourself. There's no way we would have lost in OT. USC is the best conditioned team in the entire nation, we have proven that time and time again. You can count on USC winning the Rose Bowl by a large margin.

Wacky weed... Good one.

[/ QUOTE ]

And who said anything about OT? If your precious Leinert doesn't fumble the clock keeps ticking and the game is over. ND wins 31-28. Your star QB f'd it up and got lucky. It's the equivilent of catching runner-runner to make a higher quad hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about him not fumbling? You were talking about spotting the ball at the 3-yard line in your original post. And if the ball gets spotted at the 3, USC wins.

Bottom line is: Even if you need to go runner-runner to make your higher quads, that doesn't mean you get any less money or are any less of the winner.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah USC was the team who did not want replay, good thing they didn't too. That ball was out of bounds at like the 3 yard line it looked like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope all of you who are saying this realize it doesn't matter. Cry all you want, we would have won anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

RIGGGHTTT.... Pass over some of that wacky weed, it must be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Don't kid yourself. There's no way we would have lost in OT. USC is the best conditioned team in the entire nation, we have proven that time and time again. You can count on USC winning the Rose Bowl by a large margin.

Wacky weed... Good one.

[/ QUOTE ]

And who said anything about OT? If your precious Leinert doesn't fumble the clock keeps ticking and the game is over. ND wins 31-28. Your star QB f'd it up and got lucky. It's the equivilent of catching runner-runner to make a higher quad hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about him not fumbling? You were talking about spotting the ball at the 3-yard line in your original post. And if the ball gets spotted at the 3, USC wins.

Bottom line is: Even if you need to go runner-runner to make your higher quads, that doesn't mean you get any less money or are any less of the winner.

[/ QUOTE ]

When have I once said anything about the being spotted at the 3? You have me mixed up w/ someone else. I agree, if USC ties, they win, but they got lucky to win because if Leinert doesn't fumble the clock runs out.

Re: USC v ND
 

Yeah, sorry about that mixup.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, sorry about that mixup.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's OK. I do it all the time! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: USC v ND
 

God damn, helluva game, ND almost pulled off the upset. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: USC v ND
 

Is it just me or is Dwayne Jarrett EXTREMELY slow? There was no reason why he shouldn't have broken that catch for a TD.

That being said, that game was the most amazing college FB game I've ever seen in my life. Trojans [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please. Don't kid yourself. There's no way we would have lost in OT. USC is the best conditioned team in the entire nation, we have proven that time and time again. You can count on USC winning the Rose Bowl by a large margin.

[/ QUOTE ]

I watched this game with a bunch of die-hard USC fans, none of whom particularly liked their chances in overtime. USC's clearly the better team physically - that's what happens when you have the best recruiting class in the country year after year. I expect USC to go undefeated and win the national title, and if they don't they don't really have any excuse. But everyone watching the game with me was convinced that USC got out-coached. And with ND's receivers having a good 6" over the SC corners, I'm not sure SC could have shut down Samardjza(?) with ND no longer concentrating on running down the clock.

What a fantastic game. I had no particular stake in either team, and I was worn out by the end just watching. On a side note, it was entertaining watching the SC message boards piling up with the "OMG we're done, we lost, it's over, wtf??!!???" messages during the second half. There are a lot of freshman/sophomores at that school that aren't used to anything but winning by 50 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'm hoping Leinart comes out of this relatively healthy. He's getting beat up, and I'm not sure this year is helping him as far as the NFL's concerned.

Re: USC v ND
 

Oh yea. It's a good thing for Pete Carroll that sneak at the end worked. I'm not saying his job'd be in danger or anything - just that more than a few people wouldn't be too happy with him.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about OT? If your precious Leinert doesn't fumble the clock keeps ticking and the game is over. ND wins 31-28. Your star QB f'd it up and got lucky. It's the equivilent of catching runner-runner to make a higher quad hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Watch the replay... If Leinart doesn't fumble he lands in endzone. TD, we win.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
Oh yea. It's a good thing for Pete Carroll that sneak at the end worked. I'm not saying his job'd be in danger or anything - just that more than a few people wouldn't be too happy with him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I liked it...

Id say the % of making the field goal was around 85
The % of sneaking it in for the win was ~60
The % of winning in overtime was ~60

It was +EV

Re: USC v ND
 

No way USC only wins 60% of the time in OT

Re: USC v ND
 

Carroll said the reason he went for it was because he didn't like his teams chances in overtime.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
If your precious Leinert doesn't fumble the clock keeps ticking and the game is over

[/ QUOTE ]

If Leinert doesn't fumble, it might've been a TD.

Re: USC v ND
 

I could have sworn the initial ruling on Leinart's scramble was that he was down inches short of the goal line, inbounds, and the clock ran out. Then the officials got together and correctly ruled on the fumble (at least that there was one ... not taking into consideration the spot it went out of bounds). So I'm pretty sure had Leinart not fumbled, the line judge was going to mark him short and that's the game.

Edit: I'm not saying Leinart didn't cross the goal line on the initial run. It looked darn close to me. All I'm saying is that I believe the officials' initial ruling was that he was short, there was no fumble, and the game as over, before they got together and realized there was a fumble.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If your precious Leinert doesn't fumble the clock keeps ticking and the game is over

[/ QUOTE ]

If Leinert doesn't fumble, it might've been a TD.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah that was what I was thinking too. Looking at the replay and his huge body was in the air and going foward. Would have been very hard for ND defenders to stop that guy in the air.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]

I could have sworn the initial ruling on Leinart's scramble was that he was down inches short of the goal line, inbounds, and the clock ran out. Then the officials got together and correctly ruled on the fumble (at least that there was one ... not taking into consideration the spot it went out of bounds). So I'm pretty sure had Leinart not fumbled, the line judge was going to mark him short and that's the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't the case. Watch it again, the ref on the goal line immediately waves his arms to stop the clock. He was obviously ruling the ball out of bounds.

Re: USC v ND
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I could have sworn the initial ruling on Leinart's scramble was that he was down inches short of the goal line, inbounds, and the clock ran out. Then the officials got together and correctly ruled on the fumble (at least that there was one ... not taking into consideration the spot it went out of bounds). So I'm pretty sure had Leinart not fumbled, the line judge was going to mark him short and that's the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't the case. Watch it again, the ref on the goal line immediately waves his arms to stop the clock. He was obviously ruling the ball out of bounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure I'll never get the chance to see it again ... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I could easily be wrong with my interpretation of what happened.