So some quick thoughts in hindsight on the overall game

Irondawg

Senior
Dec 2, 2007
2,887
548
113
1) The refs did hurt us badly in this game as much as I ever hate to play the "blame the ref" card. The LOS call was a HUGE play and I still have to really lay a lot of blame on Dan for not challenging that. Then Stallworth's block looked legit and took away the TD that turned into a fumble.

2) I'm to the point where I consider Lee a ticking time bomb. He'll look like he's a good rhythm and then disaster seems to find him. On the option read I don't know who's fault those fumbles are but he's involved and the INT's are hurting (although the 1st one was not on him).

3) As others have said, the play calling wasn't really that great today. I think Berry and Bumphis HAVE to get 8-10 touches between them and they got 5 today in the offense. Early 4th we're driving and in FG range. First down Dan calls a pass and we take a 12 yard sack then we get it back into decent FG range and on 3rd we call a pass that turns into a pick. Then later after the option read fumble we call it again deep in Houston territory instead of just using the #24 battering ram and we fumble again.

4) While most will say our defense wasn't the cause of this defeat and they'll be right - we still looked awful for the most part. We gave up 180 yards rushing to a passing team (just the opposite of the GT game). With these short passing game teams we just can't continue to play so soft in initial coverage. How many difficult passes did Keenum make all day? Sure he made some, but most were pretty easy pitch and catches and our guys were no where close enough to make the quick tackle or try to knock the ball loose. No good pass rush most of the time either. Granted I saw a good number of holds, but I was hoping for more pressure on the QB.

5) Our 2-minute offense needs a lot of work. We should have thrown a pick and a lot of the plays just were way too short. I feel we were fortunate to score b/c it just looked disjointed half the time.

In the end it was the turnovers and two huge calls by the officials that just killed us. We make one less turnover or get one of those calls to go our way and we're most likely looking at least at OT.

They had 2 turnovers and when you take account the LOS play we had 5 (would be 6 b/c of the TD callback, but we ended up fumbling anyway on that drive). You can't play an very good offensive team and be -3 in that department.
 

Irondawg

Senior
Dec 2, 2007
2,887
548
113
1) The refs did hurt us badly in this game as much as I ever hate to play the "blame the ref" card. The LOS call was a HUGE play and I still have to really lay a lot of blame on Dan for not challenging that. Then Stallworth's block looked legit and took away the TD that turned into a fumble.

2) I'm to the point where I consider Lee a ticking time bomb. He'll look like he's a good rhythm and then disaster seems to find him. On the option read I don't know who's fault those fumbles are but he's involved and the INT's are hurting (although the 1st one was not on him).

3) As others have said, the play calling wasn't really that great today. I think Berry and Bumphis HAVE to get 8-10 touches between them and they got 5 today in the offense. Early 4th we're driving and in FG range. First down Dan calls a pass and we take a 12 yard sack then we get it back into decent FG range and on 3rd we call a pass that turns into a pick. Then later after the option read fumble we call it again deep in Houston territory instead of just using the #24 battering ram and we fumble again.

4) While most will say our defense wasn't the cause of this defeat and they'll be right - we still looked awful for the most part. We gave up 180 yards rushing to a passing team (just the opposite of the GT game). With these short passing game teams we just can't continue to play so soft in initial coverage. How many difficult passes did Keenum make all day? Sure he made some, but most were pretty easy pitch and catches and our guys were no where close enough to make the quick tackle or try to knock the ball loose. No good pass rush most of the time either. Granted I saw a good number of holds, but I was hoping for more pressure on the QB.

5) Our 2-minute offense needs a lot of work. We should have thrown a pick and a lot of the plays just were way too short. I feel we were fortunate to score b/c it just looked disjointed half the time.

In the end it was the turnovers and two huge calls by the officials that just killed us. We make one less turnover or get one of those calls to go our way and we're most likely looking at least at OT.

They had 2 turnovers and when you take account the LOS play we had 5 (would be 6 b/c of the TD callback, but we ended up fumbling anyway on that drive). You can't play an very good offensive team and be -3 in that department.
 

dogfan96

Redshirt
Jun 3, 2007
2,188
12
66
ARTICLE 2. Reviewable plays involving passes include:

a. Pass ruled complete, incomplete or intercepted anywhere in the field of play or an end zone.

b. Forward pass touched by a player or an official.

c. Forward pass or forward handing when a ball carrier is or has been beyond the neutral zone.
 

615dawg

All-Conference
Jun 4, 2007
6,516
3,349
113
You can challenge it one way but not the other. I'm sure VZ will figure it out and let us know for sure. In general, you can't challenge a penalty, which is what this technically is, but you could challenge if if the roles were reversed. Weird.
 

dogfan96

Redshirt
Jun 3, 2007
2,188
12
66
Passes ARTICLE 2. Reviewable plays involving passes include: a. Pass ruled complete, incomplete or intercepted anywhere in the field of play or an end zone. b. Forward pass touched by a player or an official. c. Forward pass or forward handing when a ball carrier is or has been beyond the neutral zone. d. A forward pass or forward handing after a change of team possession. e. Pass ruled forward or backward when thrown from behind the neutral zone. 1. If the pass is ruled forward and is incomplete, the play is reviewable only if there is clear recovery of a loose ball in the immediate continuing action following the loose ball.
 

HighPointDawg

Redshirt
Feb 9, 2005
1,022
0
0
they ruled he threw a forward pass beyond the LOS. It is 100% reviewable. and could have been challenged.

They review forward/backward laterals all the time. it was NOT a dead ball penalty ...which would have not been reviewable.
 

615dawg

All-Conference
Jun 4, 2007
6,516
3,349
113
is where the ball is at the end of a play. The only thing that could have been challenged is whether or not it was a penalty, which can't be challenged - we would have had at least three others that met that criteria.
 

Conman90

Junior
Mar 3, 2008
260
394
63
That very rule says it IS reviewable. Even gives an example.

e. A forward pass or forward handing ruled when a runner is beyond the line of scrimmage

III. First and 10 on the Team A 20-yard line. A10 scrambles and throws a pass that is completedfor an apparent touchdown. The line judge flags A10 for being beyond the neutral zonewhen he throws the pass. RULING: Reviewable, regarding whether the passer wascompletely beyond the neutral zone when he released the ball.
 

Columbus Dawg

Redshirt
Feb 23, 2008
1,642
0
0
unless the rule is different from the NFL to college because I just saw that exact same penalty over-turned in an NFL game 2 weeks ago.
 

615dawg

All-Conference
Jun 4, 2007
6,516
3,349
113
but there is at least one SEC officiating crew that doesn't interpret that as reviewable, and if you read the rule book, it doesn't say that it is. I find it hard to believe that we would not have challenged it if it was.
 

Irondawg

Senior
Dec 2, 2007
2,887
548
113
regardless he should have at least tried to argue them into taking a look upstairs...stomped on the field and spent 5 minutes yelling at them.
 

lawdawg02

Redshirt
Jan 23, 2007
4,120
0
0
Like pass interference, holding, roughing QB, etc. You can challenge penalties that are not based on a ref's perception- same as you can challenge whether a receiver got a foot in or whatever. At least that is how it has always been explained.
 

districtdawg

Redshirt
Oct 9, 2009
2
0
0
There is no subjectivity in the location of the ball is when it leaves a qb's hand, much like there is no subjectivity in how many players are on the field or the spot of the ball at the end of the play (which is also reviewable). Is it also a judgement call on whether or not the ball breaks the plane of the goal line?
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
55,896
24,854
113
Irondawg said:
1) The refs did hurt us badly in this game as much as I ever hate to play the "blame the ref" card. The LOS call was a HUGE play and I still have to really lay a lot of blame on Dan for not challenging that. Then Stallworth's block looked legit and took away the TD that turned into a fumble.
the holding call on Stallworth was legit. Stallworth clearly grabbed the guys leg and tackled him. I hate it, but that was a good call. And as huge as the blown call on the LOS play was, when you turn the ball over 4 times, you don't get to blame the loss on one bad call. We should have won that game easily despite that call.
 

lawdawg02

Redshirt
Jan 23, 2007
4,120
0
0
the play could have been reviewed. i've seen the same play reviewed several different times in NFL games for sure, and i don't know why the college rule would be any different.</p>