So why did Freeze use two guys wearing the same number in the Egg Bowl?

Rebels7

Redshirt
Mar 3, 2008
1,389
0
0
I'm guessing he thought the rule as I did

Apologies if this has already been answered.

That as long as they weren't on the field at the same time, it wasn't against the rules. I don't know if they recently changed it or I was just wrong, but the policy to not allow them to play the same position makes obvious sense. Regardless, you think he would have confirmed that prior to the game.
 

icouldjustpuke

Redshirt
Oct 28, 2013
246
0
0
He is just a couple of years removed from scoring poon on a high school basketball team. Does not know the rules yet.
 

thekimmer

All-Conference
Aug 30, 2012
8,121
2,125
113
That has been a rule for a long time for obvious reasons. Hard to believe he nor anybody else on his staff did not know it or at least didn't feel the need to verify the rule before the deed. Even if they really didn't know ignorance is no excuse and by rule your team should have been penalized 15 and RN disqualified.
 

Reb_Among_Dogs

Redshirt
Dec 16, 2013
95
0
0
That has been a rule for a long time for obvious reasons. Hard to believe he nor anybody else on his staff did not know it or at least didn't feel the need to verify the rule before the deed. Even if they really didn't know ignorance is no excuse and by rule your team should have been penalized 15 and RN disqualified.

The rule was changed this past offseason, not something that has been around a long time.
 

was21

Senior
May 29, 2007
9,937
584
113
He's not supposed to "guess' the rules....he must be a freaking bush league kind of dude
 

JungRebel

Redshirt
Aug 23, 2012
2,606
0
0
He would have to be painfully stupid to know that rule and then break it, putting two key players at risk of being thrown out. As for the rule itself, I could see where it might give a competitive advantage to the guilty team in some instances, but this wasn't one. Still, by rule both should've been tossed.
 

Rezpup

Redshirt
May 4, 2009
591
0
0
He would have to be painfully stupid to know that rule and then break it, putting two key players at risk of being thrown out. As for the rule itself, I could see where it might give a competitive advantage to the guilty team in some instances, but this wasn't one. Still, by rule both should've been tossed.
You only get ejected for excessive abuse of the rule. The rule was in place since McKnight signed with USC west years ago. He and a defensive player both wore number #4. I thought he was going both ways until the announcers explained two players could wear the same number as long gas one was on defense and the other offense.
I think Freeze played dumb and knew there was a chance the refs would miss it.

Kinda pissed our coaches didn't pick up on it since he had carried the ball already this year.

and that their starting tailback was #5
 
Last edited:

was21

Senior
May 29, 2007
9,937
584
113
Yes. You said it: "He would have to be painfully stupid to know that rule and then break it....." thanks
 

JungRebel

Redshirt
Aug 23, 2012
2,606
0
0
JungRebel meant:
A. Freeze is painfully stupid
B. Freeze didn't know the rule

What did you make on the reading portion of the ACT?
 

Hanmudog

Redshirt
Apr 30, 2006
5,853
0
0
I find it interesting that Freeze thought he had to try and pull some sneaky **** to beat us with a freshman third stringer playing QB. Freeze probably planned all week to try and rub Mullens face in a big pile of Nkemdiche by letting his prize recruit play both ways and wanted every advantage he could get. Legal or not it was bush league.
 

DerHntr

All-Conference
Sep 18, 2007
15,819
2,741
113
For an advantage. Period. End of story.

It is of course total ******** nothing was done about it other than telling him to not do it again.
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,854
26,252
113
The rule was changed this year. The old rule was as long as they weren't on the field at the same time, it was OK. UGA had 2 players wearing #1 that played running back regularly a couple of years ago. We used multiple kickers with #40 last season. We changed one of them to 41 this year when the rule changed. The new rule is a slight improvement, but it's still ridiculous that teams are allowed to suit up 2 players with the same number. No way Freeze knew the rule and risked getting Nkemdiche thrown out of the game.
 

HiLo.sixpack

Redshirt
Aug 24, 2012
28
0
0
Kimdeechee had an big advantage, at least the first go around. Our LB sees a #5 out of corner of his eye, and assumes it's the 185 lb RB. He moves in to make the tackle, and #5 is now 285 lbs. Surprise, illegal Freeze surprise.
 

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,854
26,252
113
I'm pretty sure our LB is going to notice that they guy is 6'7" and 300 lbs before he notices that he's wearing #5. It's stupid, it never should have happened, and the RB #5 should have been ejected from the game (pretty sure Nkemdiche played at RB before he did). But it wasn't an advantage for Mississippi in the game.
 

Arloguthrie

Redshirt
Nov 3, 2012
880
0
0
Exactly. Freeze would have looked like a complete idiot if Nkemdiche had been ejected early in the game, so there's no way he would have intentionally taken that gamble. Yes, Freeze should have known the rule, but I would bet Mullen didn't know it either, or else he would have and should have been raising hell the first time RN went in at running back.
 

Seinfeld

All-American
Nov 30, 2006
11,161
6,989
113
Hey, I'm not going to argue that Freeze was an idiot for thinking that this would work, but there is no doubt in my mind that his intent with all of this was to catch our defense off guard while RN was back there. I also have no doubt in my mind that he was giddy all week just thinking about about the possibility of rubbing our faces in it. Seriously, how many times has Freeze given him the ball all season outside of the Egg Bowl? Once or twice? Then he gets 4 carries against us?

Yep, none of the Rebs care about this game at all