Hello.It will probably be decided on a weird replay call.
Not even technically. It straight up is.I think that’s technically targeting
Edit: never count out refball.Horney Toads to play for the title!
How about they, I don’t know, make a stop. They are the number 1 defense in the country.Michigan hosed by the refs today.
It’s a semifinal, I’m sure all the CFP brass (Blandino, Shaw, etc.) gave their input on a call that importantThat’s called targeting in the second quarter. Way to go, refs.
I'm going to go with "were"How about they, I don’t know, make a stop. They are the number 1 defense in the country.
the lesson, as always, is lol B1GHow about they, I don’t know, make a stop. They are the number 1 defense in the country.
And not fumble the ball from the 1 foot line, and not throw 2 pick 6s. And so on.How about they, I don’t know, make a stop. They are the number 1 defense in the country.
Was just watch the OSU coach jumping around pregame and thought the same thing. I have tonight as like 40-20.What’s the over/under for Georgia’s combined margin of victory in these next two? I’ll go with 56.
This. They were without a pulse and didn't deserve to be revived. TCU won that game fair and square.TCU stopped them fair and square. Who wants to see Michigan be given new life because of a borderline hit after the play was (essentially) over?
100%And not fumble the ball from the 1 foot line, and not throw 2 pick 6s. And so on.
And while that could have been Targeting, Michigan certainly didn't do anything on that last drive to earn the chance to keep going
Ok, but other than the situation what is the argument for calling no targeting on review? Replay not clear enough to overturn? The angles all looked good. Plus, targeting seems like a penalty where they have less deference for calls on the field than other judgment calls.It’s a semifinal, I’m sure all the CFP brass (Blandino, Shaw, etc.) gave their input on a call that important
So I only half saw it, but from what I saw it looked like there was a clear indicator. So just need the shot confirming the force of the contact was from the top of the helmet (not side). I’ll try to find a video.Ok, but other than the situation what is the argument for calling no targeting on review? Replay not clear enough to overturn? The angles all looked good. Plus, targeting seems like a penalty where they have less deference for calls on the field than other judgment calls.
Why the hell would he do that?Wonder if Harbaugh heads to Indy now.
Personally I couldn't tell whether he made contact with the head/neck area or with the shoulder.Ok, but other than the situation what is the argument for calling no targeting on review? Replay not clear enough to overturn? The angles all looked good. Plus, targeting seems like a penalty where they have less deference for calls on the field than other judgment calls.
Why would he go to a team with no QB?Wonder if Harbaugh heads to Indy now.