Red, couldn't agree more. LSU plays a very physical game all around. However, what bothers me (and many other fans) that penalty calling is so friggin' biased that you have to be almost blind not to see this in HD Replay these days. If the cheating must go on, then some sophistication must be introduced to conceal it because it is glaringly apparent to even the most novice spectators now let alone real fans. TerryP, the issue can be sliced and diced many ways, but the truth of the matter is when defenseless players take a pop on National TV and then "your" team gets away with it. Wow. If this was LSU that had done it, I am willing to bet $$ that most of the fans on this board would call BS on our own player. Grow a pair, man up and admit it. If not, go away.
Four added in two years, yes. Another change they made this year is the first round games with seeds 5-12 are single elimination. The tournament goes to double elimination Weds. - Fri. and then back to single elimination on Saturday. Last season was the first year they had single elimination on Saturday.
On more than one occasion in the original thread on this subject I said that Dial should have been flagged for unnecessary roughness. I also believe the flag was missed. I might question that hit being flagged if it was against a lineman. But a skill player? That's a truck hitting a small car type of collision. A suspendable offense? I have an issue with that and therein is where I find these outcries baseless.
It's only a suspendable offense because a precident has been set by the SEC office when the Mississippi State kid was suspended. Personally I think it's all bullshit, but as I said, call it both ways, and equally throughout the league or stop fucking calling it altogether.
Yeah ole miss my bad, and no it's not a bad example, targeting is targeting doesn't matter if its a CB on a receiver or a DL on a qb.
Whoa. You're changing the rules. There is one on the books about targeting a defenseless player on offense with the head, shoulder, elbow, or forearm above the numbers. It's designed—in its original intent—to cover receivers like the guy Elston hit. That's where I see it as a bad example. Murray wasn't on offense, among other reasons it doesn't fit...but we've been around this fire a few times already. Oh, I do agree with one thing you said and should have mentioned so. I don't like the rule. It takes away an advantage from the defense to make receivers crossing the middle think about the hit and catching the ball at the same time.
I'm with you, and it's rule 9-1-4 on targeting a defenseless player, can't hit them with a shoulder, forearm, or elbow above the shoulders. It's a stupid rule, and I'm sick of it. But if its not going anywhere it needs to be enforced equally.
After tiring of hearing Holtz talk about how ND could stay in a high two safety zone last night I started channel surfing and stopped on the Seattle vs Washington game for a minute. I wasn't 20 seconds into the game and saw a flag thrown for a high hit by a defender on a receiver. Technically, the call was accurate. But there's this small point of the hit would have caught him square in the numbers but the receiver balled up, crouched down, and the contact was high. I said to the people also watching, "there is another reason I don't watch the league." I've heard Danielson mention the penalty needs to be called both ways. Personally, I don't think it should be called at all. Even if the intent is to protect the result means defenders can't concentrate on separating the receiver from the ball. It's changing the game—fundamentally. I fear in the next decade this game is going to be so watered down my love for the game will be as well. And, like the NFL, I'll see reason after reason I don't watch collegiate football any longer.
