Somebody may have already covered this but I thought the play in the endzone was clearly a safety. Friend of mine argued they'd never call it, he was right, but our player clearly knocked him back, he never lost his balance completely, he was still moving, trying to regain complete balance, moved into the end zone, and was tackled clearly, in my opinion within the end zone. Now, someone will argue, like Danielson or Vern, that his forward progress was stopped. The Auburn coach was arguing that as well. But, had he completely regained his balance and ran for 95 yards and a TD, that would have counted, right? I think it was a safety. You experts shoot my theory down.
Knocked back toward the goal line from the 4. Kept moving forward from near the goal line after he regained balance. Knocked back into the end zone and tackled. Judgement call that he was just out of the end zone the second time he was knocked backward. It was too close a call to make any legit argument otherwise. Those calls usually go to the runner unless he his clearly stopped with the ball inside the end zone.
He made the catch at the 6 or 7, was hit and driven back, but disengaged from the defender. Had he gone down at this point, he would have been given forward progress back at the 6 or 7, whichever one it was. But by getting off the tackler, forward progress started again, from the point at which he was hit next, which was at the one. At that point, he was driven into the end zone and tackled, but because he was outside the end zone when the defender established contact, he was given forward progress at that point. It was a good call.
