<< Deleted >>

Sign up, and you'll be able to ignore users whose posts you don't want to see. Sign up

Report problem with this ad

Jan 10, 2017
11:12:51am

BYUMizzou Former User

<< Deleted >>

This message has been modified

Originally posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 11:12:51am

Message modified by BYUMizzou on Oct 3, 2017 at 2:14:37pm

Report problem with this ad

BYUMizzou

Previous username: Mark Harlan
Bio page: BYUMizzou
Joined: Aug 25, 2010
Last login: Jun 8, 2024
Total posts: 38,418 (8,707 FO)

Report problem with this ad

Messages

Author

Time

POLL: What non-calls had a bigger impact on the game last night last night?

boogers

1/10/17 9:30am

Reuben Foster launched his helmet directly into Watson's on the helicopter play

Coop

1/10/17 9:33am

Watson was a runner (not defenseless) so targeting either doesn't apply or is

1/10/17 9:39am

Yeah, good point - he wasn't stopped

Coop

1/10/17 9:48am

Articles 3/4 from rule 9 in the NCAA rulebook:

crazY

1/10/17 9:49am

So Article 3 doesn't require that the player be defenseless . . . interesting

Coop

1/10/17 9:54am

Yeah, I think that's a change that was made just before the season started.

crazY

1/10/17 10:00am

<< Deleted >>

BYUMizzou

1/10/17 11:12am

Boulware definitely targeted the receiver shortly before that play

1/10/17 9:43am

video

1/10/17 11:28am

I wouldn't have wanted that to be called. QB got whipped towards the defender

fattycoug

1/10/17 12:51pm

I feel the same way about a lot of targeting calls

Coop

1/10/17 1:07pm

Had the holding/PI been enforced, the game would have turned out differently IMO

crazY

1/10/17 9:34am

Well if you want to say which had a bigger impact, you can't say it was Bamas

scootsy

1/10/17 9:35am

If they (incorrectly) call the first Clemson rub play, it's a 10 yrd penalty and

1/10/17 9:42am

Considering the rubs were appropriately non-called, there's really only one

joelvandyne

1/10/17 9:52am

Report problem with this ad

Report problem with this ad