When they didn't throw a flag here, I knew we were in for a tough game ref wise.
Looking ahead to SMU, is our defense any reason to worry?
- Thread starter TheWizardofCamelot
- Start date
Rucci did not hold all game long. Stop the BS and watch some of the film from Codutti’s analysis of the offensive line play last week. You have now taken your contrarian views to asinine levels. Congrats.
I'm not. Both lines held all game. Which is true in every game. Rucci just wasn't beat as bad as the Oregon guys.
That all may be true, but I think if you look at the tape you'll see an OL that was playing in unison in a way we haven't seen in a long time. Rucci was a concern going in, but he looked like a dude. Not only was our run blocking outstanding in this one, but so was our pass blocking. I expected Allar to be running for his life after Oregon had 10.5 sacks against Washington. He wasn't sacked once. Our OL made elite pass rushers into non-factors.
That was textbook OL play. That isn't something that happens by accident or because of a bad opponent.
If we execute along the OL at the high level we saw Saturday it will not matter who the opponent is. We will have success moving the ball.
Show us the pictures or video with some of those holds. I didn't see any on the breakdowns I was watching. Just good fundamental football.
Realistically it's not holding in the B1G unless you tackle someone right in front of the ref. Thus OL should be coached so as to be able to "get away" with a certain amount of holding by not doing things that are obviously holds that refs look for.
To confirm, your claim is we didn't hold anyone and Oregon held the entire night--just making sure you solidity how biased you are
Realistically, they set the standard and call it consistently for both teams.
I did not say that we didn't hold anyone. In the plays I saw broken down on film holding wasn't the reason we won them. It was practically a clinic on OL play.
I'm biased,, but I think there was a different standard in this game overall. I saw several questionable calls or no calls from where I sat in the upper end zone and all went in favor of Oregon.
When I saw the head ref was the same guy who reffed the Ohio State game that didn't help.
So, you acknowledge we held them yet when breaking down the field you truly believe, unlike Oregon, that was irrelevant. You're wrong but you can believe that if you want and I appreciate you admitting you're biased because it was a fairly called game.
Our 90+ drive was greatly helped by a personal foul that could have been ignored. We lack discipline sometimes and that hurt us.
The officiating against Ohio State was fine as well--called the same for both teams. You just don't like how they call games which is fine but you can't pretend they're called differently.
Rucci held a lot--almost every play--but his weren't as blatant because he was getting destroyed off the snap like Carter was doing.
We lost to Oregon because we had no answer for Tez and their passing game. It's truly that simple--that's not on the refs. We have to adapt. We didn't. Same with OSU.
Have you ever seen a game that is not fairly called? Any football game ever?
I think calls are missed but, no, refs tend to be consistent when you set aside the bias
I think replay officials have shown bias as there's no excuse for them getting a call wrong but on field officials are way better (aka consistent) than people want to admit. Missed calls isn't "not fairly called" just because it goes against the team you're rooting for.
I have never heard anyone actually think that every single game is completely fairly called. In other words you think that in every game in the history of football, pro and college, there was never a game where one team had an advantage or even a slight advantage with the officiating. I am not talking about penalty yards (because that can be completely valid) but just on an analysis many more questionable calls went the favor of one team versus another. I guess you have never seen that. Interesting.
A missed call isn't "an advantage'--it's an error which all teams and officials make
Questionable calls are irrelevant--fair literally means "impartial; without bias" not a call was a missed.
Refs miss calls--that's simply part of the game--I only care about consistency. Which they were in the Ohio State and Oregon games even if I'd like to see more flags.
I am not talking about intent just the end result. I am not saying they are purposefully calling an unfair game but the end result is it ended up unfair or I know you don't like that term so let's say an advantage for one team and a disadvantage for another. An "error" by an official can lead to an advantage for one team. DPI is called but the defender never touched the receiver on 4th and ten. The offensive team gets an advantage as in an automatic first down as the result of an error by the official.
So I am not really getting a straight, clear answer from you which doesn't surprise me. Yes, I understand refs miss calls. My point is if the ref makes 3 blatant errors that all benefit one team and all other calls were correct is that a "fairly called game"? Again not on purpose but it just happened that way. I know you won't like the word fair (as it connotes whining to you) but insert whatever word you want. It sounds like you think every game ever played in the history of football never had a situation like that. It has always been completly equal for both teams. Is this what you think? I am simply trying to nail down your position.
If there's no ill-intent there's no problem. The speed of the game is too fast for any crew to get every call correct--that's just part of the game. Overcome it or lose.
I'm beyond over this "blame the official mentality"--every game we've lost we've deserved to lose.
Yes to the bold--the game is still called fair--there was no bias. No impartiality. Just mistakes.
I'm not sure why this isn't something people fully understand yet as I've said directly. The refs NEVER determine a game. NEVER have. NEVER will. Even in your scenario--3 plays isn't deciding the game--you have another 58+ minutes to make those irrelevant. That's on you not the refs. When a team plays a perfect game you can expect the same from the officials. So NEVER.
A ref can influence a game. No doubt. Does that mean an outcome is determined by a ref's call or calls? I think so. I know you don't agree so that is fine. By saying overcome bad calls that inherently means their is inequity in the officiating. One team has to overcome something they shouldn't have to. Same thing as we are going to spot one team 10 points, now overcome that other team, play better.
The Oregon holding throughout the game was often the type that should be called. Grabbing players with extended arms or who are past the grabber or blatantly hooking around them with an arm to openly tackling defenders. Ours were primarily in tight holding which is usually not called.
It doesn't. Both teams have to overcome calls in every game. It's part of it.
Again, when a team plays a perfect game you can expect it from the reps. Perfection isn't possible.
Holding is holding, right? The argument on the board has been "call it has its in the rules" which exists on every play by every team.
Yes Carter beating guys badly made it more obvious but holding is holding if we're saying it has to be called by the letter of the law.
Can you link me to a single play where a Penn State OL had the arm up around a defender’s neck as he was turning the corner towards the QB like I saw a player do to Carter and Dani-Sutton? I’ll wait oh Mr. I’m never wrong.
You just keep doubling and tripling down on your BS. No comparison between not calling technical holding and sticking your whistle up one’s you know what and not calling more obvious holding. Stop the BS. I guess you thought Penn State had offensive linemen 6 yards illegally downfield throughout the game too?
Again, did I say that? Calls are missed.
They didn't call holding on either team. Both held all day. All day. Like in every game.
Lando. By any chance, is your last name Witvoet? ;-)
I really don't understand why any of you watch football considering you feel it's all about the refs
SMU has averaged 38 pts per game over the past 5 games
48 Pitt
38 BC
33 VA
38 Cal
31 Clem
They have a dual threat QB and a good RB. I don't know how their offense will play in 28 degree weather. Oregon chewed up PSU's defense so certainly there's concern. One big question is if PSU will be able to run the ball to slow things down.
SMU is 4th in the nation on run defense giving up only 93 yds per game. Clemson only had 64 yds rushing against SMU and 21 of those were from their QB. If SMU can slow PSU's running game it will come down to a shootout between Jennings and Allar. I don't like our chances in that case. IMO the key will be PSU's ability to run but I don't expect much between the tackles. We're going to need coach K to find a way to get our RBs to the edge. Also getting the ball to Singleton on screens and swing passes.
How good will WRs on both teams be at catching the ball in 28 degree weather?
48 Pitt
38 BC
33 VA
38 Cal
31 Clem
They have a dual threat QB and a good RB. I don't know how their offense will play in 28 degree weather. Oregon chewed up PSU's defense so certainly there's concern. One big question is if PSU will be able to run the ball to slow things down.
SMU is 4th in the nation on run defense giving up only 93 yds per game. Clemson only had 64 yds rushing against SMU and 21 of those were from their QB. If SMU can slow PSU's running game it will come down to a shootout between Jennings and Allar. I don't like our chances in that case. IMO the key will be PSU's ability to run but I don't expect much between the tackles. We're going to need coach K to find a way to get our RBs to the edge. Also getting the ball to Singleton on screens and swing passes.
How good will WRs on both teams be at catching the ball in 28 degree weather?
Respectfully, I don't really understand this thought process where you are basically saying that Jennings is a better QB than Allar. Their stats are VERY similar, and our level of competition is significantly higher. And Drew was on the sideline for the end of multiple games, whereas SMU had really better hope to keep their QB upright, because his backup is already in the portal.
And I already posted last week about how the Running Backs they faced are mostly 500 yards or less guys for the season.
This just feels like another example of certain posters trying to fluff up the competition.
Last edited:
Put his lame ass on ignore. I did, and it's been absolutely glorious ever since.
He's a Michigan fan whose act on here has been exposed for years now.
I did not acknowledge that we held them. We were winning up front due to scheme and cohesiveness as a unit. We may have held, but I didn't notice it. I noticed it on them since I was keying on #11, but Carter wasn't doing enough to sell it.
Even if holding was called the same on both teams, I do not think the game was evenly called overall. It cost us field position (punt return "fair catch" plus a catch by Evans called an incompletion and not reviewed) and probably some points (Allar being thrown to the ground violently on a third down play with no penalty followed by a missed field goal). That is a factor in the outcome. Everything matters in a game like this.
I agree that Tez Johnson was the biggest difference in this game. Without a pass rush that could get home consistently we needed to do something else to defend him and did not, so we were constantly playing from behind.
All of this is bias. You're seeing the game solely as a Penn State fan not as a neutral party. You're always going to be mad at the officials when we lose and even when we win
I never suggested that Jennings is better than Allar. I said that SMU is #4 in the country against the run and the games becomes a shootout if SMU can stop PSU's running game.
I don't like the game coming down to Jennings vs Allar (and his WRs). To me that's an equalizer. PSU's talent advantage is across the board. I think it's critical that we find a way to control the game to some extent on the ground. 150 yds would be great. Limit PSU to 75 yds rushing and this could be a game IMO.
Our pass offense against their pass defense is a huge advantage for us. No idea why this would worry you even with our weak receivers.
3 things.
1. Just because Oregon chewed up our defense for 3 quarters doesn't mean anybody else will. SMU is considerably less dangerous than Oregon, who is probably the toughest offense to stop in the entire playoff.
2. We have the best defense SMU will faced up to this point. We have size and speed that they are likely not used to. I don't believe even Clemson is near us in that regard and they haven't been a good defense since Venables left. This could matter.
3. Our offense is Allar, Warren, Singleton, Allen, Wallace, Evans, backup TEs. Yeah, our WR room is not great, but we are hard to defend.
Turnovers will be huge.
1. Just because Oregon chewed up our defense for 3 quarters doesn't mean anybody else will. SMU is considerably less dangerous than Oregon, who is probably the toughest offense to stop in the entire playoff.
2. We have the best defense SMU will faced up to this point. We have size and speed that they are likely not used to. I don't believe even Clemson is near us in that regard and they haven't been a good defense since Venables left. This could matter.
3. Our offense is Allar, Warren, Singleton, Allen, Wallace, Evans, backup TEs. Yeah, our WR room is not great, but we are hard to defend.
Turnovers will be huge.
I agree with all of this. Their pass defense isn't great. Warren should have a big day. I also expect our defense to do well. I think the people that think we're going to line up and run through these guys are in for a rude awakening. We'll have trouble running the ball.
My point is when the bad calls are primarily against one team. That happens.
