Bingo!
Illinois was the only team thus far who our new DC coached against, so we may see significant improvement for the rest of the season, and the bye week came at possibly the best possible time.
Thoughts after watching the replay
- Thread starter bdgan
- Start date
Illinois was the only team thus far who our new DC coached against, so we may see significant improvement for the rest of the season, and the bye week came at possibly the best possible time.
With the toll that the season takes on players, it seems like there's never a bad time for a bye as you get into mid-October. However, there are some times that may be better than others. Personally, I would have preferred to ride the momentum of the USC win directly into Madison and then, after hopefully beating the Badgers, get a bye in the lead-up to Ohio State.
As usual the SEC is one step ahead on such matters. Their teams not only get the regular byes but then what amounts to another bye with a cupcake game against the Mercers of the world in November.
Late to the party as I was at the game and hadn't watched a replay since last night though it was the B10 in 60 version. In the OT period, at the game, I didnt see the 1st 'supposed' DPI that wasn't called on us. All the SC folks around us were going crazy but it looked like the ball was uncatchable live. The CBS guys harped on it but given it was edited down to 60 minutes, the edited version moved onto the next play. I had a better angle for the one a few plays later and that didnt look it in person. It looked bang-bang. On replay, I could see the DB getting there a bit early. The CBS guys were harsher this time because it had been two questionable calls out of the past 3 plays. But again, the discussion was edited down.
I am a bit surprised at least one of them wasnt called--not because they were valid but it's just the kind of breaks we typically get.
During the actual live broadcast, after the 1st or 2nd questionable calls, how much did Danielson and Nessler discuss them? Did they bring in any rules analyst to discuss?
I am a bit surprised at least one of them wasnt called--not because they were valid but it's just the kind of breaks we typically get.
During the actual live broadcast, after the 1st or 2nd questionable calls, how much did Danielson and Nessler discuss them? Did they bring in any rules analyst to discuss?
It was probably closer to a defensive holding call then PI but I don't recall when the ball was in the air.
Regardless, the refs "let them play" in the defensive backfield all day. Case in point, on Warren's TD catch he was mauled by the DB but no flag was thrown.
As I saw it, and I've looked at the replay a number of times, a penalty could have been called on both plays...and on many occasions in many games would have been. (The first was actually more of a hold, by the way. Our DB appeared to grab the receiver's jersey.)
As we know, however, officiating is not scientific or perfectly consistent. These are bang-bang judgment calls. Also, defensive backs get away with a lot more contact these days than was once the case. The game is a lot more physical in the defensive backfield.
To be clear, I was overjoyed that neither call was made and don't feel the slightest bit guilty if we got a bit of break from the zebras for a change. I'd have been even happier if we got the same type break against Michigan or Ohio State, but figure the odds.
As for the TV commentary, both Danielson and Nessler agreed that the USC receivers were interfered with, but I don't think they overdid it. I mean, there were obviously a couple replays shown, and it's their job to comment on what they're seeing. I think they would have said the same thing if the teams had been reversed.
I know one thing: if the teams had been reversed, I'd be screaming bloody blue murder.
If you're interested, go to the 2:14:00 mark of this game replay to watch both plays in question:
Bingo. If Tracy had given him a cleaner break, the WR is at least a yard or more further down the field and the ball would have been obviously more uncatchable. Definitely could have been a DPI (Moss threw this one early), but definitely an uncatchable pass.
They discussed them for sure. Definitely came across as being in favor of USC getting these calls that they didn't.
They were favoring USC the whole game. Not one thing was said about 44 getting mauled while catching the TD pass. And they weren’t even curious about whether the screen pass to 44 on the first drive was behind the line of scrimmage.
