A Sea Of Red

LSU plays Oklahoma and Clemson plays Ohio State.

In a way, I am happy for the Okies and Buckholes. They finally get to play somebody.

I'm glad we have a bama free final 4, aren't you ballcoach?

thepostman wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:34 pm I'm glad we have a bama free final 4, aren't you ballcoach?

Truth be known, Alabama is better than okies. If they had played LSU and Auburn, or similar teams, okies would have 2 defeats.

ballcoach15 wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:43 pm

thepostman wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:34 pm I'm glad we have a bama free final 4, aren't you ballcoach?

Truth be known, Alabama is better than okies. If they had played LSU and Auburn, or similar teams, okies would have 2 defeats.

No, that's not truth. It's opinion. Pretty much everyone who matters disagrees. Is Bama really good? Of course, and I can't imagine they will be anything but as long as Saban is there. That doesn't mean they should be in the playoffs every year.

ballcoach15 wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:43 pm

thepostman wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:34 pm I'm glad we have a bama free final 4, aren't you ballcoach?

Truth be known, Alabama is better than okies. If they had played LSU and Auburn, or similar teams, okies would have 2 defeats.

How many losses does Alabama have?

Ballcoach speculation being spun as fact. Shocker.

Purple Haize wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:59 pm

ballcoach15 wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:43 pm

thepostman wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:34 pm I'm glad we have a bama free final 4, aren't you ballcoach?

Truth be known, Alabama is better than okies. If they had played LSU and Auburn, or similar teams, okies would have 2 defeats.

How many losses does Alabama have?

Two, both to Top 10 teams

ballcoach15 wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:43 pm

thepostman wrote: ↑December 8th, 2019, 3:34 pm I'm glad we have a bama free final 4, aren't you ballcoach?

Truth be known, Alabama is better than okies. If they had played LSU and Auburn, or similar teams, okies would have 2 defeats.

LSU beats the Okies 63-28, and it wasn't that close. Alabama, Auburn and Florida are better than Okies.
I hope selection committee realizes they did not put the best 4 teams in playoffs. They need to pay more attention to strength of schedules. Okay had not played anyone until today

Much respect for Lincoln Riley he suspended a bunch of defensive starters Shows some solid integrity.
Also props to Steve Ensminger for dealing with his tragedy and calling the game

Purple Haize wrote: ↑December 28th, 2019, 9:15 pm Much respect for Lincoln Riley he suspended a bunch of defensive starters Shows some solid integrity.

I'm glad you mentioned this. Oklahoma would've lost regardless but I got the sense there has been a lot of distraction going on behind the scenes. Ballcoach just likes to toot his own horn before placing any kind of context on what happened.

Of course it THE Ohio State ends up beating Clemson he will pretend he never said anything negative about them. It's why @Purple Haize calls him fraudcoach

Win or lose I absolutely hate the Buckholes. Probably the most rogue college in NCAA

LSU vs Clemson, the way it should be.

I don’t see how Clemson can stop LSU.

Clemson has one advantage, they have been there more recently than LSU. But Dabo needs to do his best coaching job ever.

Clemson beat Alabama when I thought Tide would roll.

I just think this is one of those years where the 1 seed is just so much better than everybody else. Clemson is not as good as they have been the last few years and this LSU team is scary good.

Dabo is a heck or a coach so you can't count Clemson out. On a personal note, I wish the the national championship game was on a Saturday night. I wake up too early for work to stay up so late for 2 teams I really don't care about. Yea, I'm officially that old guy

On a side note, this was a horrendously bad call.

thepostman wrote: ↑December 29th, 2019, 10:33 am On a side note, this was a horrendously bad call.

Based on the other angle I saw, it seemed like the proper call. Definitely controversial.

I saw several angles and it looked absolutely terrible every angle I saw. Feel free to share that angle because I certainly didn't see one that warranted a targetting call. Of course that rule is very subjective which is always problematic.

thepostman wrote: ↑December 29th, 2019, 11:30 am I saw several angles and it looked absolutely terrible every angle I saw. Feel free to share that angle because I certainly didn't see one that warranted a targetting call. Of course that rule is very subjective which is always problematic.

It was one of the angles they kept showing during the game. Seems like half the “experts” thought it was correct while half thought it was ridiculous.

Yeah I have noticed it was split amongst the experts. I am far from an expert but from all the angles I saw during and after the game, it seemed like an absolutely terrible call.

Clemson would have still won so it is almost pointless just fun to debate.

For reference here is the rule:

Targeting does not solely occur when players initiate helmet-to-helmet contact. It's defined as occurring when a player "takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball." Instances include, but are not limited to:

- Launch--a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area.

-A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground.

-Leading with helmet, shoulder forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.

- Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of his helmet.

thepostman wrote: ↑December 29th, 2019, 12:02 pm Yeah I have noticed it was split amongst the experts. I am far from an expert but from all the angles I saw during and after the game, it seemed like an absolutely terrible call.

Clemson would have still won so it is almost pointless just fun to debate.

For reference here is the rule:

:

- Launch--a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area.

-A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground.

-Leading with helmet, shoulder forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.

- Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of his helmet.

It seems like he did the bolded to me.

Its crazy two people can see 2 totally different things looking at the same video because I dont see any kind of forcible contact with the crown of his helmet.

But obviously it's being interpreted both ways by a lot of people so it must not be as straight forward as I see it.

A discussion I saw elsewhere was about the punishment involved in these penalties. Since they are often very subjective, it is hard to justify being kicked out of the game. Especially for this kind of hit. Maybe treat it like an unsportsmanlike type penalty and you're out after 2? I don't know if that is perfect because there are some targetting penalties that clearly have intent behind them.

I was told that Ohio was playing dirty.

ballcoach15 wrote: ↑December 29th, 2019, 3:06 pm I was told that Ohio was playing dirty.

That’s one of your problems. You believe what you’re told without finding out on your own

Person who told me is an honest man who was watching game. If I could, I would forward you the message.