forums

NCAA Oversight Committee to Discuss Targeting, Overtime Rule Changes

Advertisement
83502488.gif
 
Idgaf whay anyone says. Referees targeted Miami defenders for ejections. I seen UM players get reviewed or ejected for some B.s. calls.
It may have been the UNC game or GT where i saw an opposing player clearly target a UM player and no call was made yet reviewed a call for Miami in thesame game that wasn't even near a target.

You cant tell me between that and the lack of holding calls the last 3 years there isnt some conspiracy
 
Advertisement
Overtime was never necessary. I never watch a college overtime and I barely acknowledge the result. Just think how Canes history would have changed if there had been overtime in 1983, 1987 and 1988. Those were all classic finishes, still remembered today and decades from now. Overtime merely adds a blended aspect. Other than the long Tua touchdown pass against Georgia I can't think of a truly memorable play from a college overtime.

The targeting proposal is fair, certainly an improvement. Every time I think the rule should be eliminated completely I see some rogue idiot who apparently hasn't been paying attention since the rule was adopted, nor the emphasis on safety. The bowl games were unbelievable with the number of aimed helmets toward defenseless players. College football is full of that type of defensive back, the ones who don't have good enough instincts to arrive a half second earlier. Not pro material but they think they have to uphold their reputation as a smacker.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
Overtime was never necessary. I never watch a college overtime and I barely acknowledge the result. Overtime merely adds a blended aspect. Other than the long Tua touchdown pass against Georgia I can't think of a truly memorable play from a college overtime.
Click to expand...


311E3759-0D72-4266-9D5F-D4871D0D1984.jpeg

.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
Overtime was never necessary. I never watch a college overtime and I barely acknowledge the result. Just think how Canes history would have changed if there had been overtime in 1983, 1987 and 1988. Those were all classic finishes, still remembered today and decades from now. Overtime merely adds a blended aspect. Other than the long Tua touchdown pass against Georgia I can't think of a truly memorable play from a college overtime.
Click to expand...
I can think of one.
 
Advertisement
One game goes to 7 OT and they need a change? What about using a proper sample size
 
Manolo Montana said:
Only the NCAA would take the best OT setup, look at it, and say "lets wreck it".
Click to expand...
Awsi Dooger said:
Overtime was never necessary. I never watch a college overtime and I barely acknowledge the result. Just think how Canes history would have changed if there had been overtime in 1983, 1987 and 1988. Those were all classic finishes, still remembered today and decades from now. Overtime merely adds a blended aspect. Other than the long Tua touchdown pass against Georgia I can't think of a truly memorable play from a college overtime.

The targeting proposal is fair, certainly an improvement. Every time I think the rule should be eliminated completely I see some rogue idiot who apparently hasn't been paying attention since the rule was adopted, nor the emphasis on safety. The bowl games were unbelievable with the number of aimed helmets toward defenseless players. College football is full of that type of defensive back, the ones who don't have good enough instincts to arrive a half second earlier. Not pro material but they think they have to uphold their reputation as a smacker.
Click to expand...

They said none of the changes in consideration would allow for a tie, so it sounds like they're just considering making "go for two" mandatory after the first touchdown.

I think they shouldn't touch it, for what it's worth
 
Awsi Dooger said:
Overtime was never necessary. I never watch a college overtime and I barely acknowledge the result. Just think how Canes history would have changed if there had been overtime in 1983, 1987 and 1988. Those were all classic finishes, still remembered today and decades from now. Overtime merely adds a blended aspect. Other than the long Tua touchdown pass against Georgia I can't think of a truly memorable play from a college overtime.

The targeting proposal is fair, certainly an improvement. Every time I think the rule should be eliminated completely I see some rogue idiot who apparently hasn't been paying attention since the rule was adopted, nor the emphasis on safety. The bowl games were unbelievable with the number of aimed helmets toward defenseless players. College football is full of that type of defensive back, the ones who don't have good enough instincts to arrive a half second earlier. Not pro material but they think they have to uphold their reputation as a smacker.
Click to expand...
More bad takes please.
 
If some slimebags had their way, at the end of a tied game there would be some committee that would vote on who SHOULD win the game based on some "eye test" factors.
 
Advertisement
Maybe I would put the teams at midfield instead of the 25. That way the team with the better defense and kicker would have the advantage instead of the offense that always seems to have an advantage in rules and regulations.
 
Until fans learn the truth about how replay is executed, and more to the point WHO executes replay then no one will know anything about how college football is officiated.



Last year the Pac12 had to openly admit that they had university administrators deciding on football replay calls. There is zero doubt in my mind that the ACC does the same. I would simply like to know the truth. DOES THE ACC HAVE NON-FOOTBALL PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE REPLAY PROCESS???

Inquiring minds want to know.
 
The targeting rules have ruined games. It’s fcukin ridiculous sometimes. Helmet hits are inevitable
 
Advertisement
SFbayCane said:
Until fans learn the truth about how replay is executed, and more to the point WHO executes replay then no one will know anything about how college football is officiated.



Last year the Pac12 had to openly admit that they had university administrators deciding on football replay calls. There is zero doubt in my mind that the ACC does the same. I would simply like to know the truth. DOES THE ACC HAVE NON-FOOTBALL PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE REPLAY PROCESS???

Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...
Now that you bring it up... yes I thought I read here on CIS or elsewhere, that replay judging is in fact partially delegated to conference administrators outside the officiating crews. However, now I can't find anything on that on the net.
 
SFbayCane said:
Until fans learn the truth about how replay is executed, and more to the point WHO executes replay then no one will know anything about how college football is officiated.



Last year the Pac12 had to openly admit that they had university administrators deciding on football replay calls. There is zero doubt in my mind that the ACC does the same. I would simply like to know the truth. DOES THE ACC HAVE NON-FOOTBALL PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE REPLAY PROCESS???

Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...

It wasn't University officials, it was PAC 12 admins that aren't trained officials. Either way it's bad. The SC Wazzou one is the one that has been used as an example.
 
SFbayCane said:
Until fans learn the truth about how replay is executed, and more to the point WHO executes replay then no one will know anything about how college football is officiated.



Last year the Pac12 had to openly admit that they had university administrators deciding on football replay calls. There is zero doubt in my mind that the ACC does the same. I would simply like to know the truth. DOES THE ACC HAVE NON-FOOTBALL PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE REPLAY PROCESS???

Inquiring minds want to know.
Click to expand...
i called the ACC to get an answer to your question and i was told the Executive Associate Commissioner for the ACC , Amy Yakola will call me back on Monday with an answer.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top