Game Thread: CFP SEMIFINAL: Clemson (13-0) vs Ohio State (13-0) 8pm ET ESPN

[dtgold88]

Under the current rules 'incidental' helmet to helmet is going to be called targeting 95% of the time. That it won't be called that 100% is part of the problem. That unintentional contact can be called at all is part of the problem. That this was called under this current rule is not where the problem lies.

Again, this will probably be brought up by your fans for years to come. The issue is the rule, not the enforcement of it.

incidental helmet to helmet called 95% of the time? This is why I would never say a comment of yours cannot be topped.

Do you watch games with the sound on? Do you hear those loud cracking sounds on each play? Those are helmets hitting helmets.

wow.

 

[dtgold88]

Don't know when initial contact was made based on a still frame. This is why you need motion.

If he showed you motion which clearly shows exactly what you see in the still frame you'd come up with another reason to deflect.

 

[Kace-1]

 

[JuiceTheGator]

It was "helmet to helmet" because of the QB. Simple as that.

When Wade was getting ready to engage, he was going at Lawrence's mid-section. If Lawrence doesn't drop down at the final second, Wade's helmet doesn't contact any part of him, and his right shoulder drive's through Lawrence's mid-section. This is literally a textbook tackle. The fact that they give the QB the power to drastically alter a game by taking advantage of a ridiculously ludicrous rule cost OSU big. That's why this conversation is happening all over the place.

Just stop! It would have been called in every game in any place. Maybe Wade would have gotten away with it with his head up, but that "crown of the helmet" bullshit in the rule seals it. When the top of a defender's helmet hits the QB's helmet, the call will be made every-single-time.

Be glad that Clemson was still asleep, in the 1st half from their pathetic schedule, and so you had a chance. You fucked up those early red zone opportunities and so you didn't have enough to hold off the awakening better squad.

//

 

[WizardHawk]

incidental helmet to helmet called 95% of the time? This is why I would never say a comment of yours cannot be topped.

Do you watch games with the sound on? Do you hear those loud cracking sounds on each play? Those are helmets hitting helmets.

wow.

What the fuck kind of stupidity are you on about now? Nearly page 90 on this thread and your fans are STILL whining.

What does sound have to do with intentional vs incidental? Yeah, not a damned thing is right.

It doesn't matter if Lawrence was moving his head before contact. It doesn't matter if Ward didn't see that movement or otherwise wasn't trying to go for his head. Do you understand what incidental even means? Yeah, that's a rhetorical question because you are clearly clueless.

How much longer are you guys going to piss about all of this? Your season is over. Deal with it.

 

[dtgold88]

I think the first call was wrong. I understand why the fumble was overturned especially when watching that play in full speed

But full speed and slow mo doesn't make a difference. You agree he took 2-3 steps after he clearly caught the ball, right? 2-3 steps constitutes a football move.

If he caught it in the end zone would you say it was a TD or not?

 

[dtgold88]

What the fuck kind of stupidity are you on about now? Nearly page 90 on this thread and your fans are STILL whining.

What does sound have to do with intentional vs incidental? Yeah, not a damned thing is right.

It doesn't matter if Lawrence was moving his head before contact. It doesn't matter if Ward didn't see that movement or otherwise wasn't trying to go for his head. Do you understand what incidental even means? Yeah, that's a rhetorical question because you are clearly clueless.

How much longer are you guys going to piss about all of this? Your season is over. Deal with it.

you claimed incidental helmet to helmet called 95% of the time. There is incidental helmet to helmet multiple times on nearly every play.

You made a foolish statement. You being you you aren't going to own up to it.

Whining? Our fans know our team still had a chance to win the game despite the bad calls. They didn't.

Tell us again how he launched into him if you'd like.

 

[dtgold88]

This is a still frame you fuck stick. And what I see in it is a helmet that is more than 50% off the side of the carriers body toward the camera. From this angle you cannot clearly see where the tacklers left shoulder is, but it looks like it may be making contact with the body.

This example fails on so many levels that it just smells of desperation to keep blaming the wrong thing for your pain in a loss.

Maybe you think he launched when he didn't?

 

[dtgold88]

Good point and where was Ohio State's defense on that last scoring drive, that put Clemson ahead with a minute and half left in the game?

Has an OSU fan said otherwise?

 

[bksballer89]

But full speed and slow mo doesn't make a difference. You agree he took 2-3 steps after he clearly caught the ball, right? 2-3 steps constitutes a football move.

If he caught it in the end zone would you say it was a TD or not?

It doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the refs thinks and they clearly said they looked at the play in full speed and thought it should get reversed. When watching the play in full speed, I agreed with them.

That play had little to do with the outcome. Clemson had to punt and OSU eventually scored the go ahead TD anyway.

 

[dtgold88]

It's now been about 13 hours since OSU choked against Clemson...and their fans are still blaming the refs.

How much longer will this continue?

It's 5 years since your team has been relevant and all you have is trolling a team who lost in a game you might never see yours in again.

How much longer will this continue?

 

[dtgold88]

Sounds like OSU needs to coach its players better on proper tackling form. Sorry that coaching cost you the game.

What cost your team from not seeing this level of game for half a decade? Coaching? Recruiting? Bad players? Not enough in the Nike coffers?

 

[dtgold88]

Womp, womp. You lost, get over it.

Maybe OSU will hire better defensive coaches to teach their players proper form.

ok

 

[dtgold88]

It doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the refs thinks and they clearly said they looked at the play in full speed and thought it should get reversed. When watching the play in full speed, I agreed with them.

That play had little to do with the outcome. Clemson had to punt and OSU eventually scored the go ahead TD anyway.

I'm asking what you think. Pretty sure we all know what any of us thinks has nothing to do with the call that is made.

2-3 steps in real time is a football move. Had they called it no catch on the field I could agree maybe not enough to overturn. But also to close to overturn as they did.

I'll try this question again.....if this play happens in the EZ would they rule it a TD or no TD?

 

[dtgold88]

Blame the rule, not the refs.

Unfortunately OSU has done a poor job on coaching their defenders to tackle properly. Maybe one day they'll fix it.

ok

 

[dtgold88]

I was wondering when you'd run out of excuses for your Suckeyes and would start lashing out at other teams...I'll give you credit, it took about 12 hours longer than I expected.

Lashing out? You are trolling an elite team while your team has been an alsoran for half a decade.

Facts.

 

[dtgold88]

So moving your head a few degrees one way would have let Lawrence, who barely made any adjustment as he was about to get hit, now easily run out of contact?

Just stop man.

It is a fact they teach how to tackle without leading using a helmet as a weapon. This is pure fact. It is also a fact that every player in the heat of a play sometimes still has their helmet going forward as a weapon. Most of the time it doesn't result in a penalty. This again is part of the problem. The problem is the rule, not the enforcement. It isn't going to get called unless that leading helmet also makes direct contact with another players helmet or somewhere in the head/neck area and won't be called 100% of the time because it isn't always interpreted the same.

The rule is the problem, not the call in this play.

OSU had an outstanding year and I would have loved to have seen LSU/OSU, but they didn't earn it. They couldn't stop Lawrence when they needed to, failed to score in the first half when they could have pulled away, failed to stop the drive that lead to Clemson taking the lead late, and then threw a pick that shouldn't have happened.

Now on to watching LSU undress Clemson and take their crown.

Stopped at the facepalm, as clear to any rational poster the SportsHoopla facepalm means either "I cannot refute what you said" or "I'm about to go way off the path and deflect uncontrollably"

 

[dtgold88]

If that play happened during the CFP NCG in the end zone while your team is on defense as the clock struck triple zeroes, you’d accept that as the game winning TD that lost you the Natty?

Actually, that's the point. Yes, it would be a TD. Clear catch and 2-3 steps. How many steps does he need to take for it to be a TD?

 

[WizardHawk]

you claimed incidental helmet to helmet called 95% of the time. There is incidental helmet to helmet multiple times on nearly every play.

You made a foolish statement. You being you you aren't going to own up to it.

Whining? Our fans know our team still had a chance to win the game despite the bad calls. They didn't.

Tell us again how he launched into him if you'd like.

Bullshit. More pure nonsense because you can't handle reality.

We are CLEARLY talking about helmet to helmet contact on a defenseless player and/or QB. This isn't about anything else ancillary and no one but you has suggested otherwise.

It doesn't matter if a player intended to lead with a helmet, nor if their head wasn't actually going toward the helmet at the time they committed to going for the tackle.

It is clear and not debatable, but do keep on.

 

[dtgold88]

And even if that is true, under this rule it is targeting. Show us where in the rule it leaves any room for an exception for that contact if the 'defenseless player' is moving part of their body into that contact. You can't.

The rule is the problem. And even many of your own fans up here today agree.

Incidental contact is still going to be called targeting because the rule sucks. And it isn't going to go away because of worry over lawsuits for brain damage later in life. This is football now.

You get there are fans of other teams who have said it was not targeting, right? Maybe you better tell them he launched himself.