Red Mosquito

Now that basketball is over the waiting game begins for kickoff...

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Trump's speech was pretty good. He surprised me. I was expecting just kinda run of the mill generic talk but it was a bit more in-depth than I would have thought it would be. Anyway, the guy is a douche, but good speech.

we shall now declare clemson "trump's team"

Spoiler: show

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Trump's speech was pretty good. He surprised me. I was expecting just kinda run of the mill generic talk but it was a bit more in-depth than I would have thought it would be. Anyway, the guy is a douche, but good speech.

we shall now declare clemson "trump's team"

Spoiler: show

um, illegal pick and stuff

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Trump's speech was pretty good. He surprised me. I was expecting just kinda run of the mill generic talk but it was a bit more in-depth than I would have thought it would be. Anyway, the guy is a douche, but good speech.

we shall now declare clemson "trump's team"

Spoiler: show

um, illegal pick and stuff

i didn't find anything troubling about it at all

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Trump's speech was pretty good. He surprised me. I was expecting just kinda run of the mill generic talk but it was a bit more in-depth than I would have thought it would be. Anyway, the guy is a douche, but good speech.

we shall now declare clemson "trump's team"

Spoiler: show

um, illegal pick and stuff

i didn't find anything troubling about it at all

i'm sure u didn't

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Trump's speech was pretty good. He surprised me. I was expecting just kinda run of the mill generic talk but it was a bit more in-depth than I would have thought it would be. Anyway, the guy is a douche, but good speech.

we shall now declare clemson "trump's team"

Spoiler: show

um, illegal pick and stuff

i didn't find anything troubling about it at all

i'm sure u didn't

I did not see the game live. Have never watched highlights closely. Just now my browser was loading kinda slow so I'm seeing that clip in choppy slo-mo, basically. Very obviously a pick.

Bammer wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:Trump's speech was pretty good. He surprised me. I was expecting just kinda run of the mill generic talk but it was a bit more in-depth than I would have thought it would be. Anyway, the guy is a douche, but good speech.

we shall now declare clemson "trump's team"

Spoiler: show

um, illegal pick and stuff

i didn't find anything troubling about it at all

i'm sure u didn't

I did not see the game live. Have never watched highlights closely. Just now my browser was loading kinda slow so I'm seeing that clip in choppy slo-mo, basically. Very obviously a pick.

Definitely illegal. And very cheap. Notre Dame used the same play on the goal line against FSU and got called for it.

It's not "definitely illegal". There are rules of engagement and if both players make contact at the same time they generally do not call it. If it's very one sided they do. But to say "definitely illegal" is not accurate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ear ... 1ca7504065

"Here’s the thing: Yes, Clemson ran a “pick play,” or a version thereof. But it was a legal play, or least a play that officials could reasonably deem legal.

So-called pick plays, sometimes referred to as “rub routes” in certain situations, have become a staple of NFL and college football, especially near the goal line, where the intended receiver only needs to run a relatively horizontal pass pattern to get the necessary yardage. When such plays are run, it is left to the referees to determine whether the play was carried out legally or not.

If one wide receiver runs into the defensive player covering another receiver, then it’s an easy flag for officials to throw. It gets more complicated when a wide receiver comes into contact with his own defender, getting in the way of another defensive player.

That’s what happened on Clemson’s game-winning play. As Scott, positioned furthest outside, began to break his route inside, he got tangled up with Alabama defensive back Marlon Humphrey. The key element here is that it’s unclear that Scott initiated that contact, as Humphrey put his arms around the receiver and appeared to pull him to the turf."

darth_vedder wrote:It's not "definitely illegal". There are rules of engagement and if both players make contact at the same time they generally do not call it. If it's very one sided they do. But to say "definitely illegal" is not accurate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ear ... 1ca7504065

"Here’s the thing: Yes, Clemson ran a “pick play,” or a version thereof. But it was a legal play, or least a play that officials could reasonably deem legal.

So-called pick plays, sometimes referred to as “rub routes” in certain situations, have become a staple of NFL and college football, especially near the goal line, where the intended receiver only needs to run a relatively horizontal pass pattern to get the necessary yardage. When such plays are run, it is left to the referees to determine whether the play was carried out legally or not.

If one wide receiver runs into the defensive player covering another receiver, then it’s an easy flag for officials to throw. It gets more complicated when a wide receiver comes into contact with his own defender, getting in the way of another defensive player.

That’s what happened on Clemson’s game-winning play. As Scott, positioned furthest outside, began to break his route inside, he got tangled up with Alabama defensive back Marlon Humphrey. The key element here is that it’s unclear that Scott initiated that contact, as Humphrey put his arms around the receiver and appeared to pull him to the turf."

Hahaha you're defending that play? To this extent? Goodness.

Um, I posted a WP article, which certainly doesn't have bias towards Clemson. You're the one saying it's "definitely illegal" which it was not. The "rub" play is perfectly legal if executed properly.

Ole Miss...

jwfocker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:It's not "definitely illegal". There are rules of engagement and if both players make contact at the same time they generally do not call it. If it's very one sided they do. But to say "definitely illegal" is not accurate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ear ... 1ca7504065

"Here’s the thing: Yes, Clemson ran a “pick play,” or a version thereof. But it was a legal play, or least a play that officials could reasonably deem legal.

So-called pick plays, sometimes referred to as “rub routes” in certain situations, have become a staple of NFL and college football, especially near the goal line, where the intended receiver only needs to run a relatively horizontal pass pattern to get the necessary yardage. When such plays are run, it is left to the referees to determine whether the play was carried out legally or not.

If one wide receiver runs into the defensive player covering another receiver, then it’s an easy flag for officials to throw. It gets more complicated when a wide receiver comes into contact with his own defender, getting in the way of another defensive player.

That’s what happened on Clemson’s game-winning play. As Scott, positioned furthest outside, began to break his route inside, he got tangled up with Alabama defensive back Marlon Humphrey. The key element here is that it’s unclear that Scott initiated that contact, as Humphrey put his arms around the receiver and appeared to pull him to the turf."

Hahaha you're defending that play? To this extent? Goodness.

College football is THE homer sport. Everybody does this.

Monkey_Driven wrote:Ole Miss...

I'm picturing what an escort in that part of the country looks like, and it's just not happening for me.

Orpheus wrote:

jwfocker wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:It's not "definitely illegal". There are rules of engagement and if both players make contact at the same time they generally do not call it. If it's very one sided they do. But to say "definitely illegal" is not accurate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ear ... 1ca7504065

"Here’s the thing: Yes, Clemson ran a “pick play,” or a version thereof. But it was a legal play, or least a play that officials could reasonably deem legal.

So-called pick plays, sometimes referred to as “rub routes” in certain situations, have become a staple of NFL and college football, especially near the goal line, where the intended receiver only needs to run a relatively horizontal pass pattern to get the necessary yardage. When such plays are run, it is left to the referees to determine whether the play was carried out legally or not.

If one wide receiver runs into the defensive player covering another receiver, then it’s an easy flag for officials to throw. It gets more complicated when a wide receiver comes into contact with his own defender, getting in the way of another defensive player.

That’s what happened on Clemson’s game-winning play. As Scott, positioned furthest outside, began to break his route inside, he got tangled up with Alabama defensive back Marlon Humphrey. The key element here is that it’s unclear that Scott initiated that contact, as Humphrey put his arms around the receiver and appeared to pull him to the turf."

Hahaha you're defending that play? To this extent? Goodness.

College football is THE homer sport. Everybody does this.

Not everybody and I can and will hate on it. Especially on a message board.

Ole Miss is bringing so much joy to my life right now.

Not everybody and I can and will hate on it. Especially on a message board.

Not to be a dick but I've seen you do it as well re: Jameis Winston.

Lenny, I think Alabama will be good this year.

Monkey_Driven wrote:Lenny, I think Alabama will be good this year.

correct...good not great

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:Lenny, I think Alabama will be good this year.

correct...good not great

But good enough to make the playoff probably.