Prince out 3 to 4 weeks

#126
#126
I guess with the new rule there is to be NO contact between helmets. How are you suppose to play without helmets hitting? Give me a break!!! Do you think they should throw a flag every time we hit ucla and our helmet touches them?
 
#127
#127
Bassmanbruno said:
Wow - UCLA fans - I really respected you all - but you do have your share of pricks coming on our boards now.
Click to expand...

Yes, even we at UCLA have posters like that. Of course you never know which ones are really 13-year olds. Nothing against 13-year olds, by the way.

I have three rules that I TRY to follow:

1. Post what you think will happen before the game and back it up intelligently.

2. If the Bruin's lose, congratulate the other team. If they win, take the victory graciously.

3. No ad hominim attacks. Or, as my father told me, don't get into a pissing contest with a skunk.
 
#128
#128
cgroce30 said:
I guess with the new rule there is to be NO contact between helmets. How are you suppose to play without helmets hitting? Give me a break!!! Do you think they should throw a flag every time we hit ucla and our helmet touches them?
Click to expand...

I think the helmet-to-helmet rule is more to protect the person doing the hitting, not the person being hit. If you're hitting an opponent's helmet with yours then you are not keeping your eyes on the target and you are increasing the chance of having a neck injury.

Just a theory.
 
#129
#129
Bruleif said:
He apparently suffered a broken jaw from that helmet-to-helmet hit (which the refs did not call) in the end zone when the refs called a safety that was not a safety. If you do not believe there was a helmet-to-helmet hit, look at the replay.

Why is it that both the refs and the broadcasters did not know the rule on a safety? The rule is this, as I understand it: if ANY part of the ball pierces the plane defined by the edge of the goal line NEXT to the end zone, that is the edge going out of the end zone, then there is NO safety.

And, as so many people get wrong, spotting the ball in football should not be based on where the knee touches the ground but rather on WHERE THE BALL IS WHEN THE KNEE TOUCHES THE GROUND.

Were the officials an SEC crew?

Kudos to Prince for toughing it out.
Click to expand...

Are you for real, or do you just have a UCLA degree? Either way, you are dumb as dirt!
 
#130
#130
On The Sportssource Sunday morning one of the guys said Nuehiesal was taking the safety on the next play regardless he was not gonna punt out of his own endzone. The safety doesn't matter, the bruins won. The fact is that the Prince kid, the redshirt freshman, didnt do anything spectacular but still outplayed are 5th year senior by not trying to do too much and by not turning the ball over and he did hang in there cause he was pounded on all day long.
 
#131
#131
Classy UCLA fans griping about us taking out their QB...why not discuss this on your own boards? You won, and lost your starter..I'd take the same for us.
 
#132
#132
Well the fumble was recovered by Tennessee. I mean it was clearly a fumble and a Vol came up with it........ how could UCLA recover it? Owell
 
#133
#133
Think about it this way. In order to score a touchdown, the ball must break the plane of the goal line meaning the edge of the goal line closest to the field of play. Wouldn't it make sense that the ball must be completely beyond the goal line to be in the field of play if you are trying to avoid a safety? Simple math really and that is the rule. We're not scoring "field of plays" here.

Bruleif said:
1. See my posting on the timing of the safety. It is only in the timing of the safety that UT benefitted, not in the safety itself. We agree on that.

2. The problem I see a lot is the conception that the ball should be spotted where the knee hits. It has been my understanding that the ball should be spotted where THE BALL IS when the knee hits. Am I wrong? I do not have a copy of the NCAA football rules.
Click to expand...
 
#135
#135
I always thought that the whole ball had to be out of the endzone. Just like only a part of the ball has to cross the line to score a touchdown, only a part of the ball has to still be in the endzone to get a safety. Maybe I'm wrong, but it makes sense to me. Oh well, doesn't matter though cause we still lost the game. I dont understand what all the whining is for.
 
#139
#139
Ghost of Archvol said:
Think about it this way. In order to score a touchdown, the ball must break the plane of the goal line meaning the edge of the goal line closest to the field of play. Wouldn't it make sense that the ball must be completely beyond the goal line to be in the field of play if you are trying to avoid a safety? Simple math really and that is the rule. We're not scoring "field of plays" here.
Click to expand...

Form the NCAA rule book regarding a safety:

safety.jpg


As I read this, the position of the ball doesn't matter but the position of the player does. Not what I always thought but it does seem to read that way.
 
#140
#140
Bruleif said:
He apparently suffered a broken jaw from that helmet-to-helmet hit (which the refs did not call) in the end zone when the refs called a safety that was not a safety. If you do not believe there was a helmet-to-helmet hit, look at the replay.

Why is it that both the refs and the broadcasters did not know the rule on a safety? The rule is this, as I understand it: if ANY part of the ball pierces the plane defined by the edge of the goal line NEXT to the end zone, that is the edge going out of the end zone, then there is NO safety.

And, as so many people get wrong, spotting the ball in football should not be based on where the knee touches the ground but rather on WHERE THE BALL IS WHEN THE KNEE TOUCHES THE GROUND.

Were the officials an SEC crew?

Kudos to Prince for toughing it out.
Click to expand...

Someone may have pointed this out already, but you do not understand the rule. If any part pierces the goal line going IN, it's a touchdown, but for a safety, the ENTIRE ball has to be outside the goalline (not touching ANY chalk).
 
#141
#141
Why are you still arguing on whether it was a safety? Isn't that kind of a moot point now? Did you not want the safety anyway? Sorry he got his jaw broken. Kevin Craft to the rescue!
 
#145
#145
Bruleif said:
He apparently suffered a broken jaw from that helmet-to-helmet hit (which the refs did not call) in the end zone when the refs called a safety that was not a safety. If you do not believe there was a helmet-to-helmet hit, look at the replay.

Why is it that both the refs and the broadcasters did not know the rule on a safety? The rule is this, as I understand it: if ANY part of the ball pierces the plane defined by the edge of the goal line NEXT to the end zone, that is the edge going out of the end zone, then there is NO safety.

And, as so many people get wrong, spotting the ball in football should not be based on where the knee touches the ground but rather on WHERE THE BALL IS WHEN THE KNEE TOUCHES THE GROUND.

Were the officials an SEC crew?

Kudos to Prince for toughing it out.
Click to expand...


1st off.... I didn't know a shoulder was a helmet
2nd ... I would be happy as a UCLA fan that UT got that safety. UCLA's punter would had to punt from the back of the endzone and TN. This also would have given UT much better field position.
3rd...the officials got the call right. Knee touched down first
 
#146
#146
dantheman617 said:
1st off.... I didn't know a shoulder was a helmet
2nd ... I would be happy as a UCLA fan that UT got that safety. UCLA's punter would had to punt from the back of the endzone and TN. This also would have given UT much better field position.
3rd...the officials got the call right. Knee touched down first
Click to expand...

For crying out loud people...they WOULD NOT have punted!

What is so freakin' hard to understand about this? They got the safety one play earlier than they would have liked to. Had the QB gotten out of the endzone, they would have been able to burn another 40 seconds off, and then on 4th the punter would have stepped out of the back of the endzone.

Geez....
 
#147
#147
orangedonkeypunch said:
Someone may have pointed this out already, but you do not understand the rule. If any part pierces the goal line going IN, it's a touchdown, but for a safety, the ENTIRE ball has to be outside the goalline (not touching ANY chalk).
Click to expand...

This is correct, because if they didn't rule it a safety when half the ball is in the endzone, where would they spot the ball? In the end zone? That would make no sense.

Plus, even if they didn't rule it a safety, UCLA would've either centered the ball over the punter's head to take a safety or the punter would've taken the snap and ran around in the end zone for 5 or 6 seconds and then slide to take a safety...either way, UCLA still would've won, so why does it matter?
 
#149
#149
This move was executed 1 game too early. Sorry Bruins.
 
#150
#150
Bruin fan here, came back from Knoxville very appreciative of how gracious and cool everyone at Neyland was, even after the game: we were invited to countless tailgates after the game. We enjoyed the pre-game, saw the Vol Walk, got to Calhoun's Friday night, all in all a great and memorable experience in one of the best college football atmospheres around.

That said, I do think UCLA managed to kinda quiet the crowd, except for the obvious third-down plays and your early TD. But after Cromp's second pick, you could sense the crowd turned on him, and the crowd barely cheered the Vols when they came out for the 2nd half. After the third pick our defense got confident and dominated the 3rd quarter, then hung on for dear life.

We were calling for the kneel-down ( to be followed by an intentional safety) on second down, and even though it looked like the ball crossed the goal line, the play-call was ridiculous. Neuheisel said in the LA Times that he made the play call, trying to get a first down and kill the game. The only way we can lose the game is a stupid turnover down there, and we were quite lucky that Franklin recovered his own fumble (watch the replay and you'll see Franklin toss the ball to the ref while still on his back), and then that Prince didn't cough it up in the end zone after the vicious (and legal) hit in the end zone.

I hope Tenn. fans now respect our defense, and don't blame it all on Cromp. Our team showed guts and deserve at least some credit: we have a great pair of corners and a fine young safety in Moore. I hope the cries of "soft Pac-10 defense" were sufficiently dismissed. We all hope you rebound and shock the Gators and regroup to whack the rest of your SEC opponents, in spite of your Trojan-dominated coaching staff. (and thanks to Coach Orgeron for the "soft" bulletin board material: once a Condom always a ......)
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top