Courtney Osborne's hit on Gabbert has been sent to Big 12 for review?
- Thread starter Nexus
- Start date
ESPY
Starter
Hehe...I just watched this about 20 times in a row and smiled the whole time. The one undeniable thing in this whole situation is Osborne frickin' laid Gabbert out. LOVE IT!!!Here is from another angle.
RedDenver
Heisman Trophy Winner
Agree. How has football devolved to the point where we can't celebrate what was obviously a great blitz and big hit on the QB? Screw the politically correct mainstream. Go Big Hits!!Hehe...I just watched this about 20 times in a row and smiled the whole time. The one undeniable thing in this whole situation is Osborne frickin' laid Gabbert out. LOVE IT!!!Here is from another angle.
Hujan
Starter
Wow. This angle seals the deal. It could not be more of a clean hit. In fact, I actually lost a little respect for Osborne. He took it easy on Gabbert. I bet if you sent this angle to Ed "You haven't said anything about my hair yet!" Cunningham, he would publicly turn in his testicles and apologize to Nebraska fans and players everywhere.Hehe...I just watched this about 20 times in a row and smiled the whole time. The one undeniable thing in this whole situation is Osborne frickin' laid Gabbert out. LOVE IT!!!Here is from another angle.
Last edited by a moderator:
BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA
All-American
So you expect Dennard to be back from his concussion by then? Ironically wasn't it Osborne that knocked Dennard out of the game with a helmet on helmet?ThrowinBones said:
A suspension would be a total joke. Consider everything that needs to be assumed to take this from a 15 yard penalty to a suspension. The rule or at least the press release on the rule reads as follows
Took from NCAA.ORG
"Penalties to curb dangerous contact will continue to be called against players who target the head and neck area of defenseless players. This includes initial contact with a forearm, elbow, shoulder or helmet. A 15-yeard penalty will be enforced on these violations. In egregious situations, officials may eject the offending player."
1) It really was helmet to helmet
2) It was targeted (that means to me "intentional"
3) It was egregious you were trying to injury the guy.
Oh and by the way this calculated destruction involved 2 moving people flying around so fast that the ref does not even make a call even though part of his job is to watch the QB. The player must be an genius he was able to do this so dam fast that the ref missed it and it takes high def super slow mo video and a few days to decide what happened. At best the ref missed a call, at it's worst one would have to be nuts to decide that this was a split second destructive effort. I almost think the suspensions should be held back for times when a game is heated and it looks like pay back for a past hit. Otherwise we are trying to mind read and then making a conclusion that he was trying to hurt the guy.
Here is how he personally reviewed the call “I don't think there was malice involved there," Pinkel said.
My conclusion: Ref didn't call it and the other teams coach even says he does not think the guy was trying to cause harm.
Took from NCAA.ORG
"Penalties to curb dangerous contact will continue to be called against players who target the head and neck area of defenseless players. This includes initial contact with a forearm, elbow, shoulder or helmet. A 15-yeard penalty will be enforced on these violations. In egregious situations, officials may eject the offending player."
1) It really was helmet to helmet
2) It was targeted (that means to me "intentional"
3) It was egregious you were trying to injury the guy.
Oh and by the way this calculated destruction involved 2 moving people flying around so fast that the ref does not even make a call even though part of his job is to watch the QB. The player must be an genius he was able to do this so dam fast that the ref missed it and it takes high def super slow mo video and a few days to decide what happened. At best the ref missed a call, at it's worst one would have to be nuts to decide that this was a split second destructive effort. I almost think the suspensions should be held back for times when a game is heated and it looks like pay back for a past hit. Otherwise we are trying to mind read and then making a conclusion that he was trying to hurt the guy.
Here is how he personally reviewed the call “I don't think there was malice involved there," Pinkel said.
My conclusion: Ref didn't call it and the other teams coach even says he does not think the guy was trying to cause harm.
NebraskaShellback
Starter
I would not hold my breath on this. :espnsucks:Wow. This angle seals the deal. It could not be more of a clean hit. In fact, I actually lost a little respect for Osborne. He took it easy on Gabbert. I bet if you sent this angle to Ed "You haven't said anything about my hair yet!" Cunningham, he would publicly turn in his testicles and apologize to Nebraska fans and players everywhere.Hehe...I just watched this about 20 times in a row and smiled the whole time. The one undeniable thing in this whole situation is Osborne frickin' laid Gabbert out. LOVE IT!!!Here is from another angle.
NebraskaShellback
Starter
Pinkel now says he does not know if it was malice.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/506874-missouri-head-coach-pinkel-wants-gabbert-hit-reviewed-by-big-12
In my post I had typed that Pinkel is a moron but I took it out as I decided to be decent ..... I now have concluded that I was wrong and he is a Moron (didn't even need a replay to make up my mind).
RedNLeader
Special Teams Player
Are players gonna be aloud to do anything in football anymore?
Osborne wasn't replacing Dennard. Ciante Evans replaced Dennard, and played his tail off. Osborne was replacing Thenarse/Smith, as we wanted someone who could tackle. Obviously, Osborne is much too good at tackling, and we need to go back to our safeties who aren't going to hurt (or tackle) anyone.
dutch91701
Special Teams Player
