Mavric

Here's hoping we break out some of our new-found zone D - corners and LBs underneath with safeties over the top. Not having 6-7 people turn and run at the snap would go a long way toward containing a mobile QB.

Romney is an asshat, yeesh.

Another excellent contribution to political discourse.

Jim Lehr = Milton from Office Space

Didn't come up with that directly but pretty much what I was thinking.

Who's watching? I won't be able to watch the debate tonight, feel free to leave any opinions, summaries, articles, videos ect. here. It would be appreciated.

I will be watching but . . . meh. Odds are that they won't be too significant.

Unless someone (Romney) manages to shove his foot in his mouth. Its kinda sad that the main thing that may come from the debates is just a screw up, otherwise they are coached to stay on script, and odds are they even know the general idea of the questions asked, and wont be held to actually answering the question and just talking around an answer.

So far, so true.

Saying the O line was the reason we lost the UCLA game was ridiculous when the offense scored 30 points and the defense looked like they had no clue what they were doing giving up over 600 yards.

 

Our O line is playing very well this year. It's amazing how important it is for a group of guys like that to play in the same system for two years in a row.

 

 

Agreed.

 

Blaming the Oline, Tmart, or "any" part of our offense for that loss is just silly.

Well, you know, the defense did it's job by holding UCLA to 36 points (34 minus the safety), but the offense failed theirs by not scoring at least 37. Hows that for looney logic?

 

Some are just so preset on blaming certain people that nothing pleases. Just like the guy that was cut off sports nightly last night for being a complete idiot.

 

The best, and maybe most important assessment of the line this year is the penalty situation. Hardly none at all. What'd they have Saturday? One holding call was it a believe. (4th qtr clip was on Ameer). No false starts, again, if I recall. That is just a flat out impresssive improvement.

Bill Callahan is that you???

That was a catch. He caught the ball and was down by contact long before the ball came out. I think because replay makes things look a lot different than full speed it should have been challenged. Look you know certain things in your heart. The fact that this WAS a catch is one of those things. Rule book be dammed We don't need refs watching action after the play is dead.

"Down by contact" has no bearing in college. It is only an NFL rule.

This rule has been in the college game for several years.

 

If a receiver goes to the ground while making a catch, the receiver must maintain control of the ball through the entire process. If the ball comes loose, it is an incomplete pass. This rule was put in place for just these types of circumstances and this same call is made many times every Saturday. There is no reason to review that play when it was clearly incomplete by rule.

 

The rule book gives several examples. This one is probable applies most to the Enunwa incomplete pass:

 

Completed Pass—ARTICLE 6

Approved Ruling 7-3-6

IX. Airborne receiver A85 grasps a forward pass and in the process of going

to the ground, first contacts the ground with his left foot as he falls to

the ground inbounds. Immediately upon A85 hitting the ground, the ball

comes loose and touches the ground. RULING: Incomplete pass. An

airborne receiver must maintain control of the ball while going to the

ground in the process of completing a catch.

 

You can download the rule book here.

This doesn't apply. This is when a player falls to the ground and the ball comes loose "AND THEN" the ball touches the ground before they've "caught" the ball. So you're falling, land on your back, ball pops out. The ball has to be loose before it makes contact with the ground - in which case it's an incomplete pass. However, if the receiver had possession of the football, the ball first makes contact with ground "and then" comes loose - it's a catch. Otherwise, if you applied this rule to all catches (which you have to correct?), then a RB that receives the ball in the backfield and runs for 50 yards before being tackled, however goes down and as he does the ball comes into contact with the ground and (while he still has possession) it comes loose...then the ball would be 50 yards back at the original line of scrimmage and ruled as incomplete (when it was clearly a complete pass).

 

The argument isn't whether it was complete/incomplete...it's whether he officially had possession before the ball hit the turf. That's why this rule specifies "in the process of completing a catch". That's the only time it applies. So was Enunwa in the process of completing the catch, or did he already have possession? I think he clearly did. So did the announcers.

The difference is where they were when they caught the ball. The rules are different if you catch the ball with your feet (or foot) on the ground vs. catch the ball while in the air. If you catch the ball while in the air, you have to maintain control all the way to the ground, whether that's just two feet or your whole body.

That's why your analogy with the RB running 50 yards doesn't apply. He either caught the ball with his feet on the ground or returned to the ground and began running while in control so it is a completed catch. If you catch it in the air, you have to maintain control through going to the ground with whatever body parts hit the ground in the time immediately following the catch. Just because your feet hit first doesn't "complete the catch" if the rest of your body goes to the ground immediately afterwards.

I really thought it looked like a good flop by the punter when it was live on TV. Replay showed he got hit pretty good.

With a leg in the air, you better barely tap him or you'll get the 15-yard variety.

This rule has been in the college game for several years.

 

If a receiver goes to the ground while making a catch, the receiver must maintain control of the ball through the entire process. If the ball comes loose, it is an incomplete pass. This rule was put in place for just these types of circumstances and this same call is made many times every Saturday. There is no reason to review that play when it was clearly incomplete by rule.

 

The rule book gives several examples. This one is probable applies most to the Enunwa incomplete pass:

 

Completed Pass—ARTICLE 6

Approved Ruling 7-3-6

IX. Airborne receiver A85 grasps a forward pass and in the process of going

to the ground, first contacts the ground with his left foot as he falls to

the ground inbounds. Immediately upon A85 hitting the ground, the ball

comes loose and touches the ground. RULING: Incomplete pass. An

airborne receiver must maintain control of the ball while going to the

ground in the process of completing a catch.

 

You can download the rule book here.

Beat me to it.

Good work.

Much as we don't like it, it's pretty clear in an example from the NCAA Rule Book:

Airborne receiver A85 grasps a forward pass and in the process of going

to the ground, first contacts the ground with his left foot as he falls to

the ground inbounds. Immediately upon A85 hitting the ground, the ball

comes loose and touches the ground. RULING: Incomplete pass. An

airborne receiver must maintain control of the ball while going to the

ground in the process of completing a catch.

You can argue that he was turning upfield but he didn't really get to run with the ball before hitting the ground. Per the rule book, he had to maintain control all the way to the ground, which he didn't.

I'm not a fan of the rule but that's how it is.

 

But in all seriousness, at that point in the game and the situation, I'm sure the coaches did not want to risk losing a timeout unless they were completely sure of an overturn. Chances are it wouldnt have been changed. The whole "possess the ball all the way through" crap did that play in.

So I get the dead horse on this one. He went up, made the catch, Took a step, and hit the ground. The ground cannot cause a fumble. Legit question. Although, not wanting to possibly waste a time out is a good point.

True. The ground cannot cause a fumble. It caused an incompletion.

Pretty nice stats courtesy OWH:

NU offense continues nice trends

Nebraska continued three trends with its 30-point, 440-yard offensive effort against Wisconsin.

>> The Huskers have scored at least 30 points in all five games this season. The last time NU hit 30 in five straight games was a stretch spanning parts of the 2007 and ’08 seasons.

>> Nebraska rushed for 259 yards to go over 250 for the fifth straight game. It’s the longest streak of 250-yard rushing games since the 2002 team went seven straight.

 

>> NU has topped 400 yards of total offense in five straight games for the first time since the 2008 season.

Perhaps if they were like LSU and had to label each 5-yard line, this wouldn't have happened.

Huskers 34

Badgers 20

Passing 260

Rushing 230

"The narrative is we've underperformed, and I can't argue with that," Delany said this week. "We haven't won big games. The narrative is about right. When you have big brands, expectations are high. I can't discount the facts, and I can't discount the critics."

...

What stands out about this season is the lack of signature wins -- or even many decent wins -- and more important, the lack of elite teams. According to ESPN Stats & Information, the last time the Big Ten didn't have any top-12 teams in the fourth AP poll of the season was in 2001, when No. 16 Northwestern was the league's highest-ranked team. Illinois finished the 2001 season as the Big Ten's highest-ranked team at No. 12, the last time the league finished without a top -10 team in the final polls.

Full Article

There was at least one bright spot:

The Big Ten has only one starting quarterback, Nebraska's Taylor Martinez, rated among the nation's top 30 passers.

Surprised no one's brought up the ESPN/Urban Meyer bromance yet.

But you have to admit that if a major injury happens to Tmart I seriously doubt Kellogg will be the starter

Disagree! I think our staff has alot of confidence in RK3!

As someone else said, depends on the situation.

If it's next game, would be a tough choice.

If it's the third quarter against Iowa and we're 8-3, RK3 without a doubt.

I would say this game doesn't mean much but there might not be very many games between ranked B1G teams this year so ... why not?

ibtm

In Before The Maudfather???

Apparently the spreads at the beginning of the thread were under and under.

Michigan St. trying to make it look respectable now.

nerd

Gotta have something to do during a 6 hour game...

Last time we scored 70 and won by 60 was 77-14 vs. Iowa St. in 1997.

From what I can tell, the last time we scored 60 was vs. Northwestern in the 2000 Alamo Bowl (66-17)

***I think Knapp started the thread with that

Looks like ucla mite lose to Oregon st

 

Beavers still up by 7?

10

mid 4th