What did we learn? Purdue edition

[mwj98]

10 hours ago, huskerfan74 said:

Scott Frost really hurt us. Look at what coach White has been able to do in less than a year with our defense even with average talent. Can’t believe the state paid that hack millions to drag us to irrelevance. Let us hope those dark days are behind us. Hope we keep recruiting good talent on offense and God willing we get an actual QB. 

I can not agree more. I was thinking the exact same thing after the game this past Saturday. Average talent in defense and they are playing lights out. 
 

These players believe in this staff. I remember listening to a podcast and JoJo Domann was speaking. He basically said the team couldn’t get behind Frost because they basically didn’t trust him. I defended Frost when the McCaffrey’s came after him. Now I see why. 
 

We will be back…..soon!!

[Undone]

4 minutes ago, Red Five said:

 

My newest theory is the Adidas footballs.  For as long as this has gone on, that is the one constant.  Is there something different in their design that makes them more fumbley?

 

I legitimately love this.

[Enhance]

8 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

The Minnesota QB was not a runner, which as I understand it is also a factor and widens the criteria. It's dumb, but a QB in the pocket/receiver in mid air are treated differently than a ballcarrier pushing through a pile.

You're correct - in the Minnesota example, the QB is considered defenseless because he was in the "act of or just after throwing a pass."

So, to me, that's the only real difference between the Robinson hit and the #21 hit on Haarberg. Both Robinson and #21 hit with roughly the same part of their helmets. That guy was defenseless and Haarberg wasn't. But, that's where the rule starts to confuse me, because the rule language doesn't appear to specify that the player must ALWAYS be defenseless for it to be targeting. We know that using the crown of the helmet is always targeting, but apparently just attacking a QB's head isn't if the QB isn't defenseless?

I also think the "crown" tends to be thought of differently depending who you ask. Perhaps the officiating crews all work off of a standard practice, but medical professionals who study CTE consider the "crown" to be this entire red area. However, I added a red circle to highlight the area that officiating crews appear to consider the "crown." It might be a little big, but refs often appear to not treat the front/top part of the helmet as the crown. Just the tippy top.

[GSG]

25 minutes ago, Red Five said:

 

My newest theory is the Adidas footballs.  For as long as this has gone on, that is the one constant.  Is there something different in their design that makes them more fumbley?

 

Yellow is Adidas, Green is Nike/jordan, and blue is Under Armour.

 

Fumbles lost this year

 

 

 

EDIT: Looks like the page I got the outfitters from might be out of date. Hawaii wears Adidas now.

 

Did find a pic from a Wisconsin game - Wilson football, same for UAB.

[GSG]

I don't think Under Armour makes footballs (do they?), so those teams are probably going with Wilson or whatever

[knapplc]

16 minutes ago, Enhance said:

You're correct - in the Minnesota example, the QB is considered defenseless because he was in the "act of or just after throwing a pass."

So, to me, that's the only real difference between the Robinson hit and the #21 hit on Haarberg. Both Robinson and #21 hit with roughly the same part of their helmets. That guy was defenseless and Haarberg wasn't. But, that's where the rule starts to confuse me, because the rule language doesn't appear to specify that the player must ALWAYS be defenseless for it to be targeting. We know that using the crown of the helmet is always targeting, but apparently just attacking a QB's head isn't if the QB isn't defenseless?

I also think the "crown" tends to be thought of differently depending who you ask. Perhaps the officiating crews all work off of a standard practice, but medical professionals who study CTE consider the "crown" to be this entire red area. However, I added a red circle to highlight the area that officiating crews appear to consider the "crown." It might be a little big, but refs often appear to not treat the front/top part of the helmet as the crown. Just the tippy top.

 

Whether the ball carrier is a QB or any other player, in the pocket or running, that should not matter. It provides WAY too much gray area for a rule ostensibly created to keep players safe.

 

If that hit on Haarberg is considered "safe" solely because he was out of the pocket, it's a bad rule. 

[Husker in WI]

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Whether the ball carrier is a QB or any other player, in the pocket or running, that should not matter. It provides WAY too much gray area for a rule ostensibly created to keep players safe.

 

If that hit on Haarberg is considered "safe" solely because he was out of the pocket, it's a bad rule. 

 

Realistically, it's about trying to prevent the hits that aren't necessary more than making all hits "safe." I do think the defense player piece is way too vague and limits the defenses ability to knock the ball out as a receiver is catching it, but I get it with some of the hits on QBs. Usually since he's standing in one place it's not crazy to require that defenders not hit him in the head. A defenseless receiver catching a ball mid air is a much tougher requirement. 

[Enhance]

5 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Whether the ball carrier is a QB or any other player, in the pocket or running, that should not matter. It provides WAY too much gray area for a rule ostensibly created to keep players safe.

 

If that hit on Haarberg is considered "safe" solely because he was out of the pocket, it's a bad rule. 

I would tend to agree with this, as well. I would think that the hit on Haarberg had the potential to be just as harmful to both players as the one Robinson was found guilty of. In fact, I would argue this Haarberg one was a little worse.

[Lorewarn]

1 hour ago, Enhance said:

We know that using the crown of the helmet is always targeting, but apparently just attacking a QB's head isn't if the QB isn't defenseless?

 

 

This is how I've understood the rule. It's either targeting based off using the crown of the helmet in any scenario, or based off forcible contact to the head/neck area specifically of a defenseless player.

[Red Five]

1 hour ago, GSG said:

 

Yellow is Adidas, Green is Nike/jordan, and blue is Under Armour.

 

Fumbles lost this year

 

 

 

EDIT: Looks like the page I got the outfitters from might be out of date. Hawaii wears Adidas now.

 

Did find a pic from a Wisconsin game - Wilson football, same for UAB.

 

Good data.  I am going to try to put a bit more research into this at some point.  I also think its probably best to look at total fumbles and not just fumbles lost. 

 

 

 

[Red Five]

Here is a Nebraska Adidas game football for sale. https://www.ebay.com/itm/195997650461?hash=item2da25ece1d:g:e6wAAOSwPndlJvnp

 

Someone needs to buy it and go through some drills to see if you can hold onto it.

[Red Five]

Also, I know we have HS coaches on here.

 

How do you choose your game balls?  Are certain brands harder to hold onto?

 

I know we used to have our QB pick out 3 or 4 as game balls.  I remember he had smallish hands, so he would like them a little underinflated so he could grip them better.

[Toe]

I remember T-Mart preferred more broken-in balls over brand new ones.

[MyBloodIsRed16]

1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Also, I know we have HS coaches on here.

 

How do you choose your game balls?  Are certain brands harder to hold onto?

 

I know we used to have our QB pick out 3 or 4 as game balls.  I remember he had smallish hands, so he would like them a little underinflated so he could grip them better.

When I was in HS my coach took me to the sporting goods store where we got our equipment and I tested a bunch of balls.  Oddly enough I picked an Adidas ball.  I liked the grip and shape of the ball.  I had smaller hands.  We stuck with those balls for a while.  When I was coaching I know we had different balls that seemed to be covered in a ton of wax straight out of the bag.  We scuffed them up pretty good before the game and would let the QB pick which one he wanted.  

[Red Five]