The Ed Cunningham Thread

[TigerNuts]

If that was targeting and "dirty" then so should that Mizzou player leading with his helmet into Taylor's thigh and the Mizzou lineman driving Taylor's head into the ground. We see tons of concussions from head-to-ground contact, so why isn't Eddie going off on that? Maybe because that will show that the real problem is the lack of helmet padding, not hits.

 

Watch the film, he hit Taylor with his shoulder.

[kansas husker]

If that was targeting and "dirty" then so should that Mizzou player leading with his helmet into Taylor's thigh and the Mizzou lineman driving Taylor's head into the ground. We see tons of concussions from head-to-ground contact, so why isn't Eddie going off on that? Maybe because that will show that the real problem is the lack of helmet padding, not hits.

 

Watch the film, he hit Taylor with his shoulder.

 

now it was his helmet it was a hemlet to the thigh, it doesn't matter though it was aginst Nebraska the play won't even be looked at by the Big 12.

[The Snork]

That hit should have been flagged. Sorry, that's a 15 yarder. We got lucky.

 

 

What kind of sun dress do you wear when you watch the game?

[Hercules]

Somebody should target Ed Cunningham.

[The Snork]

If that was targeting and "dirty" then so should that Mizzou player leading with his helmet into Taylor's thigh and the Mizzou lineman driving Taylor's head into the ground. We see tons of concussions from head-to-ground contact, so why isn't Eddie going off on that? Maybe because that will show that the real problem is the lack of helmet padding, not hits.

 

Watch the film, he hit Taylor with his shoulder.

 

 

he went for Taylor's knees ... a hit intended to injure the QB and it worked.

[TigerNuts]

If that was targeting and "dirty" then so should that Mizzou player leading with his helmet into Taylor's thigh and the Mizzou lineman driving Taylor's head into the ground. We see tons of concussions from head-to-ground contact, so why isn't Eddie going off on that? Maybe because that will show that the real problem is the lack of helmet padding, not hits.

 

Watch the film, he hit Taylor with his shoulder.

 

 

he went for Taylor's knees ... a hit intended to injure the QB and it worked.

 

You cannot be serious. A defender can tackle wherever the hell he wants (except the head). He is a running QB and was running on the play like a RB.

[HuskerJosh]

That hit should have been flagged. Sorry, that's a 15 yarder. We got lucky.

This, along with your stupid take on the Martin hit, clearly exhibit the fact that you have no football knowledge.

[Apathy]

Why was that play not reviewed on the Gabbert sack? It was clearly a fumble!

[Nebula]

Why was that play not reviewed on the Gabbert sack? It was clearly a fumble!

 

I'm still in shock over that. Blatant fumble. Cunningham, unbelievably, starts in again with his "this is what we're trying to remove from the game" horsesh&*, meanwhile, we score a defensive touchdown. A flat out defensive touchdown. No review. (Of course we could only have gained possesion through a review and not the 6 points that we had, in fact, earned, but possession nonetheless.)

 

And no mention of fumble by either broadcaster.

 

Un....real. Oh well. They still couldn't take it from us, could they? GBR!!!!!!

[MCAT800]

The guy is a fool.

[TigerNuts]

Why was that play not reviewed on the Gabbert sack? It was clearly a fumble!

 

I'm still in shock over that. Blatant fumble. Cunningham, unbelievably, starts in again with his "this is what we're trying to remove from the game" horsesh&*, meanwhile, we score a defensive touchdown. A flat out defensive touchdown. No review. (Of course we could only have gained possesion through a review and not the 6 points that we had, in fact, earned, but possession nonetheless.)

 

And no mention of fumble by either broadcaster.

 

Un....real. Oh well. They still couldn't take it from us, could they? GBR!!!!!!

 

The broadcasters mentioned that it looked like fumble and it was not reviewed b/c the play was blown dead on the field. You cannot call a fumble on a review just like you can't call a face-mask.

[MCAT800]

Why was that play not reviewed on the Gabbert sack? It was clearly a fumble!

 

I'm still in shock over that. Blatant fumble. Cunningham, unbelievably, starts in again with his "this is what we're trying to remove from the game" horsesh&*, meanwhile, we score a defensive touchdown. A flat out defensive touchdown. No review. (Of course we could only have gained possesion through a review and not the 6 points that we had, in fact, earned, but possession nonetheless.)

 

And no mention of fumble by either broadcaster.

 

Un....real. Oh well. They still couldn't take it from us, could they? GBR!!!!!!

 

The broadcasters mentioned that it looked like fumble and it was not reviewed b/c the play was blown dead on the field. You cannot call a fumble on a review just like you can't call a face-mask.

 

How is a play blown dead before or during a QB sack????

[TigerNuts]

Why was that play not reviewed on the Gabbert sack? It was clearly a fumble!

 

I'm still in shock over that. Blatant fumble. Cunningham, unbelievably, starts in again with his "this is what we're trying to remove from the game" horsesh&*, meanwhile, we score a defensive touchdown. A flat out defensive touchdown. No review. (Of course we could only have gained possesion through a review and not the 6 points that we had, in fact, earned, but possession nonetheless.)

 

And no mention of fumble by either broadcaster.

 

Un....real. Oh well. They still couldn't take it from us, could they? GBR!!!!!!

 

The broadcasters mentioned that it looked like fumble and it was not reviewed b/c the play was blown dead on the field. You cannot call a fumble on a review just like you can't call a face-mask.

 

How is a play blown dead before or during a QB sack????

 

It was blown dead (maybe "dead" is not the right word, it was whistled that the play was over) after the sack. They didn't call the fumble on the field so you can't call it on review.

[Apathy]

Why was that play not reviewed on the Gabbert sack? It was clearly a fumble!

 

I'm still in shock over that. Blatant fumble. Cunningham, unbelievably, starts in again with his "this is what we're trying to remove from the game" horsesh&*, meanwhile, we score a defensive touchdown. A flat out defensive touchdown. No review. (Of course we could only have gained possesion through a review and not the 6 points that we had, in fact, earned, but possession nonetheless.)

 

And no mention of fumble by either broadcaster.

 

Un....real. Oh well. They still couldn't take it from us, could they? GBR!!!!!!

I agree. The officials blew the whistle when Allen picked up the ball so even if we would've got the ball it would've been at the spot where the ball was picked up at. The booth reviews a completed catch by Burkhead but not this fumble? What game are they watching?

[TigerNuts]

Here is the hit on Martinez. Clearly, his head is in front of the runner.