Will we or won't we....

[HuskerExpat]

So obviously a certain percentage of us felt like we got a raw deal on a few calls last year as a going away present from the Big 12. Now I've finally seen a mainstream journalist admit that it wouldn't be good for the B1G if we come in and win the first year (Adam Rittenberg, the ESPN B1G blogger). So who thinks there will be one or two games we lose this year as the result of a controversial call?

[Caven]

So obviously a certain percentage of us felt like we got a raw deal on a few calls last year as a going away present from the Big 12. Now I've finally seen a mainstream journalist admit that it wouldn't be good for the B1G if we come in and win the first year (Adam Rittenberg, the ESPN B1G blogger). So who thinks there will be one or two games we lose this year as the result of a controversial call?

 

If your games are close then you will lose one or two on a controversial call and you will win one or two on a controversial call. It is college football. There are always controversial calls that if the game is close can affect the outcome. At least it is slightly better now with replay.

[Moiraine]

we won't be

[HuskerExpat]

I basically feel that way too, but I know there have to be some conspiracy theorists around here!

[druski_2k5]

Well if you're worried about getting shafted on a controversial call, then as a team you have to do the best to your ability to limit those situations. You have to make sure you dominate the other team enough so that a bad call won't hurt you. Yeah bad calls suck when they go against you, and you can't blow everyone out, but the mentality is you have to limit those situations so that you don't get shafted. Easier said than done, yes, but that's the only way you could combat a shafted call, be it last year or this year.

 

That being said, I think the refs will be much more fair and less annoying in this conference.

[The Maudfather]

Yes, the conference that asked us to join is going to screw us in the first year.

[GSG]

As long as it's not something as bad as this:

 

[knapplc]

So obviously a certain percentage of us felt like we got a raw deal on a few calls last year as a going away present from the Big 12. Now I've finally seen a mainstream journalist admit that it wouldn't be good for the B1G if we come in and win the first year (Adam Rittenberg, the ESPN B1G blogger). So who thinks there will be one or two games we lose this year as the result of a controversial call?

 

If your games are close then you will lose one or two on a controversial call and you will win one or two on a controversial call. It is college football. There are always controversial calls that if the game is close can affect the outcome. At least it is slightly better now with replay.

 

Last year one specific officiating crew had an agenda against Nebraska. The same crew called the Texas, Iowa State and Texas A&M games. In those three games Nebraska was called for 32 penalties while ISU, Texas and A&M were called for a total of nine. There was a 187-yard disparity in penalty yards for those three games. Two-thirds of all penalties called against Nebraska in Big XII play were called in those three games.

 

But the sticking point isn't the amount of penalties that were called against Nebraska (although they were egregious), it was the amount that weren't called against our opponents. Texas A&M, in particular, was one of the most-penalized teams in all of college football, but in our game they were only called for two penalties. For ten total yards. In no other game last year was A&M penalized so few times.

[HuskerT]

I disagree with the blogger, I think it would actually be a good thing for the conference if we did well and I really don't expect any hidden agendas. The big 10 has been perceived as down lately and I think the excitement of us joining the conference and doing well would only enhance perception.

[Hercules]

So obviously a certain percentage of us felt like we got a raw deal on a few calls last year as a going away present from the Big 12. Now I've finally seen a mainstream journalist admit that it wouldn't be good for the B1G if we come in and win the first year (Adam Rittenberg, the ESPN B1G blogger). So who thinks there will be one or two games we lose this year as the result of a controversial call?

 

If your games are close then you will lose one or two on a controversial call and you will win one or two on a controversial call. It is college football. There are always controversial calls that if the game is close can affect the outcome. At least it is slightly better now with replay.

 

Last year one specific officiating crew had an agenda against Nebraska. The same crew called the Texas, Iowa State and Texas A&M games. In those three games Nebraska was called for 32 penalties while ISU, Texas and A&M were called for a total of nine. There was a 187-yard disparity in penalty yards for those three games. Two-thirds of all penalties called against Nebraska in Big XII play were called in those three games.

 

But the sticking point isn't the amount of penalties that were called against Nebraska (although they were egregious), it was the amount that weren't called against our opponents. Texas A&M, in particular, was one of the most-penalized teams in all of college football, but in our game they were only called for two penalties. For ten total yards. In no other game last year was A&M penalized so few times.

 

It wasn't just the disparity in penalties, either. It was the quality of the calls that were being made.

 

Nebraska was penalized for this:

 

 

and Nebraska was penalized 30 yards for this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiaRMoEASJE&feature=related

[Hercules]

And here's the call that essentially cost us the game against Texas A&M.

 

[druski_2k5]

Don't forget this blown call too:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfYxKRR2Wl4

 

Bad calls are bad!!!

 

Just rehashing the obvious....but....

 

The Iowa State thing was a complete joke. I thought it couldn't get worse than that.

 

Then came Texas A&M.

 

Sad thing is, before the ball was even snapped on that 3rd down, I knew who was coming and what coverage we would be in that blitz package. So obviously bringing that much pressure is going to hurry the quarterback to get pressure on him, force a throw and remind him that the defense wasn't going to back down.

 

A completely clean and legal hit. A perfect way to hurry the quarterback and take him down legally. There is no way that was pass interference.

 

I will probably never live that call down. Just as bad as the 94 Orange Bowl, 98 Kansas State, the Eric Martin hit was questionable, but him being the ONLY guy ever suspended in conference play for an on-field hit, raises a lot of questions too.

[The Dude]

To me it seems Big Ten refs tend to favor teams that have a shot at making the MNC game. The conference wants a rep in that game. If we have a loss and Wiscy is undefeated, don't be too shocked if the refs give us the business. And vice-versa.