Mike Pereira: Nebraska's Bo Pelini once again crosses the line with officials

[zoogs]

Bo explained in today's presser that he saw a game recently where a similar thing happened with an interception/QB hit and they called it "after the interception."

[ZRod]

Bo explained in today's presser that he saw a game recently where a similar thing happened with an interception/QB hit and they called it "after the interception."

Ah, didn't hear the presser yet. VV did he him before the INT though.

[TheSker]

Less than 12 months ago he was having a huge spat with his own defensive coordinator mid-game, prompting players to intervene.

 

The one Spurrier had with his assistant last season was way more entertaining.

[Moiraine]

Bo explained in today's presser that he saw a game recently where a similar thing happened with an interception/QB hit and they called it "after the interception."

 

IMO it shouldn't matter whether the interception occurred before or after the roughing. What should matter is whether the roughing had an effect on the pass.

[Danimal]

First, the only contact you can see is on the thigh, the highest the rule applies is the knees. Second, the rule applies to when the defender is unabated. VV was stumbling off of a block, that is hardly unabated. Plus that flag came out late. You can see it in the air during Gerry's return. I think he threw it when pick occurred.

[knapplc]

Guy, go watch that game. Tell me I'm wrong in the sentence you put in bold. You can do it - but you'll be wrong.

 

I said nothing about some "vendetta," that's hyperbole you're putting on what I said. I am not wrong in that Bo was on camera every time something happened. It's the national story line on Bo, he's earned it, Angry Bo Face makes for great TV, and that's not deniable.

 

What's also not deniable is that Bo's reaction to that officiating was completely called-for, and there are dozens of college football coaches who would have reacted the same.

 

It's the hyperbole in this analysis that's amiss. Let's be realistic. Bo has a face made for these kinds of games, the kind that TV producers love. We've all seen it, but it's a partial representation of the man. I'm not defending the whole of Bo Pelini - I'm ONLY defending this particular instance.

 

It's you who's creating some over-arching vendetta... whatever word(s) you're using.

 

 

I don't care if this particular call is a "focus" of officiating this year. It was a bad call, Valentine was blocked into the QB and that is NOT the intent of the rule, as you would know if you did ten seconds of research:

 

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/new-rule-protect-passers-low-hits

 

 

The rule specifically covers a scenario in which a quarterback is in a passing posture with one or both feet on the ground. In that situation, no defensive player rushing unabated can hit him forcibly at or below the knee. The defensive player also may not initiate a roll or lunge and forcibly hit the quarterback in the knee area or below.

Exceptions for these types of hits occur when:

• the passer becomes a runner, either inside or outside the tackle box;
• the defender grabs or wraps the passer in an attempt to make a conventional tackle;
• the defender is not rushing unabated or is blocked or fouled into the passer.

 

 

The underlined is where the refs blew the call. It's why Bo was justifiably upset. It's why this writer is picking at low-hanging fruit - incorrectly so - and why defending his piece is ridiculous.

 

 

I know it's fun to be the guy to debunk a vendetta.

 

 

 

Only problem is, you're wrong. And it's pretty obvious.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

That last pick on that video is great...totally pre-planned

I had no idea Jamal Turner picked it off with a torn achilles.

 

 

Anybody ever stop to think that Bo never heard the roughing call and was yelling because he just thought they were PFs, and then saw Miami had a first down? I know in the stadium you couldn't hear the ref on the PA system so there's a good chance Bo never heard the full ruling either, hence why he calmed down quite a bit after the he had it explained to him. Something old Mike never considered before all but calling Bo and idiot.

 

 

 

Absolutely. It's obvious that Bo was misinformed somewhere along the way because he freaked out as soon as he realized Miami retained possession.

 

 

I freaked out, too.

[JTrain]

Bo was heard on the ref's live mic arguing that the roughing the passer was after the interception, not that the roughing penalty was a bad call (most of us agree it was a bad call). One of Pereira's main points was that Bo's argument about the timing of the roughing didn't make any sense. Roughing the passer is considered part of the offense's possession and negates any interceptions regardless of the timing. Bo did not understand the rule and apparently (via zoogies) Bo said he "saw a game recently where a similar thing happened". I think all head coaches and coordinators should read and have a good understanding of the rules rather than basing their understanding on live TV examples.

 

I have no problem with Bo getting heated at the refs for poor calls, but it's not a good look when he is raging over a misunderstanding of the rules. I believe a similar situation occurred earlier this season when he was angry about the refs running out the clock when we spiked it with 0:02 remaining in the half, despite the fact that the new rule clearly states there must be three seconds at the end of the previous play in order to spike the ball and stop the clock.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Guy, go watch that game. Tell me I'm wrong in the sentence you put in bold. You can do it - but you'll be wrong.

 

I said nothing about some "vendetta," that's hyperbole you're putting on what I said. I am not wrong in that Bo was on camera every time something happened. It's the national story line on Bo, he's earned it, Angry Bo Face makes for great TV, and that's not deniable.

 

What's also not deniable is that Bo's reaction to that officiating was completely called-for, and there are dozens of college football coaches who would have reacted the same.

 

It's the hyperbole in this analysis that's amiss. Let's be realistic. Bo has a face made for these kinds of games, the kind that TV producers love. We've all seen it, but it's a partial representation of the man. I'm not defending the whole of Bo Pelini - I'm ONLY defending this particular instance.

 

It's you who's creating some over-arching vendetta... whatever word(s) you're using.

 

 

I don't care if this particular call is a "focus" of officiating this year. It was a bad call, Valentine was blocked into the QB and that is NOT the intent of the rule, as you would know if you did ten seconds of research:

 

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/new-rule-protect-passers-low-hits

 

 

The rule specifically covers a scenario in which a quarterback is in a passing posture with one or both feet on the ground. In that situation, no defensive player rushing unabated can hit him forcibly at or below the knee. The defensive player also may not initiate a roll or lunge and forcibly hit the quarterback in the knee area or below.

Exceptions for these types of hits occur when:

• the passer becomes a runner, either inside or outside the tackle box;
• the defender grabs or wraps the passer in an attempt to make a conventional tackle;
• the defender is not rushing unabated or is blocked or fouled into the passer.

 

The underlined is where the refs blew the call. It's why Bo was justifiably upset. It's why this writer is picking at low-hanging fruit - incorrectly so - and why defending his piece is ridiculous.

 

 

I know it's fun to be the guy to debunk a vendetta.

 

 

 

Only problem is, you're wrong. And it's pretty obvious.

 

 

 

I'll stick with every post I made in this thread, thanks. They were pretty specific and supportable.

Also, if you read carefully, none of them suggested it wasn't a bad call.

Also, most of it wasn't about the Pereira article.

If you do in fact think Bo Pelini is treated fairly by the media in most respects, I apologize.

[knapplc]

Frankly, I haven't a clue what we're disagreeing about then.

 

Go Big Red, amirite?

[MichiganDad3]

This is because of Bo's reputation. I actually though Bo was much more controlled than usual. Yes he was yelling and fired up, but he tried to have a calm conversation and the ref was basically ignoring him.

 

After he yelled his peace, he calmed down.

 

Bo knew the line and didnt cross it.

That is the same feeling I had. I was thinking that Bo was much more in control than past years, and other than the Texas A&M fiasco and maybe the Texas one second, that was the worst call Bo has had to deal with.

[jsneb83]

Bo was heard on the ref's live mic arguing that the roughing the passer was after the interception, not that the roughing penalty was a bad call (most of us agree it was a bad call). One of Pereira's main points was that Bo's argument about the timing of the roughing didn't make any sense. Roughing the passer is considered part of the offense's possession and negates any interceptions regardless of the timing. Bo did not understand the rule and apparently (via zoogies) Bo said he "saw a game recently where a similar thing happened". I think all head coaches and coordinators should read and have a good understanding of the rules rather than basing their understanding on live TV examples.

 

I have no problem with Bo getting heated at the refs for poor calls, but it's not a good look when he is raging over a misunderstanding of the rules. I believe a similar situation occurred earlier this season when he was angry about the refs running out the clock when we spiked it with 0:02 remaining in the half, despite the fact that the new rule clearly states there must be three seconds at the end of the previous play in order to spike the ball and stop the clock.

If the interception occurred before the QB got hit, wouldn't the QB then be a defender and therefore fair game to be hit (any penalties would be considered blocking penalties)?

[Mavric]

 

Bo was heard on the ref's live mic arguing that the roughing the passer was after the interception, not that the roughing penalty was a bad call (most of us agree it was a bad call). One of Pereira's main points was that Bo's argument about the timing of the roughing didn't make any sense. Roughing the passer is considered part of the offense's possession and negates any interceptions regardless of the timing. Bo did not understand the rule and apparently (via zoogies) Bo said he "saw a game recently where a similar thing happened". I think all head coaches and coordinators should read and have a good understanding of the rules rather than basing their understanding on live TV examples.

 

I have no problem with Bo getting heated at the refs for poor calls, but it's not a good look when he is raging over a misunderstanding of the rules. I believe a similar situation occurred earlier this season when he was angry about the refs running out the clock when we spiked it with 0:02 remaining in the half, despite the fact that the new rule clearly states there must be three seconds at the end of the previous play in order to spike the ball and stop the clock.

If the interception occurred before the QB got hit, wouldn't the QB then be a defender and therefore fair game to be hit (any penalties would be considered blocking penalties)?

 

Before or after the interception has no bearing. But once the QB makes a move to try to go after the interceptor, he can be blocked.

[sd'sker]

Before or after the interception has no bearing. But once the QB makes a move to try to go after the interceptor, he can be blocked.

what about unnecessary roughness v. roughing the passer? would that make a difference on if the pick got called back or not?

[Savage Husker]

Didn't want to hijack LOMS highlight thread he just created, first time I saw the fight and Pelini reaction to roughing passer call...that was a tame yelling that Pelini had in comparison to others, plus 91.5k fans yelling louder than any other point in the night. Bo is loud already, and if he's like me...I talk louder when my surrounding is louder, then no s*** Bo is going to be yelling louder.