New Rule? Cal Poly vs MT State

[Hammer]

GGNez, see what happens when you ask a legitimate football question on this board? This is far from a football board anymore. Its kind of like a bunch of grounded teenagers with way too much time on their hands. Seriously.

 

[LongTimeCatFan]

I thought EWU had a TD called back in WaGriz 3 years ago for THE SAME THING

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I thought EWU had a TD called back in WaGriz 3 years ago for THE SAME THING

I think that's true. I know that it's colloquially known as he "EWU Rule."

 

[GGNez]

GGNez, see what happens when you ask a legitimate football question on this board? This is far from a football board anymore. Its kind of like a bunch of grounded teenagers with way too much time on their hands. Seriously.

Ha. Literally "lol'd". I know, Hammer. But I got a couple of real answers before the kids logged on.

 

[grizindabox]

I thought EWU had a TD called back in WaGriz 3 years ago for THE SAME THING

I think that's true. I know that it's colloquially known as he "EWU Rule."

This is year 3 for the rule

 

[LongTimeCatFan]

I thought EWU had a TD called back in WaGriz 3 years ago for THE SAME THING

I think that's true. I know that it's colloquially known as he "EWU Rule."

That makes sense... Had to do something to curb all of the douchbaggery show boating that comes from those meth heads. They didn't seem to get the message

 

[Hammer]

GGNez, see what happens when you ask a legitimate football question on this board? This is far from a football board anymore. Its kind of like a bunch of grounded teenagers with way too much time on their hands. Seriously.

Ha. Literally "lol'd". I know, Hammer. But I got a couple of real answers before the kids logged on.

You lucked out!!! :lol:

 

[grizindabox]

I thought EWU had a TD called back in WaGriz 3 years ago for THE SAME THING

I think that's true. I know that it's colloquially known as he "EWU Rule."

That makes sense... Had to do something to curb all of the douchbaggery show boating that comes from those meth heads. They didn't seem to get the message

rule was put in place prior to the 2012 season.

 

[IdaGriz01]

I thought EWU had a TD called back in WaGriz 3 years ago for THE SAME THING

I think that's true. I know that it's colloquially known as he "EWU Rule."

That makes sense... Had to do something to curb all of the douchbaggery show boating that comes from those meth heads. They didn't seem to get the message

That's the crux, right there.
But I still think the penalty is too severe -- re my suggestion of not having a subsequent kickoff, and giving the opponent the ball on the 35-50 year line.

 

[CFallsGriz]

GGNez, see what happens when you ask a legitimate football question on this board? This is far from a football board anymore. Its kind of like a bunch of grounded teenagers with way too much time on their hands. Seriously.

Ha. Literally "lol'd". I know, Hammer. But I got a couple of real answers before the kids logged on.

You lucked out!!! :lol:

Well I must've missed your take on the rule Hammer.

lol

 

[Hammer]

GGNez, see what happens when you ask a legitimate football question on this board? This is far from a football board anymore. Its kind of like a bunch of grounded teenagers with way too much time on their hands. Seriously.

Ha. Literally "lol'd". I know, Hammer. But I got a couple of real answers before the kids logged on.

You lucked out!!! :lol:

Well I must've missed your take on the rule Hammer.

lol

Hmmmmmm, I must've missed yours too, LOL

 

[CFallsGriz]

Not trying to be a troll here...I honestly thought that the call was BS, but generally feel that the rule is good for college FB. I just thought this call was BS, and changed a game that was already very close. Let them play. :twocents:

 

[Hammer]

The call, as the rule is written, was the correct call. Not that I agree with the rule (not the call).

 

[IdaGriz01]

Not trying to be a troll here...I honestly thought that the call was BS, but generally feel that the rule is good for college FB. I just thought this call was BS, and changed a game that was already very close. Let them play. :twocents:

I agree, in general. It took me a bit to realize what the call was in the earlier game (CAA) where we saw it called. Seemed like it was not much more than a little "happy" skip step.

Yet it also seems like all the players are into the "look at me! Me!" antics ... and the NCAA (and the NFL) want to find a way to curb that. And that, I agree with.

It's funny, in a way. This younger generation seems so much into to the "been there, done that" mode about new experiences, yet they want to act like a TD, or other big play, is the greatest thing that ever happened in sports. "Act like you've been there before," seems to escape them. Sigh.

 

[CFallsGriz]

While I don't agree with the decision, I respect it. That is often lost on a message board. It might be the "letter of the law," but the same could be said for defensive PI in the NFL when the game is on the line. Most agree: don't call it if it's questionable when it's a game-changer call. Let them play, and call the foul if it's blatant. Don't call back a TD when the kid just drug his feet on the way in to score. It just seemed ticky-tacky when the offense had earned the points. They beat you and the refs gave it back. Doesn't change the outcome ultimately, but does affect the momentum of the game. Just my opinion.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Not trying to be a troll here...I honestly thought that the call was BS, but generally feel that the rule is good for college FB. I just thought this call was BS, and changed a game that was already very close. Let them play. :twocents:

I agree, in general. It took me a bit to realize what the call was in the earlier game (CAA) where we saw it called. Seemed like it was not much more than a little "happy" skip step.

Yet it also seems like all the players are into the "look at me! Me!" antics ... and the NCAA (and the NFL) want to find a way to curb that. And that, I agree with.

It's funny, in a way. This younger generation seems so much into to the "been there, done that" mode about new experiences, yet they want to act like a TD, or other big play, is the greatest thing that ever happened in sports. "Act like you've been there before," seems to escape them. Sigh.

Why? As hard as these kids work, why NOT be allowed to celebrate when a play works to perfection? I can't stand this rule, and the subjectivity of it....really don't like it, especially when it impacts games like this one could have.

 

[LongTimeCatFan]

Not trying to be a troll here...I honestly thought that the call was BS, but generally feel that the rule is good for college FB. I just thought this call was BS, and changed a game that was already very close. Let them play. :twocents:

I agree, in general. It took me a bit to realize what the call was in the earlier game (CAA) where we saw it called. Seemed like it was not much more than a little "happy" skip step.

Yet it also seems like all the players are into the "look at me! Me!" antics ... and the NCAA (and the NFL) want to find a way to curb that. And that, I agree with.

It's funny, in a way. This younger generation seems so much into to the "been there, done that" mode about new experiences, yet they want to act like a TD, or other big play, is the greatest thing that ever happened in sports. "Act like you've been there before," seems to escape them. Sigh.

Why? As hard as these kids work, why NOT be allowed to celebrate when a play works to perfection? I can't stand this rule, and the subjectivity of it....really don't like it, especially when it impacts games like this one could have.

I get what you're saying, but it isn't subjective at all. It's as simple as yes or no. Did the ball carrier alter his stride as he approached the goal line or not?

I don't like taking points off the board, but it is what it is.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Not trying to be a troll here...I honestly thought that the call was BS, but generally feel that the rule is good for college FB. I just thought this call was BS, and changed a game that was already very close. Let them play. :twocents:

I agree, in general. It took me a bit to realize what the call was in the earlier game (CAA) where we saw it called. Seemed like it was not much more than a little "happy" skip step.

Yet it also seems like all the players are into the "look at me! Me!" antics ... and the NCAA (and the NFL) want to find a way to curb that. And that, I agree with.

It's funny, in a way. This younger generation seems so much into to the "been there, done that" mode about new experiences, yet they want to act like a TD, or other big play, is the greatest thing that ever happened in sports. "Act like you've been there before," seems to escape them. Sigh.

Why? As hard as these kids work, why NOT be allowed to celebrate when a play works to perfection? I can't stand this rule, and the subjectivity of it....really don't like it, especially when it impacts games like this one could have.

I get what you're saying, but it isn't subjective at all. It's as simple as yes or no. Did the ball carrier alter his stride as he approached the goal line or not?

I don't like taking points off the board, but it is what it is.

The subjectivity is in whether they call it or not. I've seen many, many instances where they DON'T call it...

 

[LongTimeCatFan]

I agree, in general. It took me a bit to realize what the call was in the earlier game (CAA) where we saw it called. Seemed like it was not much more than a little "happy" skip step.

Yet it also seems like all the players are into the "look at me! Me!" antics ... and the NCAA (and the NFL) want to find a way to curb that. And that, I agree with.

It's funny, in a way. This younger generation seems so much into to the "been there, done that" mode about new experiences, yet they want to act like a TD, or other big play, is the greatest thing that ever happened in sports. "Act like you've been there before," seems to escape them. Sigh.

Why? As hard as these kids work, why NOT be allowed to celebrate when a play works to perfection? I can't stand this rule, and the subjectivity of it....really don't like it, especially when it impacts games like this one could have.

I get what you're saying, but it isn't subjective at all. It's as simple as yes or no. Did the ball carrier alter his stride as he approached the goal line or not?

I don't like taking points off the board, but it is what it is.

The subjectivity is in whether they call it or not. I've seen many, many instances where they DON'T call it...

Well... If it's a rule, call it otherwise get the rule changed. Sort of like last week's bowing. It's the same rule, and it didn't get called, but should have.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Why? As hard as these kids work, why NOT be allowed to celebrate when a play works to perfection? I can't stand this rule, and the subjectivity of it....really don't like it, especially when it impacts games like this one could have.

I get what you're saying, but it isn't subjective at all. It's as simple as yes or no. Did the ball carrier alter his stride as he approached the goal line or not?

I don't like taking points off the board, but it is what it is.

The subjectivity is in whether they call it or not. I've seen many, many instances where they DON'T call it...

Well... If it's a rule, call it otherwise get the rule changed. Sort of like last week's bowing. It's the same rule, and it didn't get called, but should have.

Exactly. And I saw a Sac State guy today do the throat slash...plus what's the difference between the toe drag and the hyper-celebration every time a DB breaks up a pass?