Post Game: A rivalry renewed

[behappp]

A quick thought. During the game thread, the subject of Sneed throwing the long ball too high came up. I've been thinking that he may have been working on throwing the ball with more of an arc and letting our speedy receivers(Akem) run to catch up to the ball. Seemed to work

 

[WyomingGrizFan]

- Get used to the sight of Garrett Graves running dudes over.

It was exciting to see him have a few good runs - he's going to be a beast.
The new 4 game redshirt rule was a great change by the NCAA.

He looked good; real good.
Plus he's got the QB experience. I wouldn't be surprised if he throws off the option run-around end type play and catch everyone off guards. He'll be a decent threat fot that as he runs the ball well.

 

[fanofzoo]

- Get used to the sight of Garrett Graves running dudes over.

It was exciting to see him have a few good runs - he's going to be a beast.
The new 4 game redshirt rule was a great change by the NCAA.

He looked good; real good.
Plus he's got the QB experience. I wouldn't be surprised if he throws off the option run-around end type play and catch everyone off guards. He'll be a decent threat fot that as he runs the ball well.

Don't forget his two state championship's in wrestling for that attitude.

 

[kemajic]

Our depth did not shine in this game; none of the Q4 subs impressed.

 

[RABIDAWG]

http://www.naia.org/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=27900&ATCLID=205302072

Well done!

 

[Yukon]

Our depth did not shine in this game; none of the Q4 subs impressed.

Griz 3's and 4's were up against Idaho 1's.

 

[IdahoGrizFan]

- Robby Hauck is going to be a guy that MSU is going to take a key on. While he's a tackling machine he's shown issues with taking angles on ball carriers, either after a catch or when the RB/QB is running. He's a young guy and only going to get better, but far too often right now he's chasing guys or getting hurdled by guys as he's down on the ground. I'll give him props though too, that PBU at the end of the first half was great.

My only argument here is won't State first have to complete a pass for Robby to have an issue with his angles running down a receiver? :roll:

 

[bgbigdog]

- Robby Hauck is going to be a guy that MSU is going to take a key on. While he's a tackling machine he's shown issues with taking angles on ball carriers, either after a catch or when the RB/QB is running. He's a young guy and only going to get better, but far too often right now he's chasing guys or getting hurdled by guys as he's down on the ground. I'll give him props though too, that PBU at the end of the first half was great.

My only argument here is won't State first have to complete a pass for Robby to have an issue with his angles running down a receiver? :roll:

Yup.

 

[Grisly Fan]

Good write up. My few observances...
Ungerer grabs his junk a lot
Petrino is not 6’ tall, unless they have 7’2” linemen...and he’s trash
On TV that first fg looked wide. I watched it numerous times and though it was no good. No matter
With Petrino out at Louisville, maybe the spuds should make it a 2 for 1 deal today

We watched the fieldgoal on slow-mo, there's one rotation of the ball where you see the nose of it is inside the upright. It was close, but good.

Excellent thx. Did you question it at first?

Sure did! Hence why we backed it up and watched it frame by frame

I was unclear about what constitutes a successfully field goal in the instance so I searched the NCAA Football rule book for all occurrences of the words "Field Goal" and it is defined as an attempt that passes "between the goal posts" and that the goal posts are "lines and not a plane" which suggests that the entire (or maybe the majority of the) ball would have to pass between the posts if they were entended vertically. This makes sense to me because if they were then any ball that barely touched the extended goal post would certainly be deflected outside the posts. If my interpretation is correct the field as it look on TV would definitely have been no good. Unfortunately I couldn't find a reference that specifically clarifies this instance.

 

[AZDoc]

We watched the fieldgoal on slow-mo, there's one rotation of the ball where you see the nose of it is inside the upright. It was close, but good.

Excellent thx. Did you question it at first?

Sure did! Hence why we backed it up and watched it frame by frame

I was unclear about what constitutes a successfully field goal in the instance so I searched the NCAA Football rule book for all occurrences of the words "Field Goal" and it is defined as an attempt that passes "between the goal posts" and that the goal posts are "lines and not a plane" which suggests that the entire (or maybe the majority of the) ball would have to pass between the posts if they were entended vertically. This makes sense to me because if they were then any ball that barely touched the extended goal post would certainly be deflected outside the posts. If my interpretation is correct the field as it look on TV would definitely have been no good. Unfortunately I couldn't find a reference that specifically clarifies this instance.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one that was thinking WTF? It even nearly missed the outside of the net as it hit the wall. Glad it didn't matter in the end.

 

[Sam A. Blitz]

Our depth did not shine in this game; none of the Q4 subs impressed.

Graves looked pretty good.

 

[Fahque]

https://www.facebook.com/MontanaGrizFootball/videos/268594527177765/

 

[Ursa Major]

Excellent thx. Did you question it at first?

Sure did! Hence why we backed it up and watched it frame by frame

I was unclear about what constitutes a successfully field goal in the instance so I searched the NCAA Football rule book for all occurrences of the words "Field Goal" and it is defined as an attempt that passes "between the goal posts" and that the goal posts are "lines and not a plane" which suggests that the entire (or maybe the majority of the) ball would have to pass between the posts if they were entended vertically. This makes sense to me because if they were then any ball that barely touched the extended goal post would certainly be deflected outside the posts. If my interpretation is correct the field as it look on TV would definitely have been no good. Unfortunately I couldn't find a reference that specifically clarifies this instance.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one that was thinking WTF? It even nearly missed the outside of the net as it hit the wall. Glad it didn't matter in the end.

It sure seems like a lot of these disputes over field goals could be remedied with $40 worth of schedule 40 pvc pipe and some duct tape.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Sure did! Hence why we backed it up and watched it frame by frame

I was unclear about what constitutes a successfully field goal in the instance so I searched the NCAA Football rule book for all occurrences of the words "Field Goal" and it is defined as an attempt that passes "between the goal posts" and that the goal posts are "lines and not a plane" which suggests that the entire (or maybe the majority of the) ball would have to pass between the posts if they were entended vertically. This makes sense to me because if they were then any ball that barely touched the extended goal post would certainly be deflected outside the posts. If my interpretation is correct the field as it look on TV would definitely have been no good. Unfortunately I couldn't find a reference that specifically clarifies this instance.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one that was thinking WTF? It even nearly missed the outside of the net as it hit the wall. Glad it didn't matter in the end.

It sure seems like a lot of these disputes over field goals could be remedied with $40 worth of schedule 40 pvc pipe and some duct tape.

Especially when you can just hang them from the ceiling.

 

[Ursa Major]

I was unclear about what constitutes a successfully field goal in the instance so I searched the NCAA Football rule book for all occurrences of the words "Field Goal" and it is defined as an attempt that passes "between the goal posts" and that the goal posts are "lines and not a plane" which suggests that the entire (or maybe the majority of the) ball would have to pass between the posts if they were entended vertically. This makes sense to me because if they were then any ball that barely touched the extended goal post would certainly be deflected outside the posts. If my interpretation is correct the field as it look on TV would definitely have been no good. Unfortunately I couldn't find a reference that specifically clarifies this instance.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one that was thinking WTF? It even nearly missed the outside of the net as it hit the wall. Glad it didn't matter in the end.

It sure seems like a lot of these disputes over field goals could be remedied with $40 worth of schedule 40 pvc pipe and some duct tape.

Especially when you can just hang them from the ceiling.

Jesus, that's right. I'll throw in the 10 yards of 8 lbs. monofiliment.