2015 College Football Season

[old_gregg]

Just saw your response (and AA and Husky). The camera used in the photo you provide is from behind the goal posts. I'm talking about the camera that is underneath the goal posts.

he's not saying that it looks like it didn't go in from that angle. he's saying you're dumb for saying that angle leaves no doubt.

[falafel]

Just saw your response (and AA and Husky). The camera used in the photo you provide is from behind the goal posts. I'm talking about the camera that is underneath the goal posts.

Seems like the first shot shows that it was no good. The camera angle from beneath is from the center of the field goal, which skews the angle.

[il Padrino Ute]

You're overstating your point for emphasis, right? Because I can see thinking the kick might have been good, or was even probably good. But if you really think the underneath angle leaves no doubt, I'm left with no choice but to question your vision, spacial skills, and/or intelligence.

Just saw your response (and AA and Husky). The camera used in the photo you provide is from behind the goal posts. I'm talking about the camera that is underneath the goal posts.

[All-American]

You're overstating your point for emphasis, right? Because I can see thinking the kick might have been good, or was even probably good. But if you really think the underneath angle leaves no doubt, I'm left with no choice but to question your vision, spacial skills, and/or intelligence.

And did you see the players' reactions? Two Indiana players tentatively raised their hands and all the Dook players immediately jumped for joy.

[Moliere]

The only silver lining in this entire fiasco is that it happened to a Nebraska player.

Ha! Karma for the MSU game.

[Omaha 680]

The only silver lining in this entire fiasco is that it happened to a Nebraska player.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I think that poor Nebraska kid missed another game with a questionable targeting call too -- sucks for him.

Definitely a bad call and I agree seems like exactly the type of call a review should overturn because it showed the angle that the guy turned his head and led with the shoulder, didn't launch himself into the receiver, etc.

The only silver lining in this entire fiasco is that it happened to a Nebraska player.

[Donuthole]

[color="purple"]

Seeing highlights, the worst call was the FG the officials said was no good during OT in the Indiana/Duke game. The camera under the posts showed that there is no doubt the kick was good.

You're overstating your point for emphasis, right? Because I can see thinking the kick might have been good, or was even probably good. But if you really think the underneath angle leaves no doubt, I'm left with no choice but to question your vision, spacial skills, and/or intelligence.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

I agree with AA I thought the FG was no good.

[All-American]

Seeing highlights, the worst call was the FG the officials said was no good during OT in the Indiana/Duke game. The camera under the posts showed that there is no doubt the kick was good.

I saw that camera angle. I very much doubted the kick was good. In fact, I suspect it was not.

[Omaha 680]

But all targeting calls are reviewed. So far this year in CFB, the review seems to be nothing more than a rubber stamp of the on-the-field call. Nobody is really blaming the on-the-field refs for throwing the targeting flag in doubt, it's the seeming inability to change their minds on review that has everyone baffled.

Right. I'm talking about performance reviews by the conferences. So it appears to me that the booth officials are just as fearful of overturning a targeting call as the on-field officials are of missing a targeting call. I don't see it getting better because no conference is going to tell their officials to call the targeting rule less stringently and protect them when they do in the current environment.

[CardiacCoug]

But all targeting calls are reviewed. So far this year in CFB, the review seems to be nothing more than a rubber stamp of the on-the-field call. Nobody is really blaming the on-the-field refs for throwing the targeting flag in doubt, it's the seeming inability to change their minds on review that has everyone baffled.

I think that poor Nebraska kid missed another game with a questionable targeting call too -- sucks for him.

Definitely a bad call and I agree seems like exactly the type of call a review should overturn because it showed the angle that the guy turned his head and led with the shoulder, didn't launch himself into the receiver, etc.

[il Padrino Ute]

Seeing highlights, the worst call was the FG the officials said was no good during OT in the Indiana/Duke game. The camera under the posts showed that there is no doubt the kick was good.

[Jeff Lebowski]

But all targeting calls are reviewed. So far this year in CFB, the review seems to be nothing more than a rubber stamp of the on-the-field call. Nobody is really blaming the on-the-field refs for throwing the targeting flag in doubt, it's the seeming inability to change their minds on review that has everyone baffled.

Exactly.

[BigFatMeanie]

I'm not sure how you solve it. If officials miss a legitimate targeting call, they will probably receive a bad rating or worse get suspended. So they are being very conservative to protect themselves. I can't say for sure I would behave differently.

But all targeting calls are reviewed. So far this year in CFB, the review seems to be nothing more than a rubber stamp of the on-the-field call. Nobody is really blaming the on-the-field refs for throwing the targeting flag in doubt, it's the seeming inability to change their minds on review that has everyone baffled.