Stanford - UDFG game thread - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford - UDFG game thread (/thread-12865.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford - UDFG game thread (/thread-12865.html)
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - washingtonismoney - 10-15-2016
Not quite "What's Your Deal?" level, but enjoyable:
"Kelly said a Stanford strength coach said "bye bye" brushing past him postgame. Exchange followed. David Grimes followed him up the field."
https://twitter.com/PeteSampson_/status/787496987847426048
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - FarmBoy - 10-15-2016
Someone on ND Nation claims the last call was right because only the fumbler can recover a fumble on 4th down. Can anyone confirm that/ I've never heard that rule before?
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - martyup - 10-15-2016
(10-15-2016, 08:38 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Not quite "What's Your Deal?" level, but enjoyable:
"Kelly said a Stanford strength coach said "bye bye" brushing past him postgame. Exchange followed. David Grimes followed him up the field."
https://twitter.com/PeteSampson_/status/787496987847426048
The comments are hilarious.
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - BostonCard - 10-15-2016
(10-15-2016, 08:44 PM)FarmBoy link Wrote:Someone on ND Nation claims the last call was right because only the fumbler can recover a fumble on 4th down. Can anyone confirm that/ I've never heard that rule before?
Only the fumbler can advance the fumble on fourth down. So great point!
https://forum.officiating.com/football/14252-ncaa-4th-down-fumble-rule.html
Quote:When on fourth down, before a change of team possession, a Team A fumble is caught or recovered in advance of the fumble by a Team A player other than the fumbler, the ball is dead and returned to the spot of the fumble. If the fumble is recovered behind the spot of the fumble by a Team A player other than the Team A fumbler, the ball is dead at that spot.
Great catch.
BC
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - martyup - 10-15-2016
(10-15-2016, 07:59 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:NDNation.com
IrishEnvy.com
are your sources for schadenfreude y'all
A couple of gems from NDNation.com
Quote:Brian says:
October 15, 2016 at 10:37 pm
This offense just stinks! The D steps up and does its job over and over and over and the
offense sucks the wind out of the sails. BK once again gets outcoached and has no business
coaching at this level. Why wont this program get a head coach who has won at this level instead
of getting these up and comers?
Reply
Fulk says:
October 15, 2016 at 10:39 pm
Abandon hope. For now and for the future. Notre Dames best days are far behind it.
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - martyup - 10-15-2016
Here's the mood at IrishEnvy.com
Quote:Â NDPhilly Kizer thinking about what SEC school to transfer to
 TheChosen1 Remember that drive where I asked if they threw it once.
 LoveThee How long has Zaire been in? Missed most of the game
 North Buffalo Irish Bye bye Brian
 TheChosen1 Let's put a running QB in when we need a pocket passer. Makes sense.
 North Buffalo Irish Kizer has to be hurt. There is no other answer.
 Riddickulous If 2007 didn't exist this would be the worst ND team in decades.
 Riddickulous It's unfathomable how bad this team is with the amount of talent we have.
 North Buffalo Irish I don't know who we are going to beat. Army and Navy are both really good
 North Buffalo Irish The 07 team did win 3 games
 CanadianIrishFan306 Tranquill should be put into Onwualu's spot
 North Buffalo Irish Another missed tackle in the ***** backfield
 North Buffalo Irish How can a 300lb guy not tackle a little RB?
 North Buffalo Irish Tillery you bum
 North Buffalo Irish Oh gee whiz empty set on 3rd and 1 a QB run who would have thought
 TheChosen1 Has jay Hayes played tonight?
 kmoose The RT was tackling our guy on that play, right in front of the QB. No call
 North Buffalo Irish Kizer looks awful in the pocket. Good run though
 kmoose Does anyone else find Flutie just annoying as hell?
 North Buffalo Irish Yes Flutie roots against ND every week. He is a bad commentator
 CanadianIrishFan306 he almost dropped that
 North Buffalo Irish We should score with enough time to allow a FG drive for Stanford
 North Buffalo Irish Was that gonna be a reverse to Claypool?
 North Buffalo Irish That was our play?
 North Buffalo Irish 2-5
 North Buffalo Irish Lol
 North Buffalo Irish Bye bye Brian
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - BigEasyCard - 10-15-2016
(10-15-2016, 07:38 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:BigEasyCard and I say hi from NOLA.
It was great to meet a fellow CardBoarder in person to enjoy a game and the oysters at The Blind Pelican.
For the record, one minute before the safety, fullmetal predicted it. He also almost nailed the final score with his prediction of 17-9.
Geaux Cardinal!
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - Spiny_Norman - 10-15-2016
Btw, twitter seems to indicate that today was Craig Jones' birthday. Happy birthday to #30!
djones, I hope that you got to celebrate in person with Craig.
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - scorecard - 10-15-2016
A couple things that I enjoyed about this victory involved 2 whistles:
1) Pac-12 refs with the quick whistle for forward progress being stopped actually saved us from Love being stripped for a TD, instead of costing us the game in 2012 when Stepfan Taylor was whistled dead on 4th and goal. Sorry, that's not reviewable. What comes around goes around.
2) Pac-12 refs called out the whistle from the crowd which also came into play in 2012. I understand having home field advantage and making noise, but simulating a referee's whistle is poor sportsmanship and not anywhere close to fair play. Yet, plenty of ND fans were eager to call Shaw whiny for even bringing up the fake whistle.Â
Bye bye!
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - French Rage - 10-16-2016
(10-15-2016, 11:44 PM)scorecard link Wrote:1) Pac-12 refs with the quick whistle for forward progress being stopped actually saved us from Love being stripped for a TD, instead of costing us the game in 2012 when Stepfan Taylor was whistled dead on 4th and goal. Sorry, that's not reviewable. What comes around goes around.
Isn't a play like that the exact reason we have a forward progress rule?
Had they not whistled, is it possible to retroactively rule forward progress?
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - BostonCard - 10-16-2016
(10-16-2016, 10:54 AM)French Rage link Wrote:[quote author=scorecard link=topic=15912.msg176102#msg176102 date=1476600265]
1) Pac-12 refs with the quick whistle for forward progress being stopped actually saved us from Love being stripped for a TD, instead of costing us the game in 2012 when Stepfan Taylor was whistled dead on 4th and goal. Sorry, that's not reviewable. What comes around goes around.
Isn't a play like that the exact reason we have a forward progress rule?
Had they not whistled, is it possible to retroactively rule forward progress?
[/quote]
I think they whistled after Notre Dame had stripped the ball, although on a play like that forward progress is often stopped long before the whistle blows because referees want to give the offensive player a chance to escape, which does sometimes happen. Love's forward progress had clearly been stopped and he had already been pushed back 2+ yards when the strip happened, so it was a good call. That being said, it is routine for the defense to have the ball carrier wrapped up and stop forward progress and then focus on trying to strip the ball. And that does occasionally result in a fumble/strip.Â
BC
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - JJJ - 10-16-2016
Hope everyone is having as nice a Sunday as I am. #nerdnationrocks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqQVeNeedEQ&index=5&list=PL86A74C40872C3B35
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - BostonCard - 10-17-2016
Touchdown Love!
https://twitter.com/pac12/status/788176297440653312
Looks like the Pac-12 retroactively awarded Bryce Love the touchdown he so richly deserved and wiped out the fumble, which occurred after he had crossed the goal line (and in any case was caused by the ground). So, Love gets a touchdown two days after the game ended.
BC
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - JJJ - 10-17-2016
The Irish don't seem too happy.
http://www.csnchicago.com/notre-dame/notre-dame-clinging-positivity-season-long-implosion-continues-loss-stanford
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - ChicagoCard - 10-18-2016
(10-17-2016, 05:53 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Touchdown Love!
https://twitter.com/pac12/status/788176297440653312
Looks like the Pac-12 retroactively awarded Bryce Love the touchdown he so richly deserved and wiped out the fumble, which occurred after he had crossed the goal line (and in any case was caused by the ground). So, Love gets a touchdown two days after the game ended.
That was scary. And what really would have happened at the time if Burkett hadn't recovered? Touchback, for sure.
Re: Stanford - UDFG game thread - CTcard - 10-18-2016
(10-18-2016, 02:19 AM)ChicagoVisitor link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=15912.msg176320#msg176320 date=1476752010]
Touchdown Love!
https://twitter.com/pac12/status/788176297440653312
Looks like the Pac-12 retroactively awarded Bryce Love the touchdown he so richly deserved and wiped out the fumble, which occurred after he had crossed the goal line (and in any case was caused by the ground). So, Love gets a touchdown two days after the game ended.
That was scary. And what really would have happened at the time if Burkett hadn't recovered? Touchback, for sure.
[/quote]
I don't think it would have been a touchback.
I was going to post on this separately, but it was only musing until now.
That play was about as obvious a non-fumble as there can be on replay - first the knee was down, then the hand hit the ground, then the ball came loose. The only real question was whether the ball had crossed the goal line before Love's knee was down. [I think the answer is yes, but they never did show a 100% conclusive replay angle.]
My suspicion was always that either the replay official or the referee on the field simply glossed over the full explanation and went to the heart of the matter - it was a touchdown. The tweet seems to confirm that. Had a und play managed to hold onto the ball while it was rolling about I presume they would have been more careful with the explanation.
And Arcega-Whiteside wasn't the guy that recovered the non-fumble.