The CardBoard
David Pollack - 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: David Pollack (/thread-10246.html)

Pages: 1 2

David Pollack - vataha - 10-16-2015

Congrats to the team and staff on a well played game. Just curious, did anyone else find that David Pollack sounded like he had a slight anti-Stanford bias last night. Although I expect this from Pollack as I have perceived this from him the past couple of years. Not looking to flame the guy, I was just curious if more of us picked up on that?

Re: David Pollack - PrinceLightfoot - 10-16-2015

Yes, if it isn't Georgia or SEC, his comments tend to be condescending and sounds like he is surrendering when he compliments a team.

In regards to the targeting call, the crown of Walker's helmet slammed into Blake's face mask causing it to almost come off of his head completely. He had a heck of a bloody mouth afterwards, but the pain was more because of the shot he took from the shoulder into the solar plexus.

Pollack focused on one thing which is a legal shoulder block to midsection. He chose to ignore the head-to-head contact which to me was painfully obvious as soon as it happened.

Re: David Pollack - French Rage - 10-16-2015

(10-16-2015, 08:37 AM)PrinceLightfoot link Wrote:Yes, if it isn't Georgia or SEC, his comments tend to be condescending and sounds like he is surrendering when he compliments a team.

In regards to the targeting call, the crown of Walker's helmet slammed into Blake's face mask causing it to almost come off of his head completely. He had a heck of a bloody mouth afterwards, but the pain was more because of the shot he took from the shoulder into the solar plexus.

Pollack focused on one thing which is a legal shoulder block to midsection. He chose to ignore the head-to-head contact which to me was painfully obvious as soon as it happened.

Any clips online of the hit?  Being at the stadium I couldn't see it very well, and they never showed a replay.  The bloody mouth does explain the bandage he had there; he seemed in very good spirits at the end of the game, though, so good to see him taking it in stride.

Re: David Pollack - SUBuddha - 10-16-2015

Pollack is, and has been as long as I can remember, biased against Stanford.

Re: David Pollack - OutsiderFan - 10-16-2015

Pollack just has high standards, and he would prefer those PF calls error on the side of flagrant, not caution.

I thought Pollack was quite complimentary of Stanford.  Both he and Palmer said plenty of nice things about Stanford.  In fact, at one point, it was as if they were creating a Stanford football recruiting video.  Pollack questioned if Hogan could be effective without a dominant run game, and also was skeptical of Stanford's defense.  But these are totally legitimate questions.

Re: David Pollack - winflop - 10-16-2015

Pollack is a moron to question our defense.  The starters gave up 20 points in 3 quarters and maybe it would have gotten to 26-27 by the end of the game if starters had stayed in.  In UCLA's other 5 games then have scored an average of almost 38 ppg and scored 30+ against every opponent other than BYU.

Actually, Pollack is just a moron period.

Re: David Pollack - BostonCard - 10-16-2015

He ruined the moment of Owusu's catch (I think it was him, not Palmer who interjected: "Who is the guy from Alabama?") after Joe Tessitore was going crazy over the Owusu catch.  Then, he criticized Hogan for underthrowing the ball (not that it was an unfair critique, but come on, Stanford just had the catch of the year, and you have to talk about how Hogan underthrew the ball?)

BC

Re: David Pollack - CornFed - 10-16-2015

It looked to me that if Hogan had not "underthrown" the ball, it would have been out of the end zone.  The reverse w/ the pitch took quite a bit of time and Hogan got the throw off as quickly as he could.  But I do not think the pass could have been properly led and still be completed.

Re: David Pollack - BostonCard - 10-16-2015

It could have been thrown three or so yards deeper and not gone out of the end zone.  The ball was underthrown, and I think if there is one fault scouts will find with Kevin Hogan is that he doesn't have a super strong arm.  Remember, on the play before, we drew the PI instead of having Rector score a TD (he had a clear step on the DB) because Hogan underthrew the ball, and on the flea flicker against UCF, you could see Hogan putting everything he had into the ball.  That being said, Hogan took the throw from behind the 50 yard line and it traveled 5 yards deep into the end zone, so it traveled about 55 yards in the air.  Not quite the 70+ yards that Andrew Luck throws it, but not too shabby either.

https://youtu.be/NkNQqOurmIA?t=1m

BC

Re: David Pollack - Hank 91 - 10-16-2015

This will sound like I'm apologizing for Pollack, but I didn't have a real problem with anything he said last night. Here's the thing. This team is clearly among the best in the country, so people will naturally be more critical of it, and not just for the sake of criticism. If Stanford were 3-3, I don't think he would've wasted his time looking for weaknesses, because they'd be apparent. But because this team is potentially a final four team, all of his questions and criticisms seemed legitimate. Analysts can't just say, "Wow, this team really dominated UCLA." They have to speculate about how the Stanford defense would do against an elite offense, and it's accurate to say that we don't yet know the answer to that. They have to speculate about how Hogan would do if an elite defense were able to shut down the run, and sadly, we've seen what happened against Northwestern. But there was lots of discussion about Stanford being the top team in the Pac-12 (it was Pollack who said, "Look, I know Utah is undefeated, but this is the team to beat in this conference"), a genuine enthusiasm about a potential matchup with Alabama, and absolute gushing over McCaffrey. What we know now is that Stanford is a great team. We don't yet know how great, and it's the job of any analyst to ask that question.

Re: David Pollack - CornFed - 10-16-2015

(10-16-2015, 08:37 AM)PrinceLightfoot link Wrote:Yes, if it isn't Georgia or SEC, his comments tend to be condescending and sounds like he is surrendering when he compliments a team.

In regards to the targeting call, the crown of Walker's helmet slammed into Blake's face mask causing it to almost come off of his head completely. He had a heck of a bloody mouth afterwards, but the pain was more because of the shot he took from the shoulder into the solar plexus.

Pollack focused on one thing which is a legal shoulder block to midsection. He chose to ignore the head-to-head contact which to me was painfully obvious as soon as it happened.

I was in the stands at that end of the stadium and just by chance saw the play unfolding and braced myself for the block that was coming.  Even if it had been legal, it would have been brutal.  When the contact occurred, I instantly leaped up and screamed, "Targeting!!".  Not saying that I could make the call from that far away.  It had every visual aspect of an illegal hit in the moment.  I still have to watch my recording to see how it was covered on TV.

Re: David Pollack - needle - 10-16-2015

Lombardi wrote that the ball was underthrown on purpose:

Quote: Hogan then lofted an intentionally underthrown bomb to Owusu, who somehow caught the pass in the midst of heavy pass interference -- by reaching around Bruin defender Jaleel Wadood and pressing the ball against his opponent's back.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/93199/stanford-still-in-disbelief-after-francis-owusus-spectacular-catch

Re: David Pollack - martyup - 10-16-2015

Pollack was adamant that the targeting call was wrong.  Despite Blake's helmet nearly flying off his head, Pollack repeatedly claimed there was no head contact. 

The UCLA player honed in on Blake from 15 yards away and had plenty of time to think about the impending hit.  He could have easily avoided head contact since Blake never saw him coming and was running upright.

Re: David Pollack - stupac2 - 10-16-2015

(10-16-2015, 12:38 PM)needle link Wrote:Lombardi wrote that the ball was underthrown on purpose:

Quote: Hogan then lofted an intentionally underthrown bomb to Owusu, who somehow caught the pass in the midst of heavy pass interference -- by reaching around Bruin defender Jaleel Wadood and pressing the ball against his opponent's back.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/93199/stanford-still-in-disbelief-after-francis-owusus-spectacular-catch

I was wondering about that because he's the only person I've seen say it. Maybe the goal of the play was to draw PI so he wanted to make sure the ball was catchable. Who knows? But it given how slow the play was and how deep Owusu was in the end zone when it got there, I don't think it was that unreasonable of a throw. Should it have been longer? Yeah probably. Am I glad it wasn't? Hell yes.

Re: David Pollack - 82lsju - 10-16-2015

the hit on Blake Martinez

https://vine.co/v/eE0gAuFKYdg

Re: David Pollack - BostonCard - 10-16-2015

Well, Pollack doesn't see us losing again.  Says we are the team to beat in the conference.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:13902411

BC

Re: David Pollack - French Rage - 10-16-2015

The best way to avoid a targeting call is to actually tackle or block with your arms and body, not use your head and helmet like some sort of goddam battering ram.  If you go in like that, you put yourself at risk for wherever your helmet hits, moreso since, you know, you're no longer looking at where you're actually heading.  Maybe he meant to aim lower and maybe the way to hit struck made BMart's helmet jump more than from another angle (though I seriously doubt both), but neither of those are an issue if you don't come in head first in the first place.

Re: David Pollack - oldalum - 10-16-2015

(10-16-2015, 12:46 PM)martyup link Wrote:The UCLA player honed in on Blake from 15 yards away and had plenty of time to think about the impending hit.  He could have easily avoided head contact since Blake never saw him coming and was running upright.

Exactly. He could have lowered himself down 6 inches and wiped Martinez out legally without risking hitting the head. The rule is there to give defenders a strong incentive to do just that. Absolutely the right call, and the commentator is an idiot.

Re: David Pollack - CTcard - 10-16-2015

(10-16-2015, 12:29 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:It could have been thrown three or so yards deeper and not gone out of the end zone.  The ball was underthrown,

Yes it could have been a couple of yards deeper, though it is not clear that would have actually made the catch easier under the circumstances.

The bigger issue than being under thrown was that the timing was a little off - in particular the throw was a little late versus the pattern. Of course on such a complicated play it is very difficult to get the timing down perfectly, but clearly if either Hogan could have thrown a few tenths of a second earlier - or Owusu came down his route those few tenths later - then it would have been an easy TD.

Re: David Pollack - Kathy - 10-16-2015

But not as awesome