[CornFed]

the hit on Blake Martinez

https://vine.co/v/eE0gAuFKYdg

Thank you for that, 82lsju.  Haven't been home long enough to look through my recording.  I very specifically am interested in seeing that whole play develop.  I think it is unconscionable for observers to get too caught up in minute nuances of where his helmet was or any of that.  As I mentioned earlier, by chance I happened to see the impending danger to the Stanford player (Martinez) very early on as Rosen began to scramble outside.  I have the impression in my mind's eye that Martinez was not really close to having a play on Rosen, but maybe he had an angle if the play had been substantially extended.  Even if the hit had been delivered in a totally legal manner, it is clear that the UCLA player had a truly malicious objective.  Well, in that case, if it were a legal hit, so be it and I would just worry about Martinez's health.  As it was, the player's helmet did undeniably make contact and the officials would be egregiously remiss if they did not call targeting.

[CornFed]

the hit on Blake Martinez

https://vine.co/v/eE0gAuFKYdg

Thank you for that, 82lsju.  Haven't been home long enough to look through my recording.  I very specifically am interested in seeing that whole play develop.  I think it is unconscionable for observers to get too caught up in minute nuances of where his helmet was or any of that.  As I mentioned earlier, by chance I happened to see the impending danger to the Stanford player (Martinez) very early on as Rosen began to scramble outside.  I have the impression in my mind's eye that Martinez was not really close to having a play on Rosen, but maybe he had an angle if the play had been substantially extended.  Even if the hit had been delivered in a totally legal manner, it is clear that the UCLA player had a truly malicious objective.  Well, in that case, if it were a legal hit, so be it and I would just worry about Martinez's health.  As it was, the player's helmet did undeniably make contact and the officials would be egregiously remiss if they did not call targeting.

[Nan3cy]

To my eye, Blake was far enough away from Rosen that all the blocker had to do was give him a little push out of the way. That was clearly not his agenda.

[Nan3cy]

To my eye, Blake was far enough away from Rosen that all the blocker had to do was give him a little push out of the way. That was clearly not his agenda.

[standfan]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13197.msg135048#msg135048 date=1445023752]
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.
[/quote]
+1. The play was right in front of me (although I was watching Rosen more than than the hit on Martinez) and real time I thought it was a clean albeit unnecessary hit. So I'd have some sympathy for Pollack if he hadn't had the chance to see the replay. But when I replayed it, it's clearly targeting.

[standfan]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13197.msg135048#msg135048 date=1445023752]
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.
[/quote]
+1. The play was right in front of me (although I was watching Rosen more than than the hit on Martinez) and real time I thought it was a clean albeit unnecessary hit. So I'd have some sympathy for Pollack if he hadn't had the chance to see the replay. But when I replayed it, it's clearly targeting.

[slide]

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

+1

as much as I loved seeing Pollack play at UGA (a Ben Gardner type of development story but to a 3 time All-American), I still cringe a bit when he speaks.  Pollack is an SEC guy all the way.  based on follow-ups, it appears he is trying to grow a bit in seeing strengths of other conferences although he was not that complimentary at a private event I attended earlier this year.

[slide]

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

+1

as much as I loved seeing Pollack play at UGA (a Ben Gardner type of development story but to a 3 time All-American), I still cringe a bit when he speaks.  Pollack is an SEC guy all the way.  based on follow-ups, it appears he is trying to grow a bit in seeing strengths of other conferences although he was not that complimentary at a private event I attended earlier this year.

[winflop]

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.

Sorry Hank I call BS.

If Coker had thrown that ball Pollack would have been talking about it as one of the great catches in CFB history.  Instead it's an underthrown pass that was lucky to have been completed.

I think UCLA is at worst a very good offense.  They have a ton of weapons, and our first-string D is not only better than advertised it is getting progressively better each week especially in the secondary.

Finally, the reality is that the only defense Stanford will face the rest of this season that could even be called good is UW.  UDFG is above average but not by much.  Pollack can speculate all he wants about how this offense will do against an elite defense.  Reality is they won't face one until CCG or CFB playoff if they get to either one.

[winflop]

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.

Sorry Hank I call BS.

If Coker had thrown that ball Pollack would have been talking about it as one of the great catches in CFB history.  Instead it's an underthrown pass that was lucky to have been completed.

I think UCLA is at worst a very good offense.  They have a ton of weapons, and our first-string D is not only better than advertised it is getting progressively better each week especially in the secondary.

Finally, the reality is that the only defense Stanford will face the rest of this season that could even be called good is UW.  UDFG is above average but not by much.  Pollack can speculate all he wants about how this offense will do against an elite defense.  Reality is they won't face one until CCG or CFB playoff if they get to either one.

[Hank 91]

Sorry Hank I call BS.

Or, you could've just disagreed with me. But I guess this is another way to go.

[Hank 91]

Sorry Hank I call BS.

Or, you could've just disagreed with me. But I guess this is another way to go.

[PrinceLightfoot]

Pollack apparently is not as biased as we thought.

During ESPN's College Game Day, he was asked about Thursday night's game and had nothing but good things to say about Stanford. He called us a legitimate playoff contender and should be considered the favorite to win the PAC12. Tons of respect for the offense and no words on the defense.

[PrinceLightfoot]

Pollack apparently is not as biased as we thought.

During ESPN's College Game Day, he was asked about Thursday night's game and had nothing but good things to say about Stanford. He called us a legitimate playoff contender and should be considered the favorite to win the PAC12. Tons of respect for the offense and no words on the defense.

[JJJ]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13197.msg135048#msg135048 date=1445023752]
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.
[/quote]

According to this Daily article (linked elsewhere as well), Hogan took something off the pass since the timing was off.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/10/16/...able-snag/

[JJJ]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13197.msg135048#msg135048 date=1445023752]
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.
[/quote]

According to this Daily article (linked elsewhere as well), Hogan took something off the pass since the timing was off.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/10/16/...able-snag/

[larkinforever]

After reading this thread and before viewing the game (DVR recording), I became particularly interested in hearing Pollack's comments. I am not a fan of Pollack and find him annoyingly biased towards the SEC when I watch College Gameday. That said, I found him to be consistently complimentary on two topics - (1) Rosen and (2) Stanford's recent play.

Further, and to be fair to Pollack, I thought it would be of interest here to mention that on both of the PI calls, it was Jesse Palmer who pointed out that Hogan had underthrown the ball (not Pollack). Indeed, on Owusu's catch, Pollack wasn't critical and when one of the other commentators said the catch would be a candidate for top 10 play, Pollack exclaimed that it was THE top play and all the other plays would be fighting for 2-10.

[larkinforever]

After reading this thread and before viewing the game (DVR recording), I became particularly interested in hearing Pollack's comments. I am not a fan of Pollack and find him annoyingly biased towards the SEC when I watch College Gameday. That said, I found him to be consistently complimentary on two topics - (1) Rosen and (2) Stanford's recent play.

Further, and to be fair to Pollack, I thought it would be of interest here to mention that on both of the PI calls, it was Jesse Palmer who pointed out that Hogan had underthrown the ball (not Pollack). Indeed, on Owusu's catch, Pollack wasn't critical and when one of the other commentators said the catch would be a candidate for top 10 play, Pollack exclaimed that it was THE top play and all the other plays would be fighting for 2-10.

[CornFed]

I have now watched the game (or nearly all of it) again.  I think my buttons are different than a lot of other folks I know.  Neither Pollack or Palmer pushed them much at all.  I thought they were on top of it 90% of the time and I am really quite forgiving in a live 3-hour broadcast of small errors in information, getting players names mixed up, etc.  That is, I am forgiving if the said errors are not related to significant issues or if they are not repeated.

[CornFed]

I have now watched the game (or nearly all of it) again.  I think my buttons are different than a lot of other folks I know.  Neither Pollack or Palmer pushed them much at all.  I thought they were on top of it 90% of the time and I am really quite forgiving in a live 3-hour broadcast of small errors in information, getting players names mixed up, etc.  That is, I am forgiving if the said errors are not related to significant issues or if they are not repeated.