[qwerty49]

As Austroturf implies above,

Whoda thunk we’d beat both $C and Oregon and be only 3-2?  

And really the only things we know for sure are 1) McKee is one of our best QBs ever; 2) Karty has the longest range of any PK we’ve had; 3) Kelly is an NFL DB; 4) Our big WRs and Yurosek are clutch. Everything else seems like a roll of the dice at any given moment.

[qwerty49]

As Austroturf implies above,

Whoda thunk we’d beat both $C and Oregon and be only 3-2?  

And really the only things we know for sure are 1) McKee is one of our best QBs ever; 2) Karty has the longest range of any PK we’ve had; 3) Kelly is an NFL DB; 4) Our big WRs and Yurosek are clutch. Everything else seems like a roll of the dice at any given moment.

[gailtate]

As Austroturf implies above,

Whoda thunk we’d beat both $C and Oregon and be only 3-2?  

And really the only things we know for sure are 1) McKee is one of our best QBs ever; 2) Karty has the longest range of any PK we’ve had; 3) Kelly is an NFL DB; 4) Our big WRs and Yurosek are clutch. Everything else seems like a roll of the dice at any given moment.

Well put. It's why I dread Friday night lights in Tempe.

[gailtate]

As Austroturf implies above,

Whoda thunk we’d beat both $C and Oregon and be only 3-2?  

And really the only things we know for sure are 1) McKee is one of our best QBs ever; 2) Karty has the longest range of any PK we’ve had; 3) Kelly is an NFL DB; 4) Our big WRs and Yurosek are clutch. Everything else seems like a roll of the dice at any given moment.

Well put. It's why I dread Friday night lights in Tempe.

[teejers1]

The one factor the past two seasons that affects player availability, which in turn, can contribute to wild swings in team performance, is unique to these seasons and is COVID. Look no further than the false positive tests that Mills and others had, and how the team looked after Mills scraped off the rust against Colorado (we didn't lose the rest of the season).

That appears to be a valid assertion for 2020, but how have we seen the virus affecting us in 2021?  Injuries have been a much bigger issue so far.

No, the 2020 team, despite its 4-2 record, was not very good.  Just ask Sagarin.

The 2021 team can still go in a lot of directions, except 3-9 is extremely unlikely.  And 6 wins is very reasonably in play.  That was not a given going into this season.  So . . . hope.

[teejers1]

The one factor the past two seasons that affects player availability, which in turn, can contribute to wild swings in team performance, is unique to these seasons and is COVID. Look no further than the false positive tests that Mills and others had, and how the team looked after Mills scraped off the rust against Colorado (we didn't lose the rest of the season).

That appears to be a valid assertion for 2020, but how have we seen the virus affecting us in 2021?  Injuries have been a much bigger issue so far.

No, the 2020 team, despite its 4-2 record, was not very good.  Just ask Sagarin.

The 2021 team can still go in a lot of directions, except 3-9 is extremely unlikely.  And 6 wins is very reasonably in play.  That was not a given going into this season.  So . . . hope.

[BostonCard]

No, the 2020 team, despite its 4-2 record, was not very good.  Just ask Sagarin.

I think that is correct, but maybe the coach deserves a bit of credit for wringing out 4 wins from that collection of talent (which to be fair, can be traced to that coach's poor recruiting years earlier), especially under the adverse circumstances.

BC

---

I just re-watched the overtime, and it lends additional credence to the idea that Oregon just handed the game to Stanford.  You would have thought that with four downs to work with, and averaging 4+ yards per carry, going up against a thin, depleted Stanford defensive line, that Oregon would just run on first and second downs, and, unless it was facing third or fourth and long, run on those downs as well.

In fact, here was Oregon's OT possession (in which they failed to get a first down)
1st and 10: Incomplete pass
2nd and 10: 3 yard rush
3rd and 7: Complete pass underneath leading to a fumble, recovery by Oregon with loss of a yard
4th and 8: Incomplete pass out of bounds

Thank you (again), Mario Cristobal.

BC

[BostonCard]

No, the 2020 team, despite its 4-2 record, was not very good.  Just ask Sagarin.

I think that is correct, but maybe the coach deserves a bit of credit for wringing out 4 wins from that collection of talent (which to be fair, can be traced to that coach's poor recruiting years earlier), especially under the adverse circumstances.

BC

---

I just re-watched the overtime, and it lends additional credence to the idea that Oregon just handed the game to Stanford.  You would have thought that with four downs to work with, and averaging 4+ yards per carry, going up against a thin, depleted Stanford defensive line, that Oregon would just run on first and second downs, and, unless it was facing third or fourth and long, run on those downs as well.

In fact, here was Oregon's OT possession (in which they failed to get a first down)
1st and 10: Incomplete pass
2nd and 10: 3 yard rush
3rd and 7: Complete pass underneath leading to a fumble, recovery by Oregon with loss of a yard
4th and 8: Incomplete pass out of bounds

Thank you (again), Mario Cristobal.

BC

[BostonCard]

Teejers, you will enjoy the fact that (unless I missed one) we didn't have a single delay of game (or wasted time out) in the game.

On more serious matters, it is worth noting that the team executed the two minute drill at the end of the game to perfection, ending with five shots at the end zone and connecting on one, last, untimed down.

And your bugaboo, the Wildcat, scored.

BC

[BostonCard]

Teejers, you will enjoy the fact that (unless I missed one) we didn't have a single delay of game (or wasted time out) in the game.

On more serious matters, it is worth noting that the team executed the two minute drill at the end of the game to perfection, ending with five shots at the end zone and connecting on one, last, untimed down.

And your bugaboo, the Wildcat, scored.

BC

[martyup]

I'm re-watching the game and I must say, "What happened to Rod Gilmore?"  Having played DB for Stanford, he has always been kind to our team in his commentary.  However, yesterday he was a tool for the Ducks.  He kept trying to predict when the Ducks would get it together and pull away for the easy win.  He kept predicting that Tri-bah-doh would take over the game and wreak havoc on McKee.  

Perhaps he is in the camp that OR is the only hope for the Pac-12 to make the CFP and wants them to win out.  Whatever the reason, he was no friend to the Cardinal yesterday.

---

I'm really impressing with Higgins.  He's a clutch player.

---

Peat's big run near the end of the first Q was an "I" formation off tackle dive with our fullback leading through the hole.  Man that blocking scheme worked.  I wonder why we don't see more runs from that formation?

[martyup]

I'm re-watching the game and I must say, "What happened to Rod Gilmore?"  Having played DB for Stanford, he has always been kind to our team in his commentary.  However, yesterday he was a tool for the Ducks.  He kept trying to predict when the Ducks would get it together and pull away for the easy win.  He kept predicting that Tri-bah-doh would take over the game and wreak havoc on McKee.  

Perhaps he is in the camp that OR is the only hope for the Pac-12 to make the CFP and wants them to win out.  Whatever the reason, he was no friend to the Cardinal yesterday.

---

I'm really impressing with Higgins.  He's a clutch player.

---

Peat's big run near the end of the first Q was an "I" formation off tackle dive with our fullback leading through the hole.  Man that blocking scheme worked.  I wonder why we don't see more runs from that formation?

[Goose]

As Austroturf implies above,

Whoda thunk we’d beat both $C and Oregon and be only 3-2?  

And really the only things we know for sure are 1) McKee is one of our best QBs ever;

Sorry, but I can't buy that yet. He well may be. He has played good enough to win 3 games and beat highly ranked Oregon. I am going to fall back on Shaw's assertion that until you have played 12 games you are a freshman. I will say he is one of our best QB's ever no sooner than that. We have had other guys who were great for 3 games. It didn't last. To be clear, I DO think he could be very special, but I am not declaring it until it is earned.

[Goose]

As Austroturf implies above,

Whoda thunk we’d beat both $C and Oregon and be only 3-2?  

And really the only things we know for sure are 1) McKee is one of our best QBs ever;

Sorry, but I can't buy that yet. He well may be. He has played good enough to win 3 games and beat highly ranked Oregon. I am going to fall back on Shaw's assertion that until you have played 12 games you are a freshman. I will say he is one of our best QB's ever no sooner than that. We have had other guys who were great for 3 games. It didn't last. To be clear, I DO think he could be very special, but I am not declaring it until it is earned.

[winflop]

Well now that it's been 24 hours from that exhilarating win, it's time to visit the "other side"

1. The OL continues to be an enigma inside of a conundrum. I don't care if Oregon was barking out snap counts. Way, way, way too many false starts. And those false calls didn't cause any holding penalties either. This was supposed to be a strength of this team. It's the most glaring weakness. If they just play mediocre this team is 4-1 at worst

2. The ShawVita playbook was out in force after halftime. Thankfully it was mostly put away on the final drive. Has Shaw never taken a class in game theory? If stuff is working, you need to think about how the other team will adjust, and then be prepared to adjust to that.

The offense needs to be centered around QB1, who is hands down the best player on the team. Just do it. Make it happen. Pass to set up the run.

3. The front seven on defense continues to be unable to stop the run. The only reason we had a chance to tie is because Cristobal stopped running the ball. All he had to do was keep running between the tackles on that final drive and they run out the clock. We were gassed and couldn't stop them.

I didn't expect this win, so I'm adjusting my prediction up a win to 5-7. We still have a LOT of tough games left, starting on Friday.

[winflop]

Well now that it's been 24 hours from that exhilarating win, it's time to visit the "other side"

1. The OL continues to be an enigma inside of a conundrum. I don't care if Oregon was barking out snap counts. Way, way, way too many false starts. And those false calls didn't cause any holding penalties either. This was supposed to be a strength of this team. It's the most glaring weakness. If they just play mediocre this team is 4-1 at worst

2. The ShawVita playbook was out in force after halftime. Thankfully it was mostly put away on the final drive. Has Shaw never taken a class in game theory? If stuff is working, you need to think about how the other team will adjust, and then be prepared to adjust to that.

The offense needs to be centered around QB1, who is hands down the best player on the team. Just do it. Make it happen. Pass to set up the run.

3. The front seven on defense continues to be unable to stop the run. The only reason we had a chance to tie is because Cristobal stopped running the ball. All he had to do was keep running between the tackles on that final drive and they run out the clock. We were gassed and couldn't stop them.

I didn't expect this win, so I'm adjusting my prediction up a win to 5-7. We still have a LOT of tough games left, starting on Friday.

[Goose]

Teejers, you will enjoy the fact that (unless I missed one) we didn't have a single delay of game (or wasted time out) in the game.

On more serious matters, it is worth noting that the team executed the two minute drill at the end of the game to perfection, ending with five shots at the end zone and connecting on one, last, untimed down.

And your bugaboo, the Wildcat, scored.

BC

Well we did have I think 6 false start penalties, but they were assisted so maybe that doesn't count?

[Goose]

Teejers, you will enjoy the fact that (unless I missed one) we didn't have a single delay of game (or wasted time out) in the game.

On more serious matters, it is worth noting that the team executed the two minute drill at the end of the game to perfection, ending with five shots at the end zone and connecting on one, last, untimed down.

And your bugaboo, the Wildcat, scored.

BC

Well we did have I think 6 false start penalties, but they were assisted so maybe that doesn't count?

[martyup]

For some reason Wyrick was not on the field much in this game.  He recorded zero tackles.

[martyup]

For some reason Wyrick was not on the field much in this game.  He recorded zero tackles.

[Phogge]

I stopped respecting Rodney when he went thermonuclear on some guys on TOS. Used the word hater and it was obvious that he hadn’t read the thread.

[Phogge]

I stopped respecting Rodney when he went thermonuclear on some guys on TOS. Used the word hater and it was obvious that he hadn’t read the thread.

[BostonCard]

2. The ShawVita playbook was out in force after halftime. Thankfully it was mostly put away on the final drive. Has Shaw never taken a class in game theory? If stuff is working, you need to think about how the other team will adjust, and then be prepared to adjust to that.

I will have to go back to the game, but other than the fact that it wasn't working, why do you ascribe it to "the ShawVita playbook".  I mean, the Oregon defensive line was wreaking havoc on our OL for that period, full stop, and we had trouble both running the ball and passing it.  The penalties didn't help, of course.  In our four drives in the second half prior to the game-tying last one here's what we ran:
First drive: run, pass, penalty (holding), pass
Second drive: pass, run, QB scramble (meant to have been a pass)
Third drive: pass, pass*, run, run*, penalty (holding, on a running play), run, pass, penalty (false start), pass
Fourth drive: sack (pass play), penalty (false start), pass, pass

Excluding the penalties, I count five designed run plays, 11 designed pass plays (including one sack and one QB scramble to avoid a sack), and exactly two plays that resulted in a first down.  The five run plays gained 14 yards (2.8 ypp) and the 11 pass plays gained 27 (subtracting the 7 yards from the sack), for an average of 2.5 net yards per pass play called.  I struggle to come up with a different set of play calls that would have worked all that much better.

BC

[BostonCard]

2. The ShawVita playbook was out in force after halftime. Thankfully it was mostly put away on the final drive. Has Shaw never taken a class in game theory? If stuff is working, you need to think about how the other team will adjust, and then be prepared to adjust to that.

I will have to go back to the game, but other than the fact that it wasn't working, why do you ascribe it to "the ShawVita playbook".  I mean, the Oregon defensive line was wreaking havoc on our OL for that period, full stop, and we had trouble both running the ball and passing it.  The penalties didn't help, of course.  In our four drives in the second half prior to the game-tying last one here's what we ran:
First drive: run, pass, penalty (holding), pass
Second drive: pass, run, QB scramble (meant to have been a pass)
Third drive: pass, pass*, run, run*, penalty (holding, on a running play), run, pass, penalty (false start), pass
Fourth drive: sack (pass play), penalty (false start), pass, pass

Excluding the penalties, I count five designed run plays, 11 designed pass plays (including one sack and one QB scramble to avoid a sack), and exactly two plays that resulted in a first down.  The five run plays gained 14 yards (2.8 ypp) and the 11 pass plays gained 27 (subtracting the 7 yards from the sack), for an average of 2.5 net yards per pass play called.  I struggle to come up with a different set of play calls that would have worked all that much better.

BC

[Goose]

I struggle to come up with a different set of play calls that would have worked all that much better.

BC

BC, it is simply obvious. Shavita should have called pass and run plays that worked, not pass and run plays that didn't.

[Goose]

I struggle to come up with a different set of play calls that would have worked all that much better.

BC

BC, it is simply obvious. Shavita should have called pass and run plays that worked, not pass and run plays that didn't.

[terry]

U

For some reason Wyrick was not on the field much in this game.  He recorded zero tackles.

Wyrick has been our nickel back for the past several games. But against Oregon, Kelly was sliding over to play nickel back, with Slocum taking Kelly’s place at CB. So in effect, Slocum replaced Wyrick. I don’t know why.

[terry]

U

For some reason Wyrick was not on the field much in this game.  He recorded zero tackles.

Wyrick has been our nickel back for the past several games. But against Oregon, Kelly was sliding over to play nickel back, with Slocum taking Kelly’s place at CB. So in effect, Slocum replaced Wyrick. I don’t know why.

[BostonCard]

Teejers, you will enjoy the fact that (unless I missed one) we didn't have a single delay of game (or wasted time out) in the game.

On more serious matters, it is worth noting that the team executed the two minute drill at the end of the game to perfection, ending with five shots at the end zone and connecting on one, last, untimed down.

And your bugaboo, the Wildcat, scored.

BC

Well we did have I think 6 false start penalties, but they were assisted so maybe that doesn't count?

Moved these to the more appropriate thread.

The OL was jumpy because they were being beaten by the Duck DL.  The obvious solution is to get a better OL who isn't beaten, and it is disappointing that this OL, which was supposed to be an improvement over the last few years, is still under par.  As a side bonus, it would help cut down on holding penalties.  But the point is not that we play penalty-free football (we are fourth in the conference in penalty yards/game, with Oregon and our next opponent, ASU, 11th and 12th respectively), but that we cut down on the particular penalty that for some reason really bothered you.

All told, I would rather 30 yards worth of penalties from false starts than 30 yards worth of targeting penalties (with a roughing the passer to boot).

BC

[BostonCard]

Teejers, you will enjoy the fact that (unless I missed one) we didn't have a single delay of game (or wasted time out) in the game.

On more serious matters, it is worth noting that the team executed the two minute drill at the end of the game to perfection, ending with five shots at the end zone and connecting on one, last, untimed down.

And your bugaboo, the Wildcat, scored.

BC

Well we did have I think 6 false start penalties, but they were assisted so maybe that doesn't count?

Moved these to the more appropriate thread.

The OL was jumpy because they were being beaten by the Duck DL.  The obvious solution is to get a better OL who isn't beaten, and it is disappointing that this OL, which was supposed to be an improvement over the last few years, is still under par.  As a side bonus, it would help cut down on holding penalties.  But the point is not that we play penalty-free football (we are fourth in the conference in penalty yards/game, with Oregon and our next opponent, ASU, 11th and 12th respectively), but that we cut down on the particular penalty that for some reason really bothered you.

All told, I would rather 30 yards worth of penalties from false starts than 30 yards worth of targeting penalties (with a roughing the passer to boot).

BC

[d4cohn]

The one factor the past two seasons that affects player availability, which in turn, can contribute to wild swings in team performance, is unique to these seasons and is COVID. Look no further than the false positive tests that Mills and others had, and how the team looked after Mills scraped off the rust against Colorado (we didn't lose the rest of the season).

That appears to be a valid assertion for 2020, but how have we seen the virus affecting us in 2021?  Injuries have been a much bigger issue so far.

No, the 2020 team, despite its 4-2 record, was not very good.  Just ask Sagarin.

The 2021 team can still go in a lot of directions, except 3-9 is extremely unlikely.  And 6 wins is very reasonably in play.  That was not a given going into this season.  So . . . hope.

That Sagarin rating for Stanford is based on results of games in which, for at least a portion of those games, players weren't available for non-injury reasons (metrics are impacted their input data). I also don't think Sagarin can take into account the mechanics of playing 4 road games in a month, and basically living on the road for a month in the middle of a COVID pandemic. Finally, that Sagarin rating is based on half a normal season's of games in which we started nearly two months after schools in other conferences. 

In the end though, I honestly don't care whether we were good or bad last year. I just find it impressive that we have won six out of our last seven road games, and in the process, beaten every Cali rival on the road (with only the home loss to UCLA), a road win at UW and home win against Oregon, and most if not all of this was accomplished under the difficult circumstances of the COVID pandemic.

[d4cohn]

The one factor the past two seasons that affects player availability, which in turn, can contribute to wild swings in team performance, is unique to these seasons and is COVID. Look no further than the false positive tests that Mills and others had, and how the team looked after Mills scraped off the rust against Colorado (we didn't lose the rest of the season).

That appears to be a valid assertion for 2020, but how have we seen the virus affecting us in 2021?  Injuries have been a much bigger issue so far.

No, the 2020 team, despite its 4-2 record, was not very good.  Just ask Sagarin.

The 2021 team can still go in a lot of directions, except 3-9 is extremely unlikely.  And 6 wins is very reasonably in play.  That was not a given going into this season.  So . . . hope.

That Sagarin rating for Stanford is based on results of games in which, for at least a portion of those games, players weren't available for non-injury reasons (metrics are impacted their input data). I also don't think Sagarin can take into account the mechanics of playing 4 road games in a month, and basically living on the road for a month in the middle of a COVID pandemic. Finally, that Sagarin rating is based on half a normal season's of games in which we started nearly two months after schools in other conferences. 

In the end though, I honestly don't care whether we were good or bad last year. I just find it impressive that we have won six out of our last seven road games, and in the process, beaten every Cali rival on the road (with only the home loss to UCLA), a road win at UW and home win against Oregon, and most if not all of this was accomplished under the difficult circumstances of the COVID pandemic.

[martyup]

Our defense held OR to its lowest scoring output this season.  And, our offense scored more points on the Ducks than any opponent thus far.  So, there's that.

[martyup]

Our defense held OR to its lowest scoring output this season.  And, our offense scored more points on the Ducks than any opponent thus far.  So, there's that.

[Austroturf]

I'm re-watching the game and I must say, "What happened to Rod Gilmore?"  Having played DB for Stanford, he has always been kind to our team in his commentary.  However, yesterday he was a tool for the Ducks.  He kept trying to predict when the Ducks would get it together and pull away for the easy win.  He kept predicting that Tri-bah-doh would take over the game and wreak havoc on McKee.  

Perhaps he is in the camp that OR is the only hope for the Pac-12 to make the CFP and wants them to win out.  Whatever the reason, he was no friend to the Cardinal yesterday.

Interesting you had this impression of Gilmore.  Over on Addicted to Quack, the Duck fans were screaming how horrible it was to have Stanford-biased announcers calling the game.  They were outraged by Gilmore's homerism. Guess perspectives can vary.

[Austroturf]

I'm re-watching the game and I must say, "What happened to Rod Gilmore?"  Having played DB for Stanford, he has always been kind to our team in his commentary.  However, yesterday he was a tool for the Ducks.  He kept trying to predict when the Ducks would get it together and pull away for the easy win.  He kept predicting that Tri-bah-doh would take over the game and wreak havoc on McKee.  

Perhaps he is in the camp that OR is the only hope for the Pac-12 to make the CFP and wants them to win out.  Whatever the reason, he was no friend to the Cardinal yesterday.

Interesting you had this impression of Gilmore.  Over on Addicted to Quack, the Duck fans were screaming how horrible it was to have Stanford-biased announcers calling the game.  They were outraged by Gilmore's homerism. Guess perspectives can vary.

[Goose]

The OL was jumpy because they were being beaten by the Duck DL.  The obvious solution is to get a better OL who isn't beaten, and it is disappointing that this OL, which was supposed to be an improvement over the last few years, is still under par.  As a side bonus, it would help cut down on holding penalties.  But the point is not that we play penalty-free football (we are fourth in the conference in penalty yards/game, with Oregon and our next opponent, ASU, 11th and 12th respectively), but that we cut down on the particular penalty that for some reason really bothered you.

During the game I was really bothered by false start penalties. I know that our OL is "jumpy" because they know they needed to attack the Oregon DL quickly. We got badly out-quicked by UCLA and Oregon could have possibly done the same without having to blitz like UCLA did. However giving up five yards because you are trying to anticipate your own snap count is a losing proposition. It is a mostly mental error, and those are errors that a Stanford team should not commit. That said, I do recall a right tackle we had a few years ago who left about half a count early on just about every play. He did it all the time, and got quite a few penalties. He amazingly got away with it most of the time.
I subsequently found out that Oregon was "simulating the snap count" and undoubtedly contributing mightily to our false starts. That is a source of even greater irritation, as it obviously was to coach Shaw.

All told, I would rather 30 yards worth of penalties from false starts than 30 yards worth of targeting penalties (with a roughing the passer to boot).


BC

So would I, but targeting and roughing the passer penalties are seldom incurred often by an OL. It certainly isn't an either/or, and our OL even with all its "issues" is better than that. Oregon was using yet another of their questionable practices to induce false starts, and yes, I am upset by that. They are the #3 team in the nation and yet they feel compelled to use such stunts? Their coaches not only allow it but encourage it? Something pretty rotten there as well IMHO. I guess given their history it is not unexpected, but it is still infuriating that no penalties were called and no warnings issued in response.

[Goose]

The OL was jumpy because they were being beaten by the Duck DL.  The obvious solution is to get a better OL who isn't beaten, and it is disappointing that this OL, which was supposed to be an improvement over the last few years, is still under par.  As a side bonus, it would help cut down on holding penalties.  But the point is not that we play penalty-free football (we are fourth in the conference in penalty yards/game, with Oregon and our next opponent, ASU, 11th and 12th respectively), but that we cut down on the particular penalty that for some reason really bothered you.

During the game I was really bothered by false start penalties. I know that our OL is "jumpy" because they know they needed to attack the Oregon DL quickly. We got badly out-quicked by UCLA and Oregon could have possibly done the same without having to blitz like UCLA did. However giving up five yards because you are trying to anticipate your own snap count is a losing proposition. It is a mostly mental error, and those are errors that a Stanford team should not commit. That said, I do recall a right tackle we had a few years ago who left about half a count early on just about every play. He did it all the time, and got quite a few penalties. He amazingly got away with it most of the time.
I subsequently found out that Oregon was "simulating the snap count" and undoubtedly contributing mightily to our false starts. That is a source of even greater irritation, as it obviously was to coach Shaw.

All told, I would rather 30 yards worth of penalties from false starts than 30 yards worth of targeting penalties (with a roughing the passer to boot).


BC

So would I, but targeting and roughing the passer penalties are seldom incurred often by an OL. It certainly isn't an either/or, and our OL even with all its "issues" is better than that. Oregon was using yet another of their questionable practices to induce false starts, and yes, I am upset by that. They are the #3 team in the nation and yet they feel compelled to use such stunts? Their coaches not only allow it but encourage it? Something pretty rotten there as well IMHO. I guess given their history it is not unexpected, but it is still infuriating that no penalties were called and no warnings issued in response.

[martyup]

Gilmore kept saying that the PI call at the end of regulation was unfair because the refs had been allowing such contact throughout the game.  If Rod gets pulled over for speeding, I guess he'll say "This is not fair.  I drive this fast all the time and I have never got a ticket, and other people are drive just as fast."

BTW, on our overtime drive there was an uncalled PI on the 2nd down pass to Higgins to the left of the end zone.  The defender pushed Higgins' chest before the ball arrived.  Also, on Humphrey's OT TD catch he took two hits that could have been called targeting as he powered his way into the end zone.  Both Ducks made forceable contact to his head and both launched.

---

Also, Gilmore didn't mention the head hits on Humphreys, but he was convinced that Gilman should have been ejected for targeting for his hit on a Duck receiver on their OT 1st down pass.

[martyup]

Gilmore kept saying that the PI call at the end of regulation was unfair because the refs had been allowing such contact throughout the game.  If Rod gets pulled over for speeding, I guess he'll say "This is not fair.  I drive this fast all the time and I have never got a ticket, and other people are drive just as fast."

BTW, on our overtime drive there was an uncalled PI on the 2nd down pass to Higgins to the left of the end zone.  The defender pushed Higgins' chest before the ball arrived.  Also, on Humphrey's OT TD catch he took two hits that could have been called targeting as he powered his way into the end zone.  Both Ducks made forceable contact to his head and both launched.

---

Also, Gilmore didn't mention the head hits on Humphreys, but he was convinced that Gilman should have been ejected for targeting for his hit on a Duck receiver on their OT 1st down pass.