All Activity

Absolutely.... It needs to be broadened to forceful helmet to helmet contact. And everything else I said above.

Gross time mismanagement there. They needed to run the ball once or twice to burn the clock or some timeouts. If they scored on a run play so be it... But a pass play resulted in a touchdown, which is good... But an incompletion would have meant the clock stops and no timeout needed.

Ask our friend Dilly. Targeting is called as it should have been against Texas late in the Peach Bowl PO game, and it's ASU and not Texas that plays Ohio State (SIGH) in the Cotton Bowl. "Laws" that are badly written have too much grey area, and this leads to inconsistent enforcement. Different people in the review booths will interpret the 'law' differently. David Marsh is spot on. If there is no intent behind the contact, it's still the yardage and a 1st down, but the player should not be kicked out of the game and not lose more playing time in the next game.

Not the Oregon game, but very funny.

Thanks, great topic and contents. I don't know if anyone else watched SC at Illinois yesterday. USC scored in the last eight minutes or so to close within eight points of Illinois. SC needed to kick the extra point, score another TD, and kick the extra point to send the game into OT. Instead, SC went for two. Joel Klatt explained that this is what the analytics say you should do on the road in this situation. Secure the 2-point conversion when still seven points down. If you don't make it, you can tie the game with a two-point conversion. The analytics favor a team making one of the two attempts. SC made the two-pointer. Scored again with less than two minutes left, kicked the extra point, and went up 32-31. SC was only in the game because twice in the 4th quarter, Illinois RBs fumbled going into the end zone for a TD. The SC D that played lousy all day allowed the Illini to move into FG range. convert a walkoff FG to win 34-32. This was the sixth time in two seasons SC had a 4th quarter lead against a B1G opponent and lost. 😁 It's not always easy to watch, but I trust Dan and his 'gut' decisions. As Charles noted after OBD lost at UW in the regular season in 2023, the plays were there but the O didn't execute.

He was three time zones away, didn't make the trip!!

Before last night's loss in the 2nd OT, PSU had won the last six White Out games. The media often frustrates PSU's choice of its WO opponent. Last season, Penn State wanted to play Ohio State at night in a WO. Instead, Ohio State was the B1G Noon game, and UW was the WO opponent.

However, in how many of those games was Penn St favored. If you are a marginal top 25 team playing a top 15 team, then 3 - 7 seems reasonable.

I was thinking take the points. And still believe that was the correct call to get 2 scores up. Worked out fine. Hindsight 20 / 20

ouch!! luckily no concussion.

Oh, Boo-Hoo!

Charles, you are on a roll! Thank you

As an Ol' Offensive lineman...I've got a new Man-Crush.

This guy has some outstanding analysis videos this last week...

For the young players--this could have been overwhelming...

We understand, Penn State fan...we've been there!

I am REALLY warming up to Alex Harkey, No. 71...

Damn....I wince seeing this again.

Yeah, you never truly know how the rest of the game would have played out if you could go back in time and change one of those decisions. The FG that was missed was by no means a gimme, but the 4th down yardage needed was much longer, I believe. I generally like Dan's aggressiveness. But the one I noted above felt like too much for me. PSU hadn't been able to do anything offensively at that point. The FG was a chip-shot, and would have made it a 2-score game. I was all about taking the points there. Good thing I'm not making the calls. And the thing we'll never know in the moment is how good they feel about a particular play in a particular situation that gives them the added confidence to go. That run by Davison was blocked perfectly and made it look easy.

You’d think intent would be the primary factor for a rule that has a word describing intent in its name.