College Football Season (2006-2007)

[Tyche]

Louisville game beings im louisville alum. Also, how bout them irish >.>.

[Byrd]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2593564

Wow, refs really do suck. At least they're doing something about them. I didn't really care who won this game (I dislike Oregon and Oklahoma pretty equally), but after that onside kick, I was really hoping Oklahoma would come through.

I hate games where the refs have this much impact. I really don't see how the replay official didn't get it right. It's one thing to blow it on the field when action's happening that quick, it's another to blow it when you have time to watch it in slow motion. And to blow it again 3 minutes later on a different call?

What a load of crap. Good officiating can't fix a good game, but bad officiating can really fuck up an otherwise thrilling game.

[Coren]

Oh, and go Clemson. If not for 2 blocked punts, we'd have been looking at about a 30-10 win over FSU in tallahassee. Fucking overrated florida teams. At least the opposing fans had the grace not to throw shit at us this year (unlike our last 2 wins at home).

[Tyche]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2593564

Wow, refs really do suck. At least they're doing something about them. I didn't really care who won this game (I dislike Oregon and Oklahoma pretty equally), but after that onside kick, I was really hoping Oklahoma would come through.

I hate games where the refs have this much impact. I really don't see how the replay official didn't get it right. It's one thing to blow it on the field when action's happening that quick, it's another to blow it when you have time to watch it in slow motion. And to blow it again 3 minutes later on a different call?

What a load of crap. Good officiating can't fix a good game, but bad officiating can really fuck up an otherwise thrilling game.

The call was bad, i won't dispute that. On the flip side, OU gave up 500 yards, as well as 2 touchdowns and a blocked field-goal in the final two-minutes. Again, im not saying the call wasn't blown, because it totally was. But Ohio State or USC wouldn't have lost that game. OU just really isn't that great. Also, the replay booth doesn't get all the nice camera angles that the television viewers get. The replay official was rushed to make a decision. Again, the call was blown, but a good team wouldnt have been put in that situation.

[Kimiko]

Didn't one of those suspended officials get some serious death threats afterwards?

[Akiyama]

Yeah. The refs of that game got a 1 game suspension. Also.. go Auburn! >.>

[Byrd]

The call was bad, i won't dispute that. On the flip side, OU gave up 500 yards, as well as 2 touchdowns and a blocked field-goal in the final two-minutes. Again, im not saying the call wasn't blown, because it totally was. But Ohio State or USC wouldn't have lost that game. OU just really isn't that great. Also, the replay booth doesn't get all the nice camera angles that the television viewers get. The replay official was rushed to make a decision. Again, the call was blown, but a good team wouldnt have been put in that situation.

In any close game, either team could have done something better to win the game and not have been in the situationof having the officials make a game-costing call. Certainly, OU could've done something different, but that doesn't make the call any less egregious. I think what sets this one apart is that a) it went to the replay booth, b) it was clear as day to any fan in front of his TV and c) another call was blown 2 minutes later by the same system.

Something needs to change. The Pac-10 said the replay official had plenty of experience, so apparently it's the system. Whether it's technical problems that are causing him to be unable to review certain angles, or TV pressure to hurry the hell up, whatever, something needs to change. The whole point of the replay system was to reverse bad calls on the field. When the bad calls on the field are upheld, it only exacerbates the problem. Either get rid of Instant Replay or fix it.

[Vade]

Rumor is that one of the refs was a ref at the Cal vs Stanford game...Time to do some research.

[Avvesione]

so apparently it's the system.

Two things. The replay officials are not given all the angles as the TV viewers are. They don't have the slo-mo like the NFL guys have. They have the same angle shown at regular speed (exactly the same as the refs see). Plus they're given a small screen to view it all on. If you want to keep the replay, they need to improve it.

They also need to give more power to the replay imo. I don't like that call that if the whistle is blown early you can't overturn a play (and I can see why but I still don't like it) or that they can't challenge penalties. If they do both things, I can see a lot less problems with replay.

However, I know what the original purpose of it was. Things like incomplete/complete catchs and fumble/no fumble situations. So if they don't change it, I guess it's still alright. It's just not perfect like it was supposed to be.

[Avvesione]

Rumor is that one of the refs was a ref at the Cal vs Stanford game...Time to do some research.

Actually, the replay official was the ref at the 1982 "Big Game". He claimed the Stanford Band interfered with him. Also, there would've been a huge penalty on the band being on the field anyway and one of the options would've been awarding Cal a touchdown XD. Anyway, the Stanford band is the worst band ever in the history of man.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2588645

LOOK AT WHAT THEY WEAR

[Byrd]

so apparently it's the system.

If you want to keep the replay, they need to improve it.

Exactly. Don't half-ass a sytem, it turns out worse than no system at all. Do it right. The NFL has been doing it for years, and I have yet to see a blatantly incorrect replay call in the NFL. Obviously, TV coverage is not as complete at many (most) college games as opposed to the NFL, but at no time should anyone have access to a camera angle than the replay official does not have.

[Ryany]

I beg to differ about the lack of bad calls in the NFL with replay at least in Colts Games. I remember seeing a linebacker pick off a pass, held the ball with both hands in his chest for maybe 4 steps with the ball and it was called incomplete on the review. There were other more minor ones involving a touchback and a completion, but there always seem to be a few horrible replay calls every year just in Colts Games.

Not all went against them either though. I'm sure at least a few people remember the Polamalu interception in the Colts/Steelers playoff game last season. He intercepted the ball, took 2-3 steps with possession of the ball, rolled onto the ground, and the ball came loose after he hit the ground. This play was never even close to being disputable on not being an interception, let alone being indisputable to overturn the original interception call. I was obviously happy to see the call being a Colts fan, but I have to admit it was one of the worst replay blunders I have seen.

I was for replay when they added it, but I have my doubts now considering how much it can slow the game down just to come out with the same bad calls.

[Raineer]

Two things. The replay officials are not given all the angles as the TV viewers are. They don't have the slo-mo like the NFL guys have. They have the same angle shown at regular speed (exactly the same as the refs see). Plus they're given a small screen to view it all on.

The term is "PS2 Limitations"

[Byrd]

Not all went against them either though. I'm sure at least a few people remember the Polamalu interception in the Colts/Steelers playoff game last season. He intercepted the ball, took 2-3 steps with possession of the ball, rolled onto the ground, and the ball came loose after he hit the ground. This play was never even close to being disputable on not being an interception, let alone being indisputable to overturn the original interception call. I was obviously happy to see the call being a Colts fan, but I have to admit it was one of the worst replay blunders I have seen.

Oh yeah, good point, I had forgotten about the Polamalu interception. Of course, the Steelers ended up winning, otherwise Steeler fans would be bitching as much or more than Seahawk fans are still bitching about the Super Bowl.

As a Seahawk fan, I was obviously upset about the Super Bowl officiating. However, I thought the replay official did a good job, unlike every other official. I can't recall a game I've seen (other than Polamalu) where an NFL replay official completely botched it. Regardless, I think it's better in the NFL than in college.

[Tyche]

The thing i found just fucking hilarious was that OU said that if the PAC-10 doesnt change their rules that "we only use PAC-10" officials, that they would protest that game and not show up to the washington game next season (As per OU president and headd coach). ROFL, when washington played them in Norman, guess what, they had Big-10 officials, and washington got totally HOMERED. Need to realize that this is football, you win some and you lose some. Remember when OU played Ohio state? in i think 1998 for the championship. They totally didnt deserve to be there after getting completely routed in their last regular season game by like 40 points. They got the benefit of the doubt, and USC got shafted. USC didnt cry, and demand the game be redone. I really don't know what is worse...well actually i do. The blown call was bad, but OU fans and their PRESIDENT (who should be the pennicle of maturity) whom is crying and begging for attention, not to mention the death threats are so many scales of rediculousness above a blown call.

[Byrd]

My particular favorite Big 12 homer story is a couple of years back when Texas jumped Cal in the final polls, putting them in the BCS. Cal dropped from 4th to 6th or something like that while Texas rose from 3rd to 4th. You could see across the board that a number of coaches dropped Cal in their rankings substantially the last week of the season. One reporter (from Texas, I believe) in the AP poll had Cal ranked 20th. No Big 12 team will ever, ever get sympathy from me (whether Texas or Cal was actually better is completely immaterial to this argument).

I'd really like to get rid of the coaches' poll -- they aren't remotely impartial, and have no reason to be. When someone can make direct financial gains from voting in something like that, they shouldn't vote. Either that or all 119 Division 1 coaches should have a vote -- that would at least allow for balanced corruption.

[Raineer]

The coaches don't even vote, it's their athletic directors that don't know shit about actual football (for the most part)...the coaches are running the team.

Good coaches would only focus on the teams on their schedule, and mainly who they play in the next 7 days, by nature that makes them a retarded choice to have meaningful input.

[edgarfigaro]

No matter what, people will always complain about whoever ranks the teams, and they will complain, fuss, bitch and moan until they get their fucking playoff system.

Yeah, the coach's poll is often not well researched...the same thing happens with the AP poll showing HUGE regional biases. And the computers, which are nonbiased are bitched about because "they're not human and don't watch the game on the field" which is bullshit, because no pollster watch every game. Basically, people complain about the computer polls because they don't match the regular polls (hmm, nice logic >.>). Yes, the NY Times computer poll was fucked up, but most of them are pretty solid, and are usually better than the human polls...like WVU getting put so high not because of their football prowess (which they are a good team) but because people think they'll be undefeated due to a schedule that may include my highschool's 8 man team (rumor is next year they're facing a tough pop warner team).

The gist of this incoherent rant is that polls suck...but people that complain about them suck even more because they want a playoff. And those people fucking suck ass.

[Byrd]

The gist of this incoherent rant is that polls suck...but people that complain about them suck even more because they want a playoff. And those people fucking suck ass.

Yeah, wanting to decide things on the field makes people suck ass. Strong argument you present there. Although I do completley agree with you that computer polls > human polls.

College athletics' innate nature of unbalanced schedule, unbalanced teams, schools of different sizes, internal schedule control, etc. make a more "traditional" playoff system difficult (if not impossible) to implement. The only major sport without a formal championship system is college football.

My ideal system for college football? Have a committee at the end of the year who decides how many teams have a legit claim for the title. Last year it was obvious -- two, you didn't need anything beyond the Rose Bowl. The year before that, three major conference teams were undefeated (plus Utah & Boise State). The year before that, three major conference teams were all one loss, and we ended up with a split title. Devising some form where all teams with a legit claim could have a shot at it would be my ideal solution. And I'm not talking all conference champions or all undefeated teams (Boise State? Tulane?). Would this be controversial? Yes. Would TV hate it? Yes. But it would decide a champion. And wouldn't necessarily add extra, unecessary games.

[Avvesione]

I've wondered since earlier this year if one team from each of the major BCS confrences were undefeated and all evenly ranked at 1 (say USC, Texas, Ohio State, West Virgina, Florida State and Auburn) which 2 would be selected into the championship game and in what order.

By order I mean if you said Ohio State and USC, then take them out and leave it with the other 4.

Anyone have an opinion on this.