(09-15-2012 02:50 PM)WhiskeyDick Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 02:47 PM)niubrad00 Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 02:45 PM)WhiskeyDick Wrote:  Very fine win on the road and against a very unique offense. Winners don't blame officiating, regardless the outcome of the game. NIU kept its cool and acted like they belonged today. Which is more than I can say about some of you whining sniveling clods.

The replay official, NOT THE REFEREES, cost us 7 points. Period. It played a very important role in the game. The replay official should be reprimanded. Now go back to your hole

No Shi@head. You're wrong again. The evidence to overturn a call on the field has to be conclusive. It was not. End o' subject. You are an unstable whack o' doodle who is now on my ignore list.

How much more conclusive could it be? The ball obviously broke the plane and someone who is paid and trained in NCAA football replay should be able to see that. Even the guys in the booth couldn't believe that call.

actually that 'blown' replay call, was a swing of at least 14 points, as it ended up resulting in an Army TD + 2pt instead of the NIU TD. but glad to get out of west point with a win. it was clear that we really did not grasp how to defend the triple option

(09-15-2012 03:39 PM)huskiealum03 Wrote:  actually that 'blown' replay call, was a swing of at least 14 points, as it ended up resulting in an Army TD + 2pt instead of the NIU TD. but glad to get out of west point with a win. it was clear that we really did not grasp how to defend the triple option

The camera angle was not conclusive. Looked like TD on tv but not enough to overturn because of angle.

GO HUSKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(09-15-2012 03:49 PM)pantone1935 Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 03:39 PM)huskiealum03 Wrote:  actually that 'blown' replay call, was a swing of at least 14 points, as it ended up resulting in an Army TD + 2pt instead of the NIU TD. but glad to get out of west point with a win. it was clear that we really did not grasp how to defend the triple option

The camera angle was not conclusive. Looked like TD on tv but not enough to overturn because of angle.

GO HUSKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was conclusive the ball landed past the goal line and when hit the ground it popped loose. Hopefully there will be some disciplinary action.

(09-15-2012 03:39 PM)huskiealum03 Wrote:  actually that 'blown' replay call, was a swing of at least 14 points, as it ended up resulting in an Army TD + 2pt instead of the NIU TD. but glad to get out of west point with a win. it was clear that we really did not grasp how to defend the triple option

The only defense for a triple option is self inflicted wounds. Give credit to Army, they played as good as they could have played today.

(09-15-2012 03:49 PM)pantone1935 Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 03:39 PM)huskiealum03 Wrote:  actually that 'blown' replay call, was a swing of at least 14 points, as it ended up resulting in an Army TD + 2pt instead of the NIU TD. but glad to get out of west point with a win. it was clear that we really did not grasp how to defend the triple option

The camera angle was not conclusive. Looked like TD on tv but not enough to overturn because of angle.

GO HUSKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No. Not true. The ball was down and touched the white of the goal line. Even if they think he didn't cross (which he obviously did), the ground caused the fumble. The blew it both ways. It was as bad as the Toledo extra point last year. Someone should be held accountable.

+1. It was a bad call. No doubt about it. However, it was only a 7 point swing as after the would-have-been touchdown they would have got the ball back where they got it. Nonetheless, we won by a point, which is great, but bad call.

I love missed xtra pts by our opponent!
Shades of Buffalo last year.

Whatever the heck, i'll take a one-point road win over another close loss.

Somehow we won AND scored 41 points despite being minus 3 in turnovers and having the officials make a really bad call on a TD that was called a fumble. We had over 500 yards of offense with only a TOP of just under 18 minutes.

Does anyone think that there will be a statement tomorrow regarding the really bad call by the replay officials on that fumble or would they only do that if NIU had lost?

(09-15-2012 03:51 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 03:39 PM)huskiealum03 Wrote:  actually that 'blown' replay call, was a swing of at least 14 points, as it ended up resulting in an Army TD + 2pt instead of the NIU TD. but glad to get out of west point with a win. it was clear that we really did not grasp how to defend the triple option

The only defense for a triple option is self inflicted wounds. Give credit to Army, they played as good as they could have played today.

If that were true, most teams would use it. THey don't because it CAN be stopped. You just have to practice stopping it. Therein lies our problem.

(09-15-2012 03:51 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  The only defense for a triple option is self inflicted wounds. Give credit to Army, they played as good as they could have played today.

Probably very true, i was thinking about this after the game. That was probably the most flawlessly executed game Army plays this season. They had zero turnovers, averaged 5.6 ypc, and converted a bunch of 3rd and 4th downs. It will be hard for them to play a better game this season.

(09-15-2012 02:45 PM)WhiskeyDick Wrote:  Very fine win on the road and against a very unique offense. Winners don't blame officiating, regardless the outcome of the game. NIU kept its cool and acted like they belonged today. Which is more than I can say about some of you whining sniveling clods.

Always there with an encouraging word.

Decent turnout of NIU fans at Army today. Had to laugh though at a woman with an NIU cap and a PINK "Minnesota Golden Gophers" sweatshirt!

With the exception of Clark, the LB'S really struggled. I thought Santa was solid as a starter last week, but he barely played this week, strange. We stressed dicipline on defense all week. We didn't show much on D. The O was outstandingnwhen it needed to be.

(09-15-2012 07:05 PM)Djud Wrote:  With the exception of Clark, the LB'S really struggled. I thought Santa was solid as a starter last week, but he barely played this week, strange. We stressed dicipline on defense all week. We didn't show much on D. The O was outstandingnwhen it needed to be.

It is impossible to judge the D based on this week, you could see the triple option was causing mass confusion. We wont see this again the rest of the year, thank the lord.

This was a great Huskie victoty. Congrats Huskies!!!

http://www.niuhuskies.com/view.gal?id=125218

I may owe some people an apology for dismissing the fact that it could have been a good fumble call. Check out the NIU photo gallery, that looks more like a fumble from their picture.

Its not a good fumble...what you don't see in that picture is that he's stretching out with his other hand. He looses control of the ball as it hits the goal line, which the ball was above AND there can't be a fumble bc of the ground.

(09-15-2012 11:20 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  http://www.niuhuskies.com/view.gal?id=125218

I may owe some people an apology for dismissing the fact that it could have been a good fumble call. Check out the NIU photo gallery, that looks more like a fumble from their picture.

(09-15-2012 02:50 PM)WhiskeyDick Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 02:47 PM)niubrad00 Wrote:  

(09-15-2012 02:45 PM)WhiskeyDick Wrote:  Very fine win on the road and against a very unique offense. Winners don't blame officiating, regardless the outcome of the game. NIU kept its cool and acted like they belonged today. Which is more than I can say about some of you whining sniveling clods.

The replay official, NOT THE REFEREES, cost us 7 points. Period. It played a very important role in the game. The replay official should be reprimanded. Now go back to your hole

No Shi@head. You're wrong again. The evidence to overturn a call on the field has to be conclusive. It was not. End o' subject. You are an unstable whack o' doodle who is now on my ignore list.

"I don't think those (officials) knew what was going on that play, quite obviously," Doeren said. "I can't say anything negative, but everyone in the press box (assistant coaches)…and that's kind of what I rely on…said that he crossed the goal line and the ground caused the fumble. So that's what I was going off of."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/col...1717.story

(09-16-2012 12:13 AM)georgey3085 Wrote:  Its not a good fumble...what you don't see in that picture is that he's stretching out with his other hand. He looses control of the ball as it hits the goal line, which the ball was above AND there can't be a fumble bc of the ground.

(09-15-2012 11:20 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  http://www.niuhuskies.com/view.gal?id=125218

I may owe some people an apology for dismissing the fact that it could have been a good fumble call. Check out the NIU photo gallery, that looks more like a fumble from their picture.

Yea, his other hand has control of the ball, until it hits the ground.