Football question

[WichitaSooner]

There is no way Wichita actually thinks the play was illegal. He has eyes and common sense. You don’t even need to know the rule book to understand that Oklahoma was not being that deceptive. The Oklahoma wide receiver didn’t even leave the field of play. If that is deceptive, then we need to put little flags on the running backs, so the defenders know whenever they try to sneak out the backfield for a pass. That’s definitely deceptive! The problem for Wichita is he used the “illegal” touchdown argument as a way to disparage OU’s victory. Now he has to roll with it or walk it back like the SEC has already done. And he’s choosing to roll with it.

Yes, there is no possible way I could think a play that every objective expert has said was illegal was illegal.

I wonder if the Oregon message boards argued passionately that they legally recovered the onside kick.

 

[WichitaSooner]

SEC is walking back like crazy. It’s a legal play.

Where? Link something that shows that they are. And to be clear, if the rules experts end up saying it was legal, my opinion will change accordingly. I happen to think deferring to people who spend their lives learning a subject is a good idea.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Stoops even confirmed to the radio crew that OU spent time last week working on it as a special play, which pretty clear shows that we were trying to deceive them and it wasn't just a "normal" play with a WR lined up wide.

Oh the horror of trying to practice a deceptive play on football. We should be ashamed!

c'mon dude

We 100% were trying to deceive them.
But it was 100% not an illegal play.
We never did anything to make them think he was subbing out

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Where? Link something that shows that they are. And to be clear, if the rules experts end up saying it was legal, my opinion will change accordingly. I happen to think deferring to people who spend their lives learning a subject is a good idea.

You realize most of the rules analysts are terrible right? They are mostly used to fill time during reviews and more times than not they get the call wrong

 

[WichitaSooner]

Oh the horror of trying to practice a deceptive play on football. We should be ashamed!

c'mon dude

We 100% were trying to deceive them.
But it was 100% not an illegal play.
We never did anything to make them think he was subbing out

Again, I guess reading is hard for some of you. I have now said THREE FREAKING TIMES that I don't think OU did anything to feel guilty about.

And your points are not even consistent. How can you say we were trying to deceive him but then say we did nothing to make him think he was subbing out?

Like I said, I will eagerly await Coach or anyone else posting any indication that the league is "walking back" its statement.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

And your points are not even consistent. How can you say we were trying to deceive him but then say we did nothing to make him think he was subbing out?

Every single play in football is trying to deceive your opponent.
The rule itself is about deceiving via substitution. #5 made no actions that were made to think he was subbing out.
The deception was running to a spot on the field in hopes that the defense wouldn't see him

 

[Boom Soon]

Every single play in football is trying to deceive your opponent.
The rule itself is about deceiving via substitution. #5 made no actions that were made to think he was subbing out.
The deception was running to a spot on the field in hopes that the defense wouldn't see him

The problem with the rule is it is completely subjective and therefore cannot really be “broken.” One guy thinks he’s subbing. Another guy thinks he’s just being lazy and walking to a spot. The receiver on the other hand is trying to sneak over without a defender noticing. Everyone else has hindsight to talk about this the next few days. But, I would bet dollars that no official would call that flag in the moment.

 

[Sooner04]

Guys, we're 4-0. We're back in the top ten. It's going to be a war in the Cotton Bowl. Some of you will find each other no matter the issue.
I'll throw something out there: I'd like to see Mateer attempt fewer than 20 passes against Kent State. I want to FORCE the ground trouble.
Thoughts?

 

[mict085]

It's crazy how many of you who have never read a rulebook or officiated or have any in-depth knowledge of the rule are suggesting you know better than people who know this stuff for a living. In what other area of life is this a thing? "I don't care what the pilot says, he is full of crap. .I have watched Top Gun and I know he is wrong when he talks about how to fly a plane." "That doctor is full of it. Yes, he went to medical school and has spend decades learning and practicing his craft, but I googled and he is just wrong."

This board freaks out five minutes into every basketball game when a judgment call goes against us on a play that has no real impact on the game. But when a major call is messed up in our favor, people want to just pretend like it isn't a big thing, or that the call was correct? Is it that hard to just admit that we got fortunate? I am not saying we owe anyone any apologies. Breaks happen in sports, and sometimes they are in your favor and sometimes not. The refs are the ones who messed up, not us. It is exactly the same as what happened in the Missouri-KU game. Mizzou asked the refs before a kickoff whether they could punt the kickoff. The refs said yes, so Mizzou did. After the game, the Big 12 reprimanded the crew and suspended them for a week. And you know what? Coach Drink came out and said "we knew it wasn't legal, we knew the crew was wrong, but when they said we could do it, we weren't going to ask twice."

OU checked with the SEC during the week and they said it was legal. OU checked with the refs before the game and they said it was legal. OU checked with the refs before the play and they said it was legal.

You can die on this stupid hill if you want to but you’re wrong.

 

[CoachTalk]

Guys, we're 4-0. We're back in the top ten. It's going to be a war in the Cotton Bowl. Some of you will find each other no matter the issue.
I'll throw something out there: I'd like to see Mateer attempt fewer than 20 passes against Kent State. I want to FORCE the ground trouble.
Thoughts?

Ive never met you but you could run through Kent State. Worst team in America.

 

[daqman]

Guys, we're 4-0. We're back in the top ten. It's going to be a war in the Cotton Bowl. Some of you will find each other no matter the issue.
I'll throw something out there: I'd like to see Mateer attempt fewer than 20 passes against Kent State. I want to FORCE the ground trouble.
Thoughts?

disagree.
gameplan as usual. mateer needs work just like the o-line needs work on run blocking schemes.
if mateer can clean up 4-5 passes each game....the offense looks so much better.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

disagree.
gameplan as usual. mateer needs work just like the o-line needs work on run blocking schemes.
if mateer can clean up 4-5 passes each game....the offense looks so much better.

If we can be just average in the run game it will open things up for Mateer a lot more than getting more reps in vs kent state.

 

[WTSooner]

SEC appears to have deleted all those statements via social media.

Legal “trick” play

Did they really? If so, just wow. They owe OU a public apology IMO.

 

[WTSooner]

It's crazy how many of you who have never read a rulebook or officiated or have any in-depth knowledge of the rule are suggesting you know better than people who know this stuff for a living. In what other area of life is this a thing? "I don't care what the pilot says, he is full of crap. .I have watched Top Gun and I know he is wrong when he talks about how to fly a plane." "That doctor is full of it. Yes, he went to medical school and has spend decades learning and practicing his craft, but I googled and he is just wrong."

This board freaks out five minutes into every basketball game when a judgment call goes against us on a play that has no real impact on the game. But when a major call is messed up in our favor, people want to just pretend like it isn't a big thing, or that the call was correct? Is it that hard to just admit that we got fortunate? I am not saying we owe anyone any apologies. Breaks happen in sports, and sometimes they are in your favor and sometimes not. The refs are the ones who messed up, not us. It is exactly the same as what happened in the Missouri-KU game. Mizzou asked the refs before a kickoff whether they could punt the kickoff. The refs said yes, so Mizzou did. After the game, the Big 12 reprimanded the crew and suspended them for a week. And you know what? Coach Drink came out and said "we knew it wasn't legal, we knew the crew was wrong, but when they said we could do it, we weren't going to ask twice."

The problem is they jumped to conclusions. They thought they knew the fact pattern, but they didn't. And there isn't very good video of the play. It took me a while to find a decent shot that fully showed what the OU receiver did and didn't do. I think everybody that jumped to the conclusion of calling it illegal did so having not seen the entirety of the play. They also didn't know that OU checked with the refs before the game and that the OU receiver checked with the ref at the beginning of that play.

Sorry, it wasn't illegal. What OU did on that play is no different than what Tennessee does with it's receivers and huge (wide) splits. Those guys have to run to the sideline to lineup, what did OU do that was different than that?

If the rules analyst and online clowns would have just waited a few hours, gotten some better looks and maybe even an explanation, I'm not sure their opinion of the play would have been the same.

 

[WTSooner]

Guys, we're 4-0. We're back in the top ten. It's going to be a war in the Cotton Bowl. Some of you will find each other no matter the issue.
I'll throw something out there: I'd like to see Mateer attempt fewer than 20 passes against Kent State. I want to FORCE the ground trouble.
Thoughts?

Are you going to the RRS?

Can't remember if I ever told you, but we were on the same shuttle after the game one year. Didn't really have a chance to say anything to you. The SD baseball hat gave you away.

 

[stormspencer]

Wow....what a thread. Excited to be 4-0 and will be 5-0 headed into the CB. I posted this on the other board regarding the run game. I watched Gabe's podcast and our run game was likely limited in this game because we couldn't run certain plays (more runs outside); this is because two of our lineman are playing basically on one leg right now and can't move/pull. We were never going to run up the gut on Auburn (they have a very good DL) but that was all that we could attempt based upon our health. We will see if we can get healthy in the next several weeks. I don't want Fasusi playing against Kent (they are beyond gawd-awful) because I want him as close to 100% as possible for Texas. I had seats on the 35 and watched him when he came.....he had no business being out there....he could barely move. If we can get some good fortune on the O-line health front, then I believe there is room for some marginal improvement. But with the d-lines we are going to have to face, we aren't going to be blowing any team off the ball anytime soon....at least that is my expectation.

Regarding the "illegal tactic", I believe the rule needs to be more clear. As someone mentioned above, you're always trying to deceive the defense, but you have to do it within the context of the rules. I think the SEC office jumped the gun a little on this by not having all of the tape and context. And Kiffin ran virtually the same play several years ago for a TD as well. I don't remember the uproar at that time, but maybe there was some of that. I have no problem saying that we got away with one because the refs are supposed to know the rules and they didn't call it.

 

[hoopsaustin]

Guys, we're 4-0. We're back in the top ten. It's going to be a war in the Cotton Bowl. Some of you will find each other no matter the issue.
I'll throw something out there: I'd like to see Mateer attempt fewer than 20 passes against Kent State. I want to FORCE the ground trouble.
Thoughts?

Usual gameplan imo. No problem putting emphasis on the run game tho. We need to get healthy bodies back more than anything.

 

[daqman]

don't want to see them run every play.
but i would like to see arbuckle lean on the run game when it matters.
first down....and second/third and short.

 

[Sooner04]

I may be the only one who notices this, but it annoys me. We need to learn to play offense that is complementary to our defense. A few times this season I've seen the O rush to the line and snap the ball needlessly before the quarter ends. Go to the sideline. Let those seconds tick away. When you've got a great defense, do everything you can to shorten the game.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Gundy is out