Football question

BoulderSooner said:
the 7 refs on the field didn't agree ...
Click to expand...
Just like the refs at USC didn’t think that play was illegal, or the refs at Mizzou thought they could punt. So is your position that officials are right 100 percent of the time? If so, I’ll look forward to no more game threads complaining about calls!
 
WTSooner said:
Our receiver ran out wide, never left the field, lined up, checked with the ref, and we ran a play.

Never substituted. Nobody ever left the field of play. It's no different than any other team that has WIDE splits for their receivers. It worked out nicely because on the play before, the receiver ended that play already way out wide (ie, he didn't have to spring or sneak out there).

There is nothing in that fact pattern that makes it illegal. If THAT is faking a substitution, a LOT of plays would be considered faking a substitution.
Click to expand...
Again, find a single credible source who agrees with you. Any rules analyst or former official without ties to OU.
 
WichitaSooner said:
Just like the refs at USC didn’t think that play was illegal, or the refs at Mizzou thought they could punt. So is your position that officials are right 100 percent of the time? If so, I’ll look forward to no more game threads complaining about calls!
Click to expand...
Switching jerseys when that is against the rules= 100% objective.
Trying to decide the motivations of a wide receiver and whether he had intentions to fake sub or just walked over to his spot= 100% subjective. You can’t compare the two
 
WichitaSooner said:
Again, find a single credible source who agrees with you. Any rules analyst or former official without ties to OU.
Click to expand...
By this logic all motion in the backfield and by WRs should be illegal. It's meant to be deceptive and move defensive players out of position.

I can absolutely promise you that if Texsa, Bama or Notre Dame had run that play there would be zero flack.
In fact when Kiffin ran it last year it was an afterthought within 2 hours.
 
WichitaSooner said:
Again, find a single credible source who agrees with you. Any rules analyst or former official without ties to OU.
Click to expand...
Most of the ones that went public with an opinion did so quickly and based on bad information. It was DAYS before I ever saw a video of the entire field for that play. Most people were just piggy-backing off the announcers, the Auburn fans, and then the SEC. Not sure why the SEC put out a statement so quickly, as I 100% believe they are wrong. But them making that statement, everybody just piggy-backed off of that.

Just like the officials not calling it doesn't mean they got it right, the SEC racing to publicize and opinion doesn't mean they got it right either.
 
There’s a lot of smoke out there about sark leaving texas. Potential upheaval at texas could be very good for OU.
 
WichitaSooner said:
Just like the refs at USC didn’t think that play was illegal, or the refs at Mizzou thought they could punt. So is your position that officials are right 100 percent of the time? If so, I’ll look forward to no more game threads complaining about calls!
Click to expand...

They didn't ask permission before the game, nor did they know it was a backup QB who had an illegal number until after the play.

It really shouldn't be this hard to keep up.
 
WichitaSooner said:
Just like the refs at USC didn’t think that play was illegal, or the refs at Mizzou thought they could punt. So is your position that officials are right 100 percent of the time? If so, I’ll look forward to no more game threads complaining about calls!
Click to expand...
usc didn't clear it with the refs and they don't have names on the jerseys .. so those refs had no idea
 
mict085 said:
There’s a lot of smoke out there about sark leaving texas. Potential upheaval at texas could be very good for OU.
Click to expand...
I personally don't think sark is that great.. hes just better than crappy bv.
 
WTSooner said:
Our receiver ran out wide, never left the field, lined up, checked with the ref, and we ran a play.

Never substituted. Nobody ever left the field of play. It's no different than any other team that has WIDE splits for their receivers. It worked out nicely because on the play before, the receiver ended that play already way out wide (ie, he didn't have to spring or sneak out there).

There is nothing in that fact pattern that makes it illegal. If THAT is faking a substitution, a LOT of plays would be considered faking a substitution.
Click to expand...
The wording of the rule is stupid anyway and is left to refs to decide intent instead of action. The refs knew he never left the field because they didn’t delay our snap to allow Auburn to substitute. That should have told Auburn he never left the field. You don’t need another rule on top of that where refs are trying to decide whether a player is trying to deceive because the current substitution rule already takes care of it. Faking injuries is worse and they don’t have a rule for it - they just fine you after the fact based on their belief of your intent.
 
Last edited:
Just saw that The Athletic released their updated top 50 of their big board. R Mason is at 45 and is the only OU player included. We have to recruit and develop better, and hit on more of our portal guys. I know people will predict/assume that some of the underclassmen will be high draft picks in two or three years, but that’s speculation, and, in any event, we shouldn’t be staring down a fourth straight year of this.
 
WichitaSooner said:
Just saw that The Athletic released their updated top 50 of their big board. R Mason is at 45 and is the only OU player included. We have to recruit and develop better, and hit on more of our portal guys. I know people will predict/assume that some of the underclassmen will be high draft picks in two or three years, but that’s speculation, and, in any event, we shouldn’t be staring down a fourth straight year of this.
Click to expand...
Not worried about defensive recruitment and development. The results speaks for themselves. But offense has been bad
 
WichitaSooner said:
Just saw that The Athletic released their updated top 50 of their big board. R Mason is at 45 and is the only OU player included. We have to recruit and develop better, and hit on more of our portal guys. I know people will predict/assume that some of the underclassmen will be high draft picks in two or three years, but that’s speculation, and, in any event, we shouldn’t be staring down a fourth straight year of this.
Click to expand...

Who is leaving?

On offense it's Burks, Simmons, and Kanek. None of them have high draft capital. OL has a few draft picks in a couple years with Fodje, Fasusi, and EPL but that's years away. RBs are in their first or 2nd year.

Defense has only 6 guys leaving. RMT, Marvin Jones, Halton, D Williams, Daniels, and Spears-Jennings. I would be shocked if any of those go undrafted.

At the same time Stone will be a first round pick after next year barring injury. Jayden Jackson will be a high pick. Wein is playing his way to a high pick. He leads OU in TFLs right now.

The 3 LBs are playing their way to being drafted.

DBs are all young. Guillory is a freshman. Eli Bowen Sophomore. Gentry is a junior. Bowen will get drafted after next year.

Defense alone will have about 15 guys drafted conservatively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Question for the Board
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
BoulderSooner
BoulderSooner
C
Terminate Men's Basketball until a New Stadium Built
Replies
12
Views
1K
cowboysooner
C
O
Is This Rock Bottom For the Program?
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
12K
AnotherSoonerInTX
A
Sooner04
A Rainy Night in Fort Worth
2 3
Replies
51
Views
5K
mict085
mict085
J
Realistic timeline on transfers
Replies
9
Views
4K
WichitaSooner
W
Back
Top