I wish the right call was made at the end of the game. It was terrible. I don't know what would have happened, but both teams deserved to have played it out.
Poor Ending (from a Clemson fan)
- Thread starter Clems0nTiger
- Start date
Amen..win or lose, it should be decided by the players. Good luck going forward...anybody but Bama, please.
Not just the teams, but the league deserved the correct call as well. I'm convinced that Clemson deserved that win because they were the better team for a majority of the night but it's absolutely frustrating that Carolina was robbed of its opportunity to make it interesting.
I agree. Not sure if we would have gotten it done. Thought maybe we should have put Trubinsky in halfway through the 3rd quarter, Marquise just wan't passing and playing as well.
But started to put it together. Had a chance for late game dramatics to tie the game and the ref makes an inexplicable call that cannot be challenged.
But started to put it together. Had a chance for late game dramatics to tie the game and the ref makes an inexplicable call that cannot be challenged.
Congrats to Clemson. They were better for most of the game. I feel really badly that the kids didn't decide it. Money did. F*cking damn TV $$. That official should be ID'd and publicly fired for purposeful manipulation....and the money trail followed back to Jeff Long and the CFP Committee.
Good Luck to Clemson a chance to complete a magical season.
Congratulations to Clemson. I will be pulling for them to win it all. I would have loved to have had that one last chance, but they were the better team for most of the night. So congrats and maybe we can get another chance next year.
It is a shame the game was tarnished like that. I hate the fact both teams could not walk off the field knowing it was a straight up contest.
We have lived and died by the Quise. Today, we came up short. Of course, part of that was Clemson's defense and pass rush. Well, nearly all of that.
But last 2 games he hasn't passed well, and we're just not so dominant in the trenches that we can afford that. Really was surprised. Great QB but we needed greatness today.
Oh well. Hopefully we can recruit and develop an O-line that can hold their own against a team like Clemson so if the star QB isn't having his best day, we can win anyway.
Appreciate the honest position on this Tiger.
Even with the right call the odds were in Clemson's favor. Your D may have stopped us from scoring a TD, or, if we did get the TD may well have stuffed our 2 point conversion attempt. You guys were still at an advantage.
But it would have been very exciting to see how it played out. And because of one blind, stupid, and/or corrupt official we will never get to know.
Good luck going forward.
Even with the right call the odds were in Clemson's favor. Your D may have stopped us from scoring a TD, or, if we did get the TD may well have stuffed our 2 point conversion attempt. You guys were still at an advantage.
But it would have been very exciting to see how it played out. And because of one blind, stupid, and/or corrupt official we will never get to know.
Good luck going forward.
Class earns class. Clemson was the better team by far tonight...just wish there wasn't a cloud hanging over the ending. No shame in losing to Clemson but losing to the refs is a different story. And both teams lost to the stripes.
Hope you guys get the #1 seed tomorrow.
Ryan Switzer said, one call doesn't make a game. In this instance it sure would have been interesting to see it decided by two great team and kids on the field.
I'm supporting our champion moving forward.
But dang, Kirk and Reese both commented on it and Scott Van Pelt sure covered it later, as they mentioned if helmet to helmet is reviewable then why not in special teams play like an on sides kick.
The ACC has a problem...better school up some real officials south of the age of 60 and not sight impaired.
I'm supporting our champion moving forward.
But dang, Kirk and Reese both commented on it and Scott Van Pelt sure covered it later, as they mentioned if helmet to helmet is reviewable then why not in special teams play like an on sides kick.
The ACC has a problem...better school up some real officials south of the age of 60 and not sight impaired.
As to what the officials should have done:
The ACC maintains the offside call was not reviewable, despite NCAA Rule 12, Article 4 (b) stating that reviewable plays involving kicks include determining if a player is beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball. Crafford, who was the closest player to the line of scrimmage, was clearly behind the line when Weiler made contact with the ball.
The ACC maintains the offside call was not reviewable, despite NCAA Rule 12, Article 4 (b) stating that reviewable plays involving kicks include determining if a player is beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball. Crafford, who was the closest player to the line of scrimmage, was clearly behind the line when Weiler made contact with the ball.
Yeah let's pretend like the ACC office knows what they are doing. I think the possibility of us going down and scoring a TD and a 2 were probably unlikely and if we had then I think our "D" was just too gassed to matchup with the Clemson "O" in OT. Congrats to Clemson they are the better team and have a real chance to win it all.
I wouldn't have been surprised to see us score a TD but doubt we'd have gotten the 2 against their defense the way they were playing.
Classy thread. Congrats to the Tigers, I'll be pulling for them. They played much closer to their potential than we did and deserved to win.
Talking heads are saying the nation wants Alabama vs Oklahoma and giving Clemson/ACC no respect still...destroy all comers, Tigers!
Oklahoma playing in the patsy Big 12 has not faced a defense as tough as Clemson's.
FOR YOUR KNOWLEDGE
All players must be inside the 9-yard mark when the ball is marked ready for play. If you watch a replay, you will see UNC had a defender lined up outside of the 9-yard mark. It's an obscure rule, which is why a lot of people are incorrectly railing againThat's an illegal formation call, not an offsides call. The S19 at the end of the rule refers to the Official Football Signals, and 19 is False Start, Illegal Formation, or Offensive Encroachment. The rule for offsides, 6-1-2-c-1 (#1 on your section) calls for an S18 signal, which is Offside Defense or Free-Kick Defense.st the refs, but the correct call was made.
All players must be inside the 9-yard mark when the ball is marked ready for play. If you watch a replay, you will see UNC had a defender lined up outside of the 9-yard mark. It's an obscure rule, which is why a lot of people are incorrectly railing againThat's an illegal formation call, not an offsides call. The S19 at the end of the rule refers to the Official Football Signals, and 19 is False Start, Illegal Formation, or Offensive Encroachment. The rule for offsides, 6-1-2-c-1 (#1 on your section) calls for an S18 signal, which is Offside Defense or Free-Kick Defense.st the refs, but the correct call was made.
No, that's not what the rule says. The rule is they must all be at some point between the 9-yard mark SOMETIME BETWEEN when the ball is marked ready for play and the kick-off. Where they line up doesn't matter at all.
Plus, that's not the call they made.
For your knowledge... you're wrong. You're wrong about the rule because you're wrong about the call. The refs called an infraction that did not occur... at all.
Your team won. Go have some pizza.
Um, you are actually wrong on the rule (doesn't say that) and wrong on the call, both.
What does Jeff Long or the CFP Committee have to do with anything? If anything it is the ACC that should be looked at....Even if Carolina would have won they would not have jumped over Stanford to be in the Final 4...the ACC had eveything to lose if Clemson got beat......
Clemson was the better team and certainly deserved to win. I dont blame the refs for us losing. I blame desaun watson. But yea that missed call was egregious. Woulda made for some awesome drama and maybe steal some spotlight from the big ten game which was going down to the wire at same time.
A question for the rules experts here. The offsides call was clearly bogus, but there was also an obvious targeting on UNC that was not called. If the play been called appropriately, would there be a re-kick or UNC ball at the 35?
Its not "obvious". The clemson player is standing then falls to his knees the second before impact. The unc player was targeting the clemsonplayers midsection in an effort to dislodge the ball. But by dropping to his knees the split second before getting hit the clemson players head became the target. But anyway since it happened before possession was established if it had been called clemson would take the penalty and force a re kick 15 yds back.
The targeting foul on Clemson occurred when the player receiving the punt also ducked. There was head to head contact, so I did not question it. I really wish the rule would be modified to take that into account. I did not think that either of the plays were "dirty". I do not believe that either player was "targeting" the other guys head. Good luck against Baylor, and I believe UNC will beat them with any of their QBs playing.
I dunno if Green had poor judgement on his alignment, or what. He doesn't fit the dirty player role. But, his hit was targeting. It was the epitome of targeting. That is why the foul exists, for that exact type of hit.
I concede that I saw H2H contact on the onside kick, but, you have a lot of other players right in there and the trajectory moves throughout the play. I'm not condoning the UNC player at all, but they all KNEW they had to dislodge that ball on that play or it's game over. That doesn't mean "all bets are off", but it does influence the actions that will be needed. Green's hit was as blatant as I've ever seen. I doubt it was malicious intent, but it looked very bad.
I'm not a rules expert, but I don't see how that could be misconstrued as targeting. Did the UNC player hit the clemson player in the helmet? Yes. Was it because the clemson player ducked into the hit after the UNC player had already begun his tackle? Yes. I think it's pretty clear that shouldn't be a targeting call. Although as I said, I'm not a rules expert, and if it very well could be like the NFL, where if you sneeze on a QB's head you're getting 15 yards.
you have completely misinterpreted the rule. Plus I guran damn tee you that official has no knowledge of that rule and you had to peruse the official rule book to find it yourself. Stop trying to rationalize. Nobody is going to take the win away , it would have been a monumental task for us to score a TD and a 2 point conversion and even then for our gassed "D" to go into an OT.
if the targeting was so obvious why aren't the talking heads even mentioning it? It is not possible for 2 teams to charge at each other from 10 yards away and there not be some H2H contact in fact that is the reason the KO's have been moved up to eliminate a lot of run backs.
There is a huge difference in what we are arguing and what you're TRYING to argue. A flag was thrown for an infraction that never occurred. Now, you can say "Well, he targeted and should have been called." Hey, now you have reason to be pissed at the ACC officials, too.
Here's one that was missed last week on our QB:
http://vid13.photobucket.com/albums/a251/TNTarHeel94/IMG_3033_qy2qbq_zpsz4ja7pli.mp4
No call was was made for targeting there.
What WE are arguing is that a flag WAS THROWN for an infraction that NEVER happened. And, the call made a HUGE impact on the outcome of the game.
In that situation. Onsides kick with a mad scramble, they would never call targeting. Theres way too much flying around and bodies going everywhere to make that kind of judgement call. Its a weak attempt to detract from the travesty offsides call.
But like fed said. Take it like a man and move on. Shit happens. Good luck to clemson. They deserved the win.
But like fed said. Take it like a man and move on. Shit happens. Good luck to clemson. They deserved the win.
Good luck to UNC as well. We need the ACC to really improve as a football conference. For that to occur, I believe that UM,UNC, and VaT all must be top 20 type programs consistently. Louisville needs to step up as well, and CU and FSU must continue to win big. There is so much money in football, we have to be successful to match the money coming in to the Big & SEC schools. Again, best of luck to the Tar Heels. Looks like Fedora really has the program going in the right direction in a hurry.
