What's Your Agenda on GCA.com?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Phil McDade gave the proper response to Patrick's assertion that ND somehow is screwed by all referees.

I never said or infered that.
That's your disengenuous representation of what I said.
And, Phil's suggestion is absent substance, ignoring all of the collateral issues associated with ND ceasing to be an independent.  The concept of ND joining the Big 10 has been around and rejected for decades and decades.[/color]

But as for the Bush Push, it was an illegal play by a strict reading of the NCAA rules in force at the time.  

NO, it's NOT a strict reading, it's a simple, basic interpretation[/color]

THis from the 2005 rulebook:

http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/2005/2005_football_rules.pdf
Page 117
Section 3, Article 2
b.  The runner shall not grasp a team-mate; and no other player shall grasp, push, lift, or charge into him to assist him in forward progress.
Penalty:  five yards from the basic spot.

So... it is pretty clear Bush committed a penalty.  However, say they call it... that just means clock stops, USC kicks a field goal, we go to OT.

I didn't know that 24 yard field goals were guaranteed, or that the outcome of OT was predetermined.

If Bush doesn't push him, the game's over.[/color]

Also, there's no way instant replay could have "fixed" this... it is just completely impractical to allow for instant replay to try and declare penalties that the game officials miss.  If they allowed that, every play would have to be reviewed, and we'd have 7 hour games.

You're conveniently forgetting the critical issue, the spot of the fumble, which, fortunately for USC, went OB.  If the spot goes to the 3 yard line, the TD isn't so certain.  If the fumble lands on the field, the clock runs out, or if it goes through the end zone the game is over.  USC got a fortuitous break that decided the outcome, that was their good luck.[/color]

So Patrick remains upset about the outcome of that game, and rightfully so, because his team played GREAT, showed class, and in a perfect world for him deserved the win.

However, it's less than completely gracious to say the refs somehow gave USC that win.  I know Patrick hasn't said that yet...

Then why insert that remark ?

You have to question the "no call" on the Bush Push even though Weis endorsed it from Bush's perspective.

If it's a rule, either enforce it or repeal it, but, don't ignore it.

You might want to watch some old game films, like 1964.

Keep a keen eye on # 75 when ND was on the USC six inch line.
If you examine that game film you'll see that the left tackle, # 75, on the left hash, was called for holding, on a fullback dive off tackle, by the field judge, who's job it is to watch the receivers and defensive backs, not interior lineman.  USC's defensive player stepped back and # 75 missed his block and fell on the ground, making contact with NOONE.  Yet, the flag was thrown on him for holding.  
The films show the field judge with his hand on the flag prior to the ball being snapped.
He must have had a premonition.
Ara Paraseghian called it "... the worst call in the history of college football" so, ND fans tend to remember it.[/color]

but other less eloquent Domers I know certainly have said that to me.

That's nonsense, the refs did the best they could with the spot.  Only the "no call" on the Bush Push remains open to debate[/color]

And if ND can simply stop a 4th and 9 on the 20 yard line, none of this happens.  Patrick knows this as well.  Still, that loss had to hurt, so we can give him some rope here.

Actually, a play on the previous series when ND had the ball on the USC 20 would have ended the game when the pass to ND's fullback that would have given them a 1st down, allowing the clock to run out, fell to the ground.

On the 4th and 9 play I'm yelling, " he's going for the long ball, forget the 1st down"  Unfortunately, my advice didn't reach anybody's ears.  

It was one of the great games in college football, only the ending was flawed. [/color]  

In any case, the bottom line re instant replay remains that it really can't be done in college, not fairly, for the reasons I stated before.  It works in the NFL because every game is televised, with the same number of cameras.

You don't need the same number of cameras.
I think the intent in the early years is to improve calls not to perfect them, so incremental improvements should be welcome.  Some replay is better than NO replay[/color]

ps - let's get the facts straight re that dark era, too.  It was 11 losses in a row, then a tie, then another loss, then USC finally won.  

Just think, if ND loses 7 more in a row they'll eclipse USC's record for defeats. [/color]

[Michael Dugger]

All this football talk going on......

Two words.....Oregon Ducks

This is the season, fellas, you can't stop 'em, you can only hope to contain 'em

[Tom Huckaby]

Phil McDade gave the proper response to Patrick's assertion that ND somehow is screwed by all referees.

I never said or infered that.
That's your disengenuous representation of what I said.
And, Phil's suggestion is absent substance, ignoring all of the collateral issues associated with ND ceasing to be an independent.  The concept of ND joining the Big 10 has been around and rejected for decades and decades.[/color]

Apologies.  I believe you said something to the effect that ND was at a disadvantage for this.  I still think Phil's first response - that it's a lame excuse was right on.  But never mind... And this was what I was talking about. I could care less if ND joins the Big 10.

But as for the Bush Push, it was an illegal play by a strict reading of the NCAA rules in force at the time.  



NO, it's NOT a strict reading, it's a simple, basic interpretation[/color]

Agreed.  But this action occurs quite oftenn and is RARELY called.  I too have a friend who is a retired college ref, and he said the instruction they are given is that it has to be absolutely blatant with no other players near to be called.  If there is even any slight contact with someone other than the runner - an opponent, that is - the instruction is for no penalty.  Now if I am a ref, perhaps I do make that all in the Bush instance.  But he also did bounce off into an ND player, so it's also reasonable a ref does not make the call.  In any case it's a judgment call, one that didn't go your way.  I do feel for you.

THis from the 2005 rulebook:

http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/2005/2005_football_rules.pdf
Page 117
Section 3, Article 2
b.  The runner shall not grasp a team-mate; and no other player shall grasp, push, lift, or charge into him to assist him in forward progress.
Penalty:  five yards from the basic spot.

So... it is pretty clear Bush committed a penalty.  However, say they call it... that just means clock stops, USC kicks a field goal, we go to OT.

I didn't know that 24 yard field goals were guaranteed, or that the outcome of OT was predetermined.

If Bush doesn't push him, the game's over.[/color]

That is far from certain.  Leinart's twisting may well have gotten him in the end zone anyway.  In any case of course we can't say for sure what would have occurred if the penalty you desire was called.. you can't say ND would have won, just as I can't say for sure USC would have won.  But the odds are highly in favor of a made FG and going to OT if the penalty was called.

Also, there's no way instant replay could have "fixed" this... it is just completely impractical to allow for instant replay to try and declare penalties that the game officials miss.  If they allowed that, every play would have to be reviewed, and we'd have 7 hour games.

You're conveniently forgetting the critical issue, the spot of the fumble, which, fortunately for USC, went OB.  If the spot goes to the 3 yard line, the TD isn't so certain.  If the fumble lands on the field, the clock runs out, or if it goes through the end zone the game is over.  USC got a fortuitous break that decided the outcome, that was their good luck.[/color]

I don't forget that at all - the correct call was made.  But yes,USC was quite lucky it went out of bounds - fully agreed.

So Patrick remains upset about the outcome of that game, and rightfully so, because his team played GREAT, showed class, and in a perfect world for him deserved the win.

However, it's less than completely gracious to say the refs somehow gave USC that win.  I know Patrick hasn't said that yet...

Then why insert that remark ?

You have to question the "no call" on the Bush Push even though Weis endorsed it from Bush's perspective.

If it's a rule, either enforce it or repeal it, but, don't ignore it.

You might want to watch some old game films, like 1964.

Keep a keen eye on # 75 when ND was on the USC six inch line.
If you examine that game film you'll see that the left tackle, # 75, on the left hash, was called for holding, on a fullback dive off tackle, by the field judge, who's job it is to watch the receivers and defensive backs, not interior lineman.  USC's defensive player stepped back and # 75 missed his block and fell on the ground, making contact with NOONE.  Yet, the flag was thrown on him for holding.  
The films show the field judge with his hand on the flag prior to the ball being snapped.
He must have had a premonition.
Ara Paraseghian called it "... the worst call in the history of college football" so, ND fans tend to remember it.[/color]

Well that's well and good to talk about calls from when I was 12 and you were working on your 8th grandchild... but Patrick every school has received bad calls.  In the Bush instance, I've already explained all parts that mattered.  Again, I feel for you... but the outcome is not going to change, and all the rest of this is a bunch of what ifs that neither of us can say for certain.

but other less eloquent Domers I know certainly have said that to me.

That's nonsense, the refs did the best they could with the spot.  Only the "no call" on the Bush Push remains open to debate[/color]

agree for the most part.  So you and I are pretty cool with this.  I only wish other Domers could be as gracious and logical.

And if ND can simply stop a 4th and 9 on the 20 yard line, none of this happens.  Patrick knows this as well.  Still, that loss had to hurt, so we can give him some rope here.

Actually, a play on the previous series when ND had the ball on the USC 20 would have ended the game when the pass to ND's fullback that would have given them a 1st down, allowing the clock to run out, fell to the ground.

On the 4th and 9 play I'm yelling, " he's going for the long ball, forget the 1st down"  Unfortunately, my advice didn't reach anybody's ears.  

It was one of the great games in college football, only the ending was flawed. [/color]  

Of course there are many plays each team could point to.  But yes, that 4th and 9 must have been particularly galling.  As for the end, I find it perfect.

In any case, the bottom line re instant replay remains that it really can't be done in college, not fairly, for the reasons I stated before.  It works in the NFL because every game is televised, with the same number of cameras.

You don't need the same number of cameras.
I think the intent in the early years is to improve calls not to perfect them, so incremental improvements should be welcome.  Some replay is better than NO replay[/color]

What about the fairness issue?  Some teams get lots of cameras and lots of replays, some teams get little, some teams get none?  It just won't work.

ps - let's get the facts straight re that dark era, too.  It was 11 losses in a row, then a tie, then another loss, then USC finally won.  

Just think, if ND loses 7 more in a row they'll eclipse USC's record for defeats. [/color]

I am greatly looking forward to it.  And so long as there are ND supporters so happy with Weis - and USC keeps Carroll - I feel confident such an eclipse will occur.

[Kirk Gill]

Mr. Mucci - any memories of the refs in the '91 Orange Bowl against the Buffs? Was it a clip, or did the Irish get hosed in that game, too?  

[Phil McDade]

That might solve one problem but it would create many more.

Patrick:

Such as......?

I actually agree with you about officiating crews; I've seen it happen to Wisconsin.

But I've long been curious about Notre Dame's reluctance to join the Big Ten, given that:

-- A similarly outstanding private university has seen fit to stay within the Big Ten for decades;

-- A university of somewhat similar national stature in football recently joined the Big Ten despite widespread opposition from its alumni and supporters;

-- It participates in athletic conferences for other sports, apparently not to the detriment of sports such as women's basketball and men's hockey, in which it has seen recent national success and accomplishment.

One might snidely suggest its reluctance to join the Big Ten is solely due to its football contract with NBC. But I'm not that one.

I am, however, genuinely curious about the reasons why Notre Dame rebuffs the overtures from joining what is, by most measures, a fairly prestigious athletic AND academic conference.