? for BCS Experts

[stoopified]

I am curious if you can tell me if OU had been properly ranked(ahead of MU,KU) by the delusional voters in the Harris and Coaches pollswould that have given OU a big enough push to get into the NC game?I am sure there is someone out there who can properly figure that formula,but it ain't me.

By properly ranked I simply mean one spot ahead of both KU,MU.

[Collier11]

im not sure the answer to your question, but craig humphries actually made a decent point today for once, on why the bcs games and all other bowl games dont sale out, he said why would anyone outside of the schools really care, we have a so-called title game so the other games dont even really matter. Pretty much true!

[MamaMia]

We may have been ranked high enough in the polls to play for the National Championship but what hurt us most was the call that denied us that touchdown in Lubbock which would have tied up the game. By the time we were robbed of that TD, we had established our running game and momentum already was and would have remained in our favor. I have no doubt that the results of that John Bible moment is what cost us the most this season. Its amazing how one action can cause such a negative, altering our season in such a way.

[yermom]

the computers still didn't like us, the pollsters would have had to put us in #2 and by a good margin

[Collier11]

We may have been ranked high enough to play in the polls to play for the National Championship but what hurt us most was the call that denied us that touchdown in Lubbock which would have tied up the game. By the time we were robbed of that TD, we had established our running game and momentum already was and would have remained in our favor. I have no doubt that the results of that John Bible moment is what cost us the most this season. Its amazing how one action can cause such a negative, altering our season in such a way.


all that except that it wast a catch! :rolleyes:

[MamaMia]

all that except that it wast a catch! :rolleyes:
He caught the pass in the endzone and had control of the ball when he was across the plane of the goal. That is the definition of a touchdown by pass.

[r5TPsooner]

I say get rid of Washington next year for an OOC opponent and schedule UCO or Fort Hays State instead.

It worked for Ohio State so it should work for OU too.

[Frozen Sooner]

Mama, I'm very sorry, but Manuel did not control the ball, so therefore he did not make a catch in the endzone. To control the ball in that situation he would have had to hold on to it when he hit the ground. This has been discussed previously and an approved ruling from the NCAA rulebook has been posted in support of it being the correct call. Simply having your hands on the ball with a foot down in the endzone is not a catch-you must demonstrate control of the ball. He didn't hang on to it-end of story. A catch is a catch anywhere in the field of play, and if that exact play had occured on the 50 not a single person would be arguing it was a catch.

Believe it or not, the officials DO get it right the vast majority of the time.

[MamaMia]

Mama, I'm very sorry, but Manuel did not control the ball, so therefore he did not make a catch in the endzone. To control the ball in that situation he would have had to hold on to it when he hit the ground. This has been discussed previously and an approved ruling from the NCAA rulebook has been posted in support of it being the correct call. Simply having your hands on the ball with a foot down in the endzone is not a catch-you must demonstrate control of the ball. He didn't hang on to it-end of story. A catch is a catch anywhere in the field of play, and if that exact play had occured on the 50 not a single person would be arguing it was a catch.

Believe it or not, the officials DO get it right the vast majority of the time.
I respectfully disagree. The catch was made in the end zone. He had control of the ball in the end zone. His momentum carried him out of bounds. At that time the play was dead. The ground can not cause a fumble.

[Frozen Sooner]

And it did not. Manny didn't fumble-a fumble presupposes control of the ball. It caused an incompletion. Which it certainly can do.

[Frozen Sooner]

Here's the approved ruling, Mama. Page 204 of the NCAA Rulebook-seems to cover it pretty well:

XI. Airborne receiver A85 possesses the ball and in the process of going
to the ground, first contacts the ground with his left foot as he falls to
the ground inbounds. Immediately upon hitting the ground, the ball
comes loose and touches the ground. RULING: Incomplete pass.
An airborne receiver must maintain control of the ball if going to the
ground in the process of completing a catch.

XIII. Airborne receiver A85 possesses the ball and in the process of
coming to the ground, first contacts the ground with his left foot
inbounds as he falls to the ground out of bounds. Immediately upon
hitting the ground out of bounds, the ball comes loose. RULING:
Incomplete pass regardless of whether or not the ball hits the ground
because the receiver is out of bounds.

[Collier11]

in college fball, you have to complete the play, therefore if he caught the ball in bounds but lost control upon hittnig the ground, that is not a catch and you are wrong! Sorry!!!

[Collier11]

The ground can not cause a fumble.

the ground didnt cause a fumble, by rule he never possessed the ball!!!

[insuranceman_22]

Nicely done fella's, rule book and all. I thought the same thing mama did, now I know.... However I don't think that one play is what got us beat in the game. Blame coaches, Sam's tackling ability, JH's slow start, whatever......we (the Sooners I mean) simply didn't have it on that day until the 4th quarter. The hole was a little to deep to dig out of. But one thing I can say, especially with most of these same players coming back next year.....when the chips were down that day, they never (and I do mean never) gave up. They showed heart and fought to win until it was over. I hated the loss, but I was proud to wear crimson and cream!

[Crucifax Autumn]

Yeah, we oughta be in the championship game since we're easily the best team out there right now, but yeah, we shoulda won one of those 2 crappy games.

Good news is that next year we're gonna win 'em all and leave no doubt!

[BoulderSooner79]

The pollsters moved the teams around quite a bit after the last weekend and made it clear it didn't really matter what the previous ratings were. I believe OU would have jumped VT and gotten in if LSU had lost to Tennessee. Since LSU won, they were not worried about the #3/#4 order. OU would not have jumped LSU because the CU game was a *bad* loss. Now I believe LSU's loss to Kentucky was just as bad, but I wear crimson glasses.

As for the endzone call at TT - reverse the situation. If it's a TT receiver trying for a touchdown with the same outcome is it a bad call ? That's my way of testing myself for bias. :O

[MamaMia]

Well, I suppose I need to either brush up on my rules, or apply for a job as a ref. :P

[Desert Sapper]

Anybody have a link to a video of it? I can't seem to find it anywhere. I thought I saw a catch when I was watching, but I'm probably wrong, as the rule masters on here have shown. I'm still leaning on the Mama side. But it has been a while since I've even thought of this.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

We were 6th in the computers. There was no way we were going to the NC game unless we were #1 in the human polls.

[Desert Sapper]

Some thoughts about the computers:

Jeff Sagarin's (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt07.htm)system has us at #1, but the ELO Chess (which is what the BCS uses, of course) has us at #3, behind Va Tech and LSU (#5 and #6 overall, respectively).

Anderson and Hester (http://andersonsports.com/football/ACF_frnk.html) has us at #8 (Mizzou is #2, KU is #3, and ASU of last night's beatdown is ahead of us at #7). Not really sure what kind of math could give you that outcome. They try to explain their dumbass system here: Link (http://andersonsports.com/football/Missouri_Oklahoma.html)

Billingsley (http://www.cfrc.com/Ratings_2007/WK_15.htm) has us #5, behind tOSU, LSU, USC, and Va Tech. No biggie.

Colley (http://www.colleyrankings.com/) also has us at #8, also trailing Mizzou. Florida, UGA, and West Virginia are also ranked ahead of us. Colley explains their dumbass system here: link (http://www.colleyrankings.com/method.html)

Massey (http://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=cf), surprise of all surprises, has us at #8, trailing Mizzou. Va Tech and LSU are #1 and #2 in this one. Massey describes their dumbass system here: link (http://www.masseyratings.com/theory/massey.htm)

Dr. Peter Wolfe (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/ratings.htm) has us #2, behind only Va Tech. He explains his 'maximum probability' system here: link (http://prwolfe.bol.ucla.edu/cfootball/descrip.htm)


So, I guess if we want to bitch about anything, we should bitch about a)our own schedule strength, which included North Texas and Utah State in the same year and b) egg heads living in their parents' basements cranking out formulas that the 'BCS' accepts as gospel.

Conclusion: either institute a playoff, or go back to the old bowl system that had meaning for more than one game when it came to the national title chase. I, for one, would be happy with getting the Orange Bowl back, and letting Arizona State play any takers in the Fiesta every year.

[meoveryouxinfinity]

Mama, I'm very sorry, but Manuel did not control the ball, so therefore he did not make a catch in the endzone. To control the ball in that situation he would have had to hold on to it when he hit the ground. This has been discussed previously and an approved ruling from the NCAA rulebook has been posted in support of it being the correct call. Simply having your hands on the ball with a foot down in the endzone is not a catch-you must demonstrate control of the ball. He didn't hang on to it-end of story. A catch is a catch anywhere in the field of play, and if that exact play had occured on the 50 not a single person would be arguing it was a catch.

Believe it or not, the officials DO get it right the vast majority of the time.
So when Malcolm gets stripped of the ball in the Miami game, how is that a touchdown?

[Frozen Sooner]

So when Malcolm gets stripped of the ball in the Miami game, how is that a touchdown?

Because he had already made the catch then broke the plane.

The confusion arises because you can't fumble once you've broken the plane. To break the plane you must have made the catch. By rule, Manny had not made the catch-therefore, no touchdown.

[Collier11]

So when Malcolm gets stripped of the ball in the Miami game, how is that a touchdown?


when you are crossing the front line of the endzone, only a small tip of the ball has to cross the line then the play is dead and it is a touchdown, when you are already in the endzone you have to possess the ball from start to finish. If he hadnt dropped it at the very end it would have been a TD

[Frozen Sooner]

when you are crossing the front line of the endzone, only a small tip of the ball has to cross the line then the play is dead and it is a touchdown, when you are already in the endzone you have to possess the ball from start to finish. If he hadnt dropped it at the very end it would have been a TD

Collier, this explanation isn't really the case and a person could deduce from it that had Manny's play occured at the .5 yard line and he crossed the plane of the goal after the ball was in his hands that it would have been ruled a touchdown or that had he tucked the ball away and been stripped after the tuck that it would have been ruled no catch. This is not the case.

The distinction lies in that Malcolm Kelly had already made the catch and was stripped of the ball after it had broken the goal line. By rule, Manuel hasn't made the catch until he goes to the ground with the ball or otherwise makes a "football move" with the ball (generally by demonstrating full control by tucking it away, taking a step with the ball, changing direction, etc.)

[Collier11]

Collier, this explanation isn't really the case and a person could deduce from it that had Manny's play occured at the .5 yard line and he crossed the plane of the goal after the ball was in his hands that it would have been ruled a touchdown or that had he tucked the ball away and been stripped after the tuck that it would have been ruled no catch. This is not the case.

The distinction lies in that Malcolm Kelly had already made the catch and was stripped of the ball after it had broken the goal line. By rule, Manuel hasn't made the catch until he goes to the ground with the ball or otherwise makes a "football move" with the ball (generally by demonstrating full control by tucking it away, taking a step with the ball, changing direction, etc.)


I realize that, that is what I was saying? Maybe you misread what I wrote or maybe I didnt state myself very well but the only point I was trying to make was the distinction between the two plays.

[jwlynn64]

I don't know the difference between the college and pro game but in last weeks Cowboy's game, a similar situation happened in the field and they were making a distiction between when a player is not hit by a defender and one that is. The rules for holding on to the ball are different in these two cases.

Guy with the rule book, is there any such distinction in college ball?

[Frozen Sooner]

I understood what you were getting at, but I think someone who didn't know the rule could reasonably make the assumption that what I said in the first paragraph was what you meant. Doesn't really have anything to do with where the ball crossed or how-just whether someone was a runner or not. Manny, not having made the catch, was not a runner. Malcolm was.

[Collier11]

got ya!!!

[Frozen Sooner]

I don't know the difference between the college and pro game but in last weeks Cowboy's game, a similar situation happened in the field and they were making a distiction between when a player is not hit by a defender and one that is. The rules for holding on to the ball are different in these two cases.

Guy with the rule book, is there any such distinction in college ball?

Here's all I can think of:

1. No force-out rule in college. If you're making a catch on the sidelines and you haven't come down yet, a defender can blast you out of bounds and there's no ruling that you would have come down. Exception: a defender catching a player in the air and carrying him out of bounds.

2. If a receiver possesses the ball and makes a "football move" then gets blasted, dropping the ball, it's a fumble. If it was in the end zone, it's a touchdown. Gotta be a runner before you can fumble. A runner in the endzone=touchdown.

3. If you're blasted as you're coming down with the ball and it pops out when you hit, incomplete.

However, that doesn't mean that there may be a distinction I'm not aware of in the rules.

[Desert Sapper]

Does somebody have a link to a video of it? It looked when I first saw it that he caught it in the end zone, had the ball, his feet touched, then he went out of bounds and dropped it. Anybody?

[MamaMia]

Anybody have a link to a video of it? I can't seem to find it anywhere. I thought I saw a catch when I was watching, but I'm probably wrong, as the rule masters on here have shown. I'm still leaning on the Mama side. But it has been a while since I've even thought of this.
It looked like a catch to me too, but oh well.

[yermom]

Does somebody have a link to a video of it? It looked when I first saw it that he caught it in the end zone, had the ball, his feet touched, then he went out of bounds and dropped it. Anybody?

if you are on the way to the ground you have to keep possession after you hit the ground

if you are going out of bounds, you have to establish possession before stepping out

[Collier11]

if you are on the way to the ground you have to keep possession after you hit the ground

if you are going out of bounds, you have to establish possession before stepping out

thats about as plain and simple as you can make it...good job!


BUT...if he has to possess it all way thru impact of the ground, wont that affect him academically, he is spending way too much time possessing the ball and not enough studying, this is a travesty LEROY, TRAVESTY!!! :)

[jwlynn64]

Actually what happened was that Manuel caught the ball, got a foot down and was on the way to the ground when the ball was stripped by the TT defender.

It wasn't that he dropped the ball but that the ball was stripped by a defender.

My question is: Does it make a difference if a defender is involved with the play?

The play in question is not a simple caught the ball but dropped it when he hit the ground. Does the fact that a defender had to pull it out of his arms not mean that he had possession?

[Collier11]

Actually what happened was that Manuel caught the ball, got a foot down and was on the way to the ground when the ball was stripped by the TT defender.

It wasn't that he dropped the ball but that the ball was stripped by a defender.

My question is: Does it make a difference if a defender is involved with the play?

The play in question is not a simple caught the ball but dropped it when he hit the ground. Does the fact that a defender had to pull it out of his arms not mean that he had possession?


as far as I know, he just has to possess the ball all the way through impacting the ground in this case, whether it is stripped or just fumbled doesnt matter I dont think?

[yermom]

sounds like a good defensive play...

[jwlynn64]

Seems like they need to make some type of distinction in this case. Not catching the ball is one thing but having it stripped after you have controlled the ball and established position in the end zone seems like one of another inconsistency in the rule book.

You would think that after more that a century playing this game they could at least come up with consistent rules.

I can hold the ball out of bounds or catch a ball that is out of bounds as long as my feet are in bounds but kicked or punted balls are immediately out of bounds as soon as they cross the plane? Which is it, the feet of the ball that make a difference?

By the way, I'm not really bothered by these rules. I just find it funny that they can't come up with a more consistent rule.

[Frozen Sooner]

Actually what happened was that Manuel caught the ball, got a foot down and was on the way to the ground when the ball was stripped by the TT defender.

It wasn't that he dropped the ball but that the ball was stripped by a defender.

My question is: Does it make a difference if a defender is involved with the play?

The play in question is not a simple caught the ball but dropped it when he hit the ground. Does the fact that a defender had to pull it out of his arms not mean that he had possession?

I don't recall a defender being involved in a strip, but I'll admit to being under the heavy influence of Alaskan Amber at the time.

However, a defender being involved does not impact the ruling. To establish as a catch in this case, the receiver had to maintain possession of the ball through impact with the ground. Since he did not demonstrate control of the ball by making a football move, it goes on the stat sheet as a pass defensed by the defender and an incomplete pass by Halzle (and a drop by Manny.)

[RedstickSooner]

Gawd-effing-damnit.

WE LOST TO COLORADO.

Quit talking about TTech.

Quit it.

We lost.

It's done.

We have no business being in any national championship game. The fact that another two-loss team is there doesn't make it "right".

[OKLA21FAN]

Gawd-effing-damnit.

WE LOST TO COLORADO.

Quit talking about TTech.

Quit it.

We lost.

It's done.

We have no business being in any national championship game. The fact that another two-loss team is there doesn't make it "right".

You didn't lose to TTECH, you just ran out of time.

signed,
Mack Brown :pop:

[Collier11]

Gawd-effing-damnit.

WE LOST TO COLORADO.

Quit talking about TTech.

Quit it.

We lost.

It's done.

We have no business being in any national championship game. The fact that another two-loss team is there doesn't make it "right".


The fact that one of the teams lost twice as the #1 team, once at home, and to two mediocre teams while the other team played a junior high schedule and still lost a game, we lost twice on the road and once without our starting qb...tell me what makes them more deserving than us??? Im not saying we are more deserving but you cant sit here with your 'for sure attitude' and tell me that either team is more deserving than us?!

[Vaevictis]

I think his point is the old BCS mantra, "Win all your games, and it won't be a problem.*"

(* unless you're Utah, Auburn, Boise State or Hawaii)

[Collier11]

I think his point is the old BCS mantra, "Win all your games, and it won't be a problem.*"

(* unless you're Utah, Auburn, Boise State or Hawaii) that is why his point in invalid!!!

[Vaevictis]

Hence the asterisk ;)

[Collier11]

Damn details....

[Crucifax Autumn]

Screw the details! From now on the official rule should be that OU plays whoever is #1 or #2 for the Championship! lol