Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

National Championship Thread

Who will win the national championship?

  • Total voters
    67
  • Poll closed .
dabo had his team ready. they did wear out. i am glad my confirmation bias has not let me down. i thought lsu would handle them. burrow makes that offense elite.

fun game. it illustrates how much work we have to do.
 
DBT said:
It was really sad seeing Earl Campbell. He looked so worn down and he’s a year younger than I. He was such a beast back in the day. Ran over Steve Foley like a locomotive. Knocked Foley clean out.
Click to expand...
Sad seeing Jim Brown so worn down, too. I don't buy that bull**** about Earl being a year younger than you, for some reason. :D
 
Last edited:
DBT said:
That was a butt kicking.
Click to expand...
LSU was better. Actually, I think that tOSU was also better than Clemson this year. But just like that tOSU game where Clemson found a way, this one could have gone differently if not for that PI on 3rd & 19 and the dropped Pick-6. Clemson missed its opportunities in a game where its margin was very slim. LSU is not a team you can afford to play less than your A game against and still have a chance.
 
Buffnik said:
It's soft. That's not football.
Click to expand...
Sorry late reply but that was the exact definition of targeting. Lowering the head to strike with the crown of the helmet. Used to be spearing. Either way it is a highly dangerous play for the players involved and the hitter actually has the biggest risk of potentially life changing or ending head, neck, or spinal injuries. It isn't soft to call it. It is stupid on the part of the defender and has no place or need in the game. A much better play is to keep the eyes up and strike the opponent with the shoulder, which would be more likely to result in the desired outcome of stopping the offensive player and jarring the ball loose.
 
Good game. Lots of adult beverages will be consumed tonight in Louisiana. Burrow is a great QB and also a class guy.
 
Buffnik said:
LSU was better. Actually, I think that tOSU was also better than Clemson this year. But just like that tOSU game where Clemson found a way, this one could have gone differently if not for that PI on 3rd & 19 and the dropped Pick-6. Clemson missed its opportunities in a game where its margin was very slim. LSU is not a team you can afford to play less than your A game against and still have a chance.
Click to expand...
LSU was relentless. (Like MT wants the Buffs to be). They just kept the foot on gas and wore Clemson down.
 
Buffalumni said:
I agree, it’s soft. They really need to have variations of the penalty, the automatic ejection irks me so bad. Unavoidable contact and inadvertent leading with your head should be a 15 yard penalty and a warning. Ejections should be for obvious, malicious intent.

EDIT: lol and Klatt beat me to it.
Click to expand...
His head movement was deliberate and avoidable. He started with his head up and lowered it as he entered the strike zone.
 
Buffnik said:
A big reason I'm not ok with that being targeting (and especially with the guy getting kicked out) is that if he hadn't dipped his head he would have ended up hitting the receiver in the head. It was just a football play. Nothing dangerous happened and there was clearly no intent to headhunt a guy - just the opposite.
Click to expand...
No he wouldn't. Watch the play and you will see that he has his head up and lowers it to deliver the hit. If he keeps his head up he likely contacts the same area with his shoulder. Bad play, good call.
 
I just figured, watching both teams a few times this year, LSU would find a way in this one. Their D got better as the year went on. Burrow was the better QB tonight, too. Credit to LSU coaches as well, they adjusted really well. Burrow got sacked what, 4 times in the first half? Really impressed with Helaire, he's a damn bowling ball.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
Sorry late reply but that was the exact definition of targeting. Lowering the head to strike with the crown of the helmet. Used to be spearing. Either way it is a highly dangerous play for the players involved and the hitter actually has the biggest risk of potentially life changing or ending head, neck, or spinal injuries. It isn't soft to call it. It is stupid on the part of the defender and has no place or need in the game. A much better play is to keep the eyes up and strike the opponent with the shoulder, which would be more likely to result in the desired outcome of stopping the offensive player and jarring the ball loose.
Click to expand...
I don't care what some idots wrote as a rule. Bad rules happen. Kicking someone out of a game for something called "targeting" which clearly doesn't target someone is completely outside the spirit of what we're trying to accomplish with this stuff.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
No he wouldn't. Watch the play and you will see that he has his head up and lowers it to deliver the hit. If he keeps his head up he likely contacts the same area with his shoulder. Bad play, good call.
Click to expand...
He lowers his head to slip down to put his nose on the football through contact. If he'd kept his head up to drive though the tackle, it would have been helmet-to-helmet.
 
Buffnik said:
He lowers his head to slip down to put his nose on the football through contact. If he'd kept his head up to drive though the tackle, it would have been helmet-to-helmet.
Click to expand...
I agree with your overall premise. The behavior of the player was safer. However, under the rule, helmet to helmet is no longer a penalty because the receiver is not considered defenseless. The only time it would be a targeting call would be if he leads with the crown of his helmet as it was correctly ruled.
 
Buffnik said:
I don't care what some idots wrote as a rule. Bad rules happen. Kicking someone out of a game for something called "targeting" which clearly doesn't target someone is completely outside the spirit of what we're trying to accomplish with this stuff.
Click to expand...
They should eliminate the ejection altogether and penalize as a personal foul. Or, maybe make the first one a PF and the next an ejection. Like too many yellow cards in footba....err.....soccer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top