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 .
Liver said:
supposedly, O was never seriously considered by usc. mutual non-interest, i heard. i guess he lived out of a hotel the whole time he was there. this may be usc sour grapes talk, but who knows?
Click to expand...
Darth Snow said:
sour grapes. Coach O wanted that job real bad.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the guys on this board that were in favor of Orgeron, huge props to you. You guys were dead on on recruiting and coaching him.

USC was ****ing stupid. Clearly.
 
Swish said:
So 67 votes in the AllBuffs poll.
42 votes LSU
25 votes Clemson
Interesting.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
Alfred91 said:
This might be a controversial opinion, but there has to be discretion in using the targeting hammer. This wasn't CU vs UCLA that was going on here, it was the national championship game and the player was the heart and soul of the Clemson defense. This was not the time to be making an example out of a guy for playing hard.

Take that into account with the terrible OPI that took away a TD, and you have another example of Pac-12 referees having an impact on the game in a negative way. It is embarrassing, but not surprising.
Click to expand...
There can be no discretion in the targeting rule otherwise you lead to controversy and you delve into why call it here but not here. The rule is pretty clear. When the foul occurs it must be called every time. It is why they made it a booth initiated foul. The only discretion involved is determining if a player was defenseless per the rule, or if contact was incidental, i.e. the contact was initiated in a legal manner and the contact to the helmet head neck area was not forcible.

People complain that the ejection is too harsh, and that may be in some cases, but the rules have been in place for years now, and requires replay confirmation. The rule is working. Any further deteriation of the penalty would likely result in more violations. If anything I could see the rules committee increasing the penalty to include multigame suspensions for repeat offenders.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
There can be no discretion in the targeting rule otherwise you lead to controversy and you delve into why call it here but not here. The rule is pretty clear. When the foul occurs it must be called every time. It is why they made it a booth initiated foul. The only discretion involved is determining if a player was defenseless per the rule, or if contact was incidental, i.e. the contact was initiated in a legal manner and the contact to the helmet head neck area was not forcible.

People complain that the ejection is too harsh, and that may be in some cases, but the rules have been in place for years now, and requires replay confirmation. The rule is working. Any further deteriation of the penalty would likely result in more violations. If anything I could see the rules committee increasing the penalty to include multigame suspensions for repeat offenders.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that the rule is working and would be compromised if they only tossed people for headhunting?

As it stands, the rule is unpopular with players, coaches, fans and broadcasters. Hard to imagine that not leading to change.
 
Buffnik said:
Why do you think that the rule is working and would be compromised if they only tossed people for headhunting?

As it stands, the rule is unpopular with players, coaches, fans and broadcasters. Hard to imagine that not leading to change.
Click to expand...
You don't like the rule partly because it goes against a player willing to hurt himself, which Skalski's tackle could have done. That's not a universally held opinion.
 
zbuff said:
You don't like the rule partly because it goes against a player willing to hurt himself, which Skalski's tackle could have done. That's not a universally held opinion.
Click to expand...
Not universal. Unpopular doesn’t equal 100%. And I don’t see people arguing against a penalty. It’s the ejection when someone didn’t do something dirty that’s the issue. Having 2 levels of a flagrant foul works very well in college basketball (players don’t get kicked out for 1st flagrant if it’s a live ball play & isn’t unsportsmanlike).
 
crosby87 said:
We better get a move on here.....
247sports.com

2021 Recruit Football Team Rankings

In order to create the most comprehensive Team Recruiting Ranking without any notion of bias, 247Sports Team Recruiting Ranking is solely based on the 247Sports Composite Rating.
247sports.com 247sports.com
Click to expand...
Pointless post. Not the right thread nor does it matter when only 46 teams have a commit right now for 2021. Not too common now for guys other than QB's to commit this early in the cycle.
 
4BienemyTDs said:
2* out of high school to OSU
4* when he transferred to LSU
Is what someone on TV said
If I am wrong, I am wrong
Trusting TV folks is dangerous
Click to expand...

4* out of high school. Just happened to be in a loaded QB room. Offer list was not crazy good, but he had several P5 offers.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
There can be no discretion in the targeting rule otherwise you lead to controversy and you delve into why call it here but not here. The rule is pretty clear. When the foul occurs it must be called every time. It is why they made it a booth initiated foul. The only discretion involved is determining if a player was defenseless per the rule, or if contact was incidental, i.e. the contact was initiated in a legal manner and the contact to the helmet head neck area was not forcible.

People complain that the ejection is too harsh, and that may be in some cases, but the rules have been in place for years now, and requires replay confirmation. The rule is working. Any further deteriation of the penalty would likely result in more violations. If anything I could see the rules committee increasing the penalty to include multigame suspensions for repeat offenders.
Click to expand...
It is and always has been a f*cked rule that's not needed, because there is already PERSONAL FOUL penaltys. Get rid of the rule as it sucks. Every time a defensive player lays the wood a damn flag comes out 90% of the time and the talking heads just add on convincing pussies oh that's a hard hit we can't have that. GTFOH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top