NCAA FB 2017 Season

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
LSU QB - 3/7 for 18 yards in the 2nd half and LSU expects to beat Bama? LOL.

At least he will be gone next season (graduation). Hopefully, Brennan won't be so sucky.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
Finally, Brennan is in the game and LSU is moving forward again but it is too late.
 

bguile

Senior member
Nov 30, 2011
529
51
91
Big Ten East is out of the playoff picture now. Only hope is Wisconsin. Can't believe Michigan State did it again.

And OSU...wtf. Michigan took so much crap for losing at Kinnick last year, but at least it was close.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
Stats - LSU outgained Alabama 306-299, including 151-116 on the ground, LSU performed better on third down, 9 of 19 to Alabama's 5 of 14, LSU had 16 first downs to Alabama’s 14, LSU ran 73 plays to Alabama’s 60 and had the ball for 34:07 out of 60 minutes.

But LSU did not make crucial plays as Bama did. The scramble to escape the sack from Bama QB and the INT from Bama defense (both in the first half) = 14 points for Bama = the win.

So much for the new and improved offense. At least LSU did not get shut out as last year.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,648
201
106
Ok so in the Iowa/Ohio State game, they ran the SwiningGate Offense for the 18 yard gain on 4rth and 1.
I am familiar with the Swinging gate formation as we used to run it for PATs in high school.

However... I'm not sure the play today was legal... so im hoping some rules experts out there can help me out.
Under what circumstances can the Center be both the End and an Eligible Receiver?
The long snapper was the center. immediately to his left was a pulling guard. To his right were 2 other Tight Ends/WRs which were off the line.
I feel like this should have either been an illegal formation penalty (Center is uncovered) AND OR Illegal touching of a pass, the Center is not an eligible receiver.
 

bguile

Senior member
Nov 30, 2011
529
51
91
Big Ten East is out of the playoff picture now. Only hope is Wisconsin. Can't believe Michigan State did it again.
Ok so in the Iowa/Ohio State game, they ran the SwiningGate Offense for the 18 yard gain on 4rth and 1.
I am familiar with the Swinging gate formation as we used to run it for PATs in high school.

However... I'm not sure the play today was legal... so im hoping some rules experts out there can help me out.
Under what circumstances can the Center be both the End and an Eligible Receiver?
The long snapper was the center. immediately to his left was a pulling guard. To his right were 2 other Tight Ends/WRs which were off the line.
I feel like this should have either been an illegal formation penalty (Center is uncovered) AND OR Illegal touching of a pass, the Center is not an eligible receiver.

Not a rules lawyer by any means, but from what I understand, as long as they have the required amount of men on the line, and he is uncovered, and is also wearing the correct number he is eligible. I believe his number is 97. The play seems to fit all the criteria.

Here is a link to a sbnation article on it.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/11/5/16608880/iowa-ohio-state-game-2017-fake-punt
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,648
201
106
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/7/13/12113306/college-football-rules-changes-2016

I thought the new rule was intended to prevent this sort of thing. But i guess this does meet the criteria for the new rule.

5. Fake field goal loophole tightened up, but with a new gray area (Rule 2-16-10)
For an offensive formation to be legal during a regular play, at least five linemen must be numbered 50 to 79. No matter where they line up, these players are all always ineligible receivers (by number).

When an offense is lined up for a scrimmage kick (field goal, extra point, or punt), they get an exception and can have fewer than five. Some coaches have exploited that to trick defenses into covering the wrong players, or lulling them to sleep, before attempting a fake.

The rules committee tightened up the loopholes.

First, to get the numbering exception the offense must have either:

  1. at least one player 10 or more yards behind the line of scrimmage, or
  2. two players at least 7 yards behind the line of scrimmage.
Until this year, they only had to have one player at least seven yards back, leading teams to have him take the snap and run. Now they have to be considerably more strategic with their fakes, if they want to take advantage of the "numbering exception."

The other change is one simple word that may be even more restricting. The rule used to say it has to be "obvious that a kick may be attempted." That "may" is now "will," as in, "it must be obvious that a kick will be attempted."

Now, when a team puts a snapper wearing No. 88 on the end of the line so he can run out for a pass, the offense must meet standard-play numbering rules (i.e., must have five other linemen wearing 50 to 79). A snapper on the end of the line does not make it clear to everyone in the stadium that a kick will be attempted, so the offense gets no exception.

Of course, this creates a different gray area. A kick doesn't have to be attempted under the rule, it just has to be obvious that one will be. For example, after a muffed snap, the player attempting to kick could roll out and legally run or pass. Heck, the snap doesn't even have to be muffed. They just need to fake the kick really, really well.
 

bguile

Senior member
Nov 30, 2011
529
51
91
I'm not sure but I think the added rules for scrimmage kick were meant for a different sort of play than what Iowa pulled off, though I could be reading it wrong.
 

ciba

Senior member
Apr 27, 2004
812
0
71
Not a rules lawyer by any means, but from what I understand, as long as they have the required amount of men on the line, and he is uncovered, and is also wearing the correct number he is eligible. I believe his number is 97.

It depends on the numbers of the 5 interior linemen. If they're 50-79, this play is good to go on any given down.

Bguile - you're correct. This play didn't fall under the kicking excpetion because a player was not 10 yards deep (nor 2 players 7 yards deep)

edit notes: realize this was already answered in the quoted article. I skipped the quote initially because the "kicker" wasn't 10 yards deep.
 
Last edited:

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
33,929
1,098
126
Arguably the biggest college football Saturday in years and I'm going to be at a wedding. Who gets married during football season?
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
Alabama getting all they can handle, and The U controlling the Domers.
 

GagHalfrunt

Lifer
Apr 19, 2001
25,297
2,001
126
Georgia was Tennessee before Tennessee was Tennessee. They'll win some games, give the faithful hope and then *presto*, it all disappears in a puff of smoke.

Okay, I missed that one by just a teensy bit. It didn't disappear in a puff of smoke, it disappeared in a giant apocalyptic explosion.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
LSU played a lot better in the 2nd half vs. Ark. The QB could run (for short gains). Why didn't the coaches let him run last week vs. Bama? Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

Bama is behind MSU in 4th QT. Upset?

Miami is kicking ND badly right now (pick 6) and is leading 27-0.
 
Last edited:

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,999
1,396
126
Because what works against Arkansas doesn't work against Alabama.

A few yards per play from running from QB or other plays >>>>>> pathetic passing skill from LSU QB last week.

Bama is good but not invincible. Look at what Clemson was able to do last year. Was Clemson so predictable and with a weak QB as LSU? That's my point.

In other news, MSU had a 3rd down stop then the Bama kicker missed the FG but the offense choked and could not even make a 1st down for the winning FG. Bama escaped with a W.
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |