Monday, September 18, 2006

Weekend Thoughts

1. Am I the only person in America (outside of Oregon) who thinks the officials were right on the onside kick call in the Oregon-Oklahoma? I'm not saying that the Duck player didn't touch the ball before it went ten yards. But the call on the field -- a bang-bang play -- was that he didn't. The standard for the replay is that there must be indisputable video evidence to overturn that call. I watched the same replays everyone else did. And I thought it looked like the player hit the ball too soon. But even Okies have to admit it was pretty close -- the ball went at least nine yards. So it wasn't a crazy to miss the call. But the problem with the replays are that so few of them were straight-on. That introduces the problem of depth perception and perspective. As far as I'm concerned, none of those replays could be called indisputable by definition -- it's like trying to judge whether a ball crossed the goal line by looking through the end zone camera. Now, I did see one replay that appeared to be from a camera down the 45-yard-line. That one made it look very close. If the standard was "probably," I would have overturned the call on the field. But just going on that one replay angle -- the only one that I think should matter -- I can't say it's indisputable. I can certainly see how reasonable minds could differ on that and see it more clearly than I did, though. In legal circles, we have this concept called "harmless error," and I think it applies here. Oklahoma gave up two touchdowns and missed a field goal in the last three minutes of that game to lose by one. They have no one to blame but themselves for not shoring up that victory.

2. As for the referees in the LSU-Auburn game, I'm not sure what was going on there. But I think all these announcers and ref-critics need to make clear to viewers and readers the bounds of exactly what is reviewable. They constantly note that "every play is reviewed," but not every call is. They have no mandate to review judgment calls. Or at least I thought they didn't. I don't think they can review whether a ball is catchable or not; that's a classic judgment call, and the rule explicitly allows for discretion and notes that, when in doubt, the ball is catchable. My understanding is that holding is a judgment call, too. So, on the infamous pass interference call (again, a judgment call) late in that game, the situation was: (a) a pass interference call that couldn't be reversed because it's a judgment call; (b) a holding penalty on the defender that probably could have been called but wasn't, and is a judgment call; and (c) a tipped ball that would have negated the pass interference call, except the ref missed the tip. In a perfect world, the replay booth would have (a) recognized the tip, (b) overturned the pass interference call accordingly, and (c) then instated a call against Auburn for holding an eligible receiver on a pass thrown beyond the line of scrimmage. But since they can't find holding when the refs on the field didn't (even though the ref obviously didn't call holding because he called pass interference instead), they did the first two and got as much right as they could. So I think the replay system worked as directed here, too, as well as it could under the circumstances. (And the SEC agrees.) But I think this whole mess would go down a lot better if the talking heads made it clear to everyone exactly what is reviewable and what isn't.

3. One final note about the referees. In the Florida-Tennessee game, I recall seeing at least two (and it seems like more) calls of intentional grounding that were subsequently waved off when the refs spotted an eligible receiver in the vicinity of the pass. This is a great example of a circumstance when the officials can't win. Either they throw the flag when they see the quarterback throw the ball away, and then look like dorks when they pick up the flag; or they wait to see what receivers were around before throwing a very delayed flag, and look like dorks for throwing the flag late and appearing to have been influenced by the other team or its crowd. I think it's better to throw the flag and then be man enough to wave it off, but those have to be a pretty tense few seconds for those referees.

3. Best nickname I've seen in a while: "Brady Quinn, Medicine Woman." Spotted late in this chat session. I realize that Brady Quinn has struggled this season. And I'm not saying he's going to make it Manhattan for the Heisman ceremony. But I don't think he's completely out of the running. He's got a lot of chances to pad his stats against lesser lights, and a win at USC would certainly help. Again, I'm not predicting that. But I'll give fifty bucks to the charity of Kyle's choice if Ray Rice of Rutgers or Garrett Wolfe of Northern Illinois finish ahead of Quinn in the final Heisman voting, as this guy suggests they could.

4. I think Virginia Tech has some dirty players. The incident last year where Marcus Vick stepped on Elvis Dumerville's leg was not an isolated event. The Hokies were whistled for several late hit calls in their rout of Duke Saturday. Defensive back Aaron Rouse was hit with three personal fouls. One of them was a late hit that gave Duke quarterback Thaddeus Lewis a concussion and knocked him out of the game. Rouse said the right things afterwards, but I saw it, and it was dirty. It was late, and it was a helmet-to-helmet hit. Why doesn't college football have something like college basketball, where two technical fouls equals a disqualification? Two personal fouls is probably too low a threshold, but three or four in a game is just ridiculous. Even if Rouse wasn't benched by rule, nothing would have prevented Frank Beamer from pulling Rouse from a game Tech was never in danger of losing. Beamer's new discipline measure -- instituted this year in response to the Vick incident -- is that any player called for a personal foul has to run a 100-yard sprint per foul on Wednesday morning. A concussion only costs a hundred yards? A lot of players would take that deal, knowing that the hit will probably start creeping its way into highlight reels next spring when Rouse is in the NFL draft. But even aside from whatever punishment Rouse should have received, there's a difference between the kind of show-off swagger many players exhibit and the kind of thug posturing dirty players revel in. I see a lot of the latter during Tech games. It's been kind of under-the-radar because Tech has feasted on Northeastern, North Carolina, and Duke. But take a look at the Hokies when they're on tv playing Georgia Tech or Clemson or Boston College and see if you think they could stand to have a little more class.

5. I'm beginning to think that ESPN only has Lou Holtz on its tv crew for the comedic benefits of having him around. My favorite current running Holtz-ism: his habit of calling every school "the University of --" regardless of the school's official name. He said "the University of Auburn" a few times, even though the school distinguishes itself from UA Alabama because it is AU Auburn University. Still, nothing tops this one, which I swear I heard him say: "The University of USC."