Season proficiency ratings title contenders

I don’t know whether to perma-ban him, or perms-ban myself so I don’t have to read this drivel anymore. Decisions, decisions...🤔
Might I interject that there is one person in this somehow ongoing dialogue who is very clearly enjoying himself immensely by stringing this along.
 
But it wasn't a fumble. At worst and I'll accept the worst, it was a deflected forward pass. Fumbles require intent to run. He was hit (blindsided) a result of at least a questionable (as far as intent, not as far as application) defensive formation. An open lane gave the DB clear sailing. Which is o.k. but he didn't dislodge the football. That is necessary and essential and the Q B. certainly didn't drop it. That pic you posted was misleading. He'd already RELEASED tye football and was pulling his arm back, afterward. Sure the Angie and the trajectory (from that angle) looks like a fumble. But anyone who saw the play develop know a fumble does't fly through the air in a spiral and fall several yards behind the line of scrimmage. It was a deflected forward pass. Actually the consequence of it being a deflected forward pass are much worse. No loss of down. No loss of distance. It isn't recoverable. It would have resulted in second and ten. I like that option better. But because I'm a fair person I'm calling intentional grounding. That's your only option. Defender actually interferred with recovery. But because it fell behind the line of scrimmage it isn't a penalty. Simple unrecoverable. Meaning second and long.
yep -
who knows,
had he not been blindsided
due to an illegal defensive forrnation,
the receiver was wide open,
and likely would have gotten to the end zone -
hole different ball game -
 
But it wasn't a fumble. At worst and I'll accept the worst, it was a deflected forward pass. Fumbles require intent to run. He was hit (blindsided) a result of at least a questionable (as far as intent, not as far as application) defensive formation. An open lane gave the DB clear sailing. Which is o.k. but he didn't dislodge the football. That is necessary and essential and the Q B. certainly didn't drop it. That pic you posted was misleading. He'd already RELEASED tye football and was pulling his arm back, afterward. Sure the Angie and the trajectory (from that angle) looks like a fumble. But anyone who saw the play develop know a fumble does't fly through the air in a spiral and fall several yards behind the line of scrimmage. It was a deflected forward pass. Actually the consequence of it being a deflected forward pass are much worse. No loss of down. No loss of distance. It isn't recoverable. It would have resulted in second and ten. I like that option better. But because I'm a fair person I'm calling intentional grounding. That's your only option. Defender actually interferred with recovery. But because it fell behind the line of scrimmage it isn't a penalty. Simple unrecoverable. Meaning second and long.

WRONG.
 
That's o.k. I thought you were saying it was the wrong call as far as placement and position. I always try to be as fair as I can in how I distribute the football. That's what I meant by defending me. Or you can side with the masses. Doesn't really bother me. I thought you were defending my integrity.
i was simply pointin out
that you had a lot of inforrnation to present,
and sometimes it can get a bit confusin -
 
i was simply pointin out
that you had a lot of inforrnation to present,
and sometimes it can get a bit confusin -
Yeah. I guess brevity isn't exactly my friend. I try to cut through it though. The point I was making with respect to the Belt isn't that hard to follow, really. At least fundamentally it isn't. CFP utilizes a protocol (again this really isn't open to interpretation) where bowl pairings (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Cotton, Sugar) and a title game all select one deserving titleist. I'm trying to simplify selection to include all.
I reference 1984 a lot. A Cotton Bowl Championship paired Boston College and Houston. Boston College advanced. Brigham Young advanced (Holiday Bowl). Generally speaking the Holiday Bowl is (probably appropriately) 2nd tier. Meaning Brigham Young necessarily needed to beat B. C. (Cotton Bowl Champions) to advance.
Along with S. California (Rose Bowl), Nebraska (Sugar Bowl), U C.L.A. (Fiesta Bowl), Washington (Orange Bowl) and I'm thinking maybe the Aloha Bowl (S. Methodist) or if not them Oklahoma St.
Because of protocol. Top pairings yield top performers. We actually really don't need to limit it. But practicality makes it better.
I included (last year( Clemson and Ohio St.
Not because I'm necessarily partial to either. It's because neither were defeated twice.
Making either eligible. Until they lose again.
Oklahoma, Georgia, Mississippi, Iowa, Texas A&M and Alabama all successfully were victors in a title game they participated in.
I think I've demonstrated the protocol adequately enough to the condition of a N.C.
 
Players have to secure the football before being called out for a fumble and your pictures prove the football wasn't secure at the time of the collision. Another problem and almost assuredly not the last. I think when a quarterback drops back into the pocket he has protection from kamikaze attacks. Meaning he can't be blindsided. A defender can dislodge the football. But your pics prove that isn't what happened. He was blindsided as well as pushed down. Neither are particularly acceptable in today's game. Honestly it's a cheap way to secure a win. I think it's a little cowardly, too. I don't think it proved Alabama superior. It proved them more cowardly, IMO. Was it a safety blitz? Anyway I guess you can tip your hat for it working properly.
My biggest beef really isn't about the result. I accept the result, but it seemed to me to be almost predictable. I already explained why. I think it's unfortunate it decided it. I've already told my end if it. It wasn't fair, IMO. But I guess nobody said life was fair.
 
Last edited:
yep -
who knows,
had he not been blindsided
due to an illegal defensive forrnation,
the receiver was wide open,
and likely would have gotten to the end zone -
hole different ball game -
Well in response to your query stranger things have happened. Brigham Young scored a touchdown against Coastal Carolina to similar effect. It's almost like you diagramed it. Weirdly. But it was nullified. But the measure to which it applies is spot on. So while you're being sarcastic I'm telling you it's not over until the clock strikes midnight. Be careful what you wish for, chief. You might get it! By the way BYU lost. But no, it wasn't an illegal defense and since we're on the topic I prefer to ride my steed without an accomplice. Thank you very much. As far as Texas goes I'm assuming they ride solo.
Meaning we can all take a page from history. Sure if scenario A doesn't play out, scenario B never follows. I said it was a legal defense with an illegal execution. FW.I.W. by the way I don't make the rules.
 
Players have to secure the football before being called out for a fumble and your pictures prove the football wasn't secure at the time of the collision. Another problem and almost assuredly not the last. I think when a quarterback drops back into the pocket he has protection from kamikaze attacks. Meaning he can't be blindsided. A defender can dislodge the football. But your pics prove that isn't what happened. He was blindsided as well as pushed down. Neither are particularly acceptable in today's game. Honestly it's a cheap way to secure a win. I think it's a little cowardly, too. I don't think it proved Alabama superior. It proved them more cowardly, IMO. Was it a safety blitz? Anyway I guess you can tip your hat for it working properly.
My biggest beef really isn't about the result. I accept the result, but it seemed to me to be almost predictable. I already explained why. I think it's unfortunate it decided it. I've already told my end if it. It wasn't fair, IMO. But I guess nobody said life was fair.

WRONG.

Ball is in QBs control.

20100107__20100108_C01_SP08FBCBCSp1.jpg


Ball has now been knocked out of his control by defender. You lose, moron.

GettyImages-95635924-1024x683.jpg
 

Attachments

  • GarretAnders.JPG
    GarretAnders.JPG
    100.3 KB · Views: 1
WRONG.

Ball is in QBs control.

20100107__20100108_C01_SP08FBCBCSp1.jpg


Ball has now been knocked out of his control by defender. You lose, moron.

GettyImages-95635924-1024x683.jpg
Pass deflected. Meaning if it wasn't impeded it probably ought to have been ruled di
Show me in the rule book for college football where it says this. Because that is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
Advance position relative to where it was caught is a prerequisite to a pass compldtion. Without which there isn't a fumble. It's a relatively new rule. It might not apply to a quarterback snap but it would apply to a pass reception. It is used to determine possession of the football. It became notable in the previous years Fiesta Bowl between Ohio St and Clemson. A fumble was reversed by Clemson.
 
Pass deflected. Meaning if it wasn't impeded it probably ought to have been ruled di

Advance position relative to where it was caught is a prerequisite to a pass compldtion. Without which there isn't a fumble. It's a relatively new rule. It might not apply to a quarterback snap but it would apply to a pass reception. It is used to determine possession of the football. It became notable in the previous years Fiesta Bowl between Ohio St and Clemson. A fumble was reversed by Clemson.

What in the everloving hell does a brand new rule about a wide receiver catching a pass have to do with a QB getting a ball dislodged 14 years ago?

I didn't ask for your sporadic and unintelligible interpretations of the rule book. I asked you to show me in the rulebook where it says that intent to run is required for it to be a fumble...by a quarterback...that just got his clock cleaned from a PERFECTLY legal blindside hit.
 
What in the everloving hell does a brand new rule about a wide receiver catching a pass have to do with a QB getting a ball dislodged 14 years ago?

I didn't ask for your sporadic and unintelligible interpretations of the rule book. I asked you to show me in the rulebook where it says that intent to run is required for it to be a fumble...by a quarterback...that just got his clock cleaned from a PERFECTLY legal blindside hit.
But the defense tried to confuse him, and he was intending to pass the ball...lol!
 
But the defense tried to confuse him, and he was intending to pass the ball...lol!

And what exactly was that "loading the defensive line is illegal" statement about? Wait, you're only allowed to put 6 guys on the line on defense? Who tha fuck ever saw that....uh....."rule"...enforced? Does that mean putting 11 men on the line to try and block a punt is illegal? Where does he come up with this shit?
 
And what exactly was that "loading the defensive line is illegal" statement about? Wait, you're only allowed to put 6 guys on the line on defense? Who tha fuck ever saw that....uh....."rule"...enforced? Does that mean putting 11 men on the line to try and block a punt is illegal? Where does he come up with this shit?
You don’t get to this level of ignorance and stupidity over night. It requires many years of patience, practice, and dedication.
 
You don’t get to this level of ignorance and stupidity over night. It requires many years of patience, practice, and dedication.

Sad thing is, I actually like the guy and I try to help him out. His tunnel vision is a very tight window.

Some people know more than they understand. Some people understand more than they know. This dude.....he doesn't understand that he doesn't fit either of those categories. All he knows is what "he thinks he knows.".
 
Top