Afraid to ask, but...

[Coug90]

I haven't looked closely at OSU's personnel, but against Ward I think I'd stick with the 4 man rush and try to keep him under pressure without opening running lanes. I don't know that a DE contain or an LB spy would be effective, because he can outrun either one.

Best bet is probably to keep him under pressure and confuse him with shifting coverages.

I mean make a few wrinkles but for the most part do what you did against Wisconsin. The defense was dominant.

 

[Coug-Vandal]

I agree that refs tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the ball carrier on possible safety plays. At the game it was impossible to tell but as I said above when I watched the replay last night Ward's foot is clearly across the line on the playing field side and then he is hit and falls back into the end zone. It wasn't a bad call.

 

[Stretch 74]

I agree that refs tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the ball carrier on possible safety plays. At the game it was impossible to tell but as I said above when I watched the replay last night Ward's foot is clearly across the line on the playing field side and then he is hit and falls back into the end zone. It wasn't a bad call.

The ball carrier's foot is totally irrelevant on a play like that. The only thing that matters is the position of the BALL WRT the goal line. And I am pretty sure that if the nose of the ball is an inch in front of the goal line that it is not a safety. Just like on the other end of the field- if the ball just barely touches the goal line then it becomes a TD.

 

[95coug]

The ball carrier's foot is totally irrelevant on a play like that. The only thing that matters is the position of the BALL WRT the goal line. And I am pretty sure that if the nose of the ball is an inch in front of the goal line that it is not a safety. Just like on the other end of the field- if the ball just barely touches the goal line then it becomes a TD.

I agree it’s about ball position, but I think if the ball breaks the plane, it’s a safety. It has to be fully out of the end zone.

Which makes it completely subjective in this case.

 

[Coug90]

I agree it’s about ball position, but I think if the ball breaks the plane, it’s a safety. It has to be fully out of the end zone.

Which makes it completely subjective in this case.

I believe that’s correct. When contact is first initiated, literally the first finger that’s laid on him, the ball was fully beyond the GL IMO. If they had called it a safety it probably stands as you get those angled views which really don’t provide clarity. If I was a fan of Wisconsin I’d probably bitch about it tbh because it was such a huge call but I think the ref on the field made the correct call.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

I believe that’s correct. When contact is first initiated, literally the first finger that’s laid on him, the ball was fully beyond the GL IMO. If they had called it a safety it probably stands as you get those angled views which really don’t provide clarity. If I was a fan of Wisconsin I’d probably bitch about it tbh because it was such a huge call but I think the ref on the field made the correct call.

At the end of the day, if it was a Wisconsin QB being tackled, every Badger fan would suddenly believe in forward progress.