Would have Oregon and ASU been ranked as high if the Pac12…
- Thread starter ttowncoug
- Start date
That was one of the worst tail between the legs referee moments I’ve ever seen. FFS have a pair of balls and make the correct call, that’s your job. There’s rarely a targeting more clear than that, they review it, and still can’t get it right.
That said ASU had the game won with 4 and 13 and decided to telegraph a zero blitz, dumb AF. They deserved to lose. I do love Skattebo though.
If the Pac-12 had stayed together, Oregon would have still been a Top 5 team. ASU would not have made the playoff because they wouldn't have won the Pac-12 and frankly, the Big 12 wasn't a great conference this year. The Sun Devils would have probably finished 9-3 with losses to USC, CU and Oregon if they had played a Pac-12 schedule. Good enough to be in the Top 20 but nowhere near to sniffing the playoff.
Didn’t hit with the crown of the helmet, a mandatory requirement for targeting.
Bad look? Yes.
Targeting? NO which is why it wasn’t called after video review.
Absolutely was which is why Terry McCauley and Gene Steratore both said without a doubt targeting. These are guys who are not only foremost experts on the rules and how they should be applied but also are advocates of the referees and know what a difficult job it is so will always give them the benefit of the doubt on anything that’s gray area. There was zero gray area here.
I think what it came down to was the fact it wasn't called on the field. The replay official didn't think it was clear cut enough to "overturn" the field officials.
On replay, I think it easily could have gone either way. Initial contact was with the head and to the head...although it was more forehead than crown. There wasn't really a launch, but it was a defenseless receiver, and he slightly lowered his head. If it had been called, there still would have been an argument over it...especially if it had led to an ASU win.
Reality is that if the UT defender keeps his head up and leads with his shoulder, it's irrelevant, and the ASU receiver is still on the ground.
Maybe incorporating sensors in the helmet would be helpful to take away the subjective part of the targeting call.
ASU was extremely "meh" in the first half of the season. They lost to Texas Tech and a bad Cincinnati team. They struggled against other mediocre teams on their schedule at that time. They didn't look like a "good" team until they knocked off KSU in game 10. From that point, they were suddenly a pretty good team and dangerous to everyone. USC had the talent to beat ASU if they played well. So, a lot of ASU's results in the Pac-12 would depend on how their schedule lined up. If they played more of the good teams early....it wouldn't surprise me if they would have struggled to get it together.
Still, kudos to ASU for getting a lot better late in the season....something we haven't seen in a while.
