Fiesta Bowl: #3 Clemson 29, #2 Ohio State 23 (Postgame)

[FearlessF]

A receiver catches a ball, sticks one foot down and goes out of bounds. Same goes for the end zone.

Catch.

Not incomplete.

Catch.

but, if the reciever goes to the ground out of bounds or the defender prys the ball loose after going out of bounds, he did not complete the process of the catch

[FearlessF]

forward progress is determined when the whistle blows

[utee94]

forward progress is determined when the whistle blows

It actually isn't.  Plenty of times a pile pushes back a ballcarrier, the whistle blows sometime after that, and the ball is awarded at the furthest forward point.  Hence the name "forward progress."

It's quite common to see a pile push back a ballcarrier, strip the ball, return the "fumble" for a TD, with only late whistles to stop the play.  And yet still, the ballcarrier is considered "stopped" and the ball goes back to the furthest forward point.

[847badgerfan]

Ahhh, now I see. I thought you were talking about the tweet posted. It makes slightly more sense now, but still not a ton of sense.

Those in-game experts tend to be wrong often. They're kind of a running joke. To read into it that it is because ESPN likes the SEC, and in this case really just hating the Big Ten because Delaney dared sign with Fox, this is a stretch of logic that is a tad much.

If you start with the presupposition that the TV network hates your team and conference, you will find lots of "coincidences." If there was a an SEC-Big Ten game and the same rules guy sided with the Big Ten team, you wouldn't say, that's a good job by they guy who drew a Big 10 paycheck for two decades. But the SEC team's fans would point it out as a clear bias against them. Because it's feelings.

98 percent of this angst about the great conspiracy isn't real.

If I thought it was a good job, sure I would say so - if need be. In this case, so many are on the opposite of what the SEC booth fairy did, it's not even funny. I have no dog in this fight, other than I always hope there are no SEC officials in games the Badgers play in.

I also don't think this play changed the game nearly as much as the targeting reversal (and missed hands-to-the-face on the same play) did. Lots of reversals in this game, which is interesting.

Probably need to move to a two-stage targeting rule.

Stage 1, no launch, wrapped up, etc., subject to review of the tackled players' movements prior to the hit. 15 yards, first down, no ejection.

Stage 2, clear launch, force with head, etc. 15 yards, first down, ejection and suspension for at least one game, or for many games as the victim misses (eye for an eye - not gonna happen, but hey!).

[FearlessF]

It actually isn't.  Plenty of times a pile pushes back a ballcarrier, the whistle blows sometime after that, and the ball is awarded at the furthest forward point.  Hence the name "forward progress."

It's quite common to see a pile push back a ballcarrier, strip the ball, return the "fumble" for a TD, with only late whistles to stop the play.  And yet still, the ballcarrier is considered "stopped" and the ball goes back to the furthest forward point.

I agree and think this is lazy at best from the officials.

[medinabuckeye1]

Having more time to calmly review it, it is interesting how the momentum shifted back and forth.  As I see it there were three distinct portions of the game.  

Portion I, tOSU dominating, tOSU's drives:

• 10 plays, 71 yards, FG
• 1 play, 68 yards, TD
• 6 plays, 6 yards, punt
• 7 plays, 75 yards, FG
• 14 plays, 70 yards, FG
• TOTAL:  38 plays, 290 yards (7.6 YPP), 1 TD, 3 FG's, 1 Punt

Clemson's drives:

• 9 plays, 43 yards, missed FG
• 6 plays, 33 yards, Punt
• 3 plays, 1 yard, Punt
• 3 plays, 9 yards, Punt
• TOTAL:  21 plays, 86 yards (4.1 YPP), 1 missed FG, 3 punts

Portion II, Clemson dominating, Clemson's drives:

• 10 plays, 75 yards, TD
• 5 plays, 83 yards, TD
• 1 play, end of half (I didn't count this in the total)
• 3 plays, 19 yards, Punt
• 7 plays, 99 yards, TD
• TOTAL:  26 plays, 276 yards (10.6 YPP), 3 TD's, 1 punt

Ohio State's drives:

• 3 plays, 7 yards, punt
• 3 plays, 1 yard, punt
• 7 plays, 52 yards, punt
• 3 plays, -5 yards, punt
• TOTAL:  16 plays, 55 yards (3.4 YPP)

Portion III, competitive, tOSU's drives:

• 3 plays, 2 yards, INT
• 13 plays, 84 yards, TD
• 10 plays, 50 yards, punt
• 8 plays, 52 yards, INT
• TOTAL:  34 plays, 188 yards (5.5 YPP), 1 TD, 1 punt, 2 INT's

Clemson's drives:

• 3 plays, -9 yards, punt
• 4 plays, 8 yards, punt
• 4 plays, 21 yards, punt
• 4 plays, 94 yards, TD
• TOTAL:  15 plays, 114 yards (7.6 YPP), 1 TD, 3 punts

What this keeps bringing me back to is tOSU's failures in the RZ.  Blame tOSU for not converting or credit Clemson for minimizing the damage when they were getting shredded.  Either way, to me it comes back to that.  When Ohio State was dominating they got 1 TD and 3 FG's.  When Clemson was dominating they got 3 TD's.  21>16.  

[medinabuckeye1]

Most of you guys probably already know this, but FP is actually the older rule.  Being down when a knee (or anything else other than a foot or hand) touches the turf is newer.  Originally the play continued until the defense stopped FP.  

[Kris60]

I have to ask a couple of questions.

How does anyone determine what is just human error and what is purposely done?  I mean, how can you tell that Olave didn’t run the wrong route on purpose?

Also, have you ever seen a bad call in a key moment of a big game and not thought it was done in purpose?

[medinabuckeye1]

Even if only one of tOSU's FG's had been a TD that still would have made it a very different game.  Instead of 16-0 it would have been 20-0.  When Clemson scored three TD's instead of 21-16 it would have been a one point game.  When Ohio State scored again that would have made it 26-21 instead of 22-21.  Would Day have gone for 2 up 5*?  It would have been either 26-21 (missed 2pt conversion), 27-21 (made PAT) or 28-21 (made 2pt conversion).  Then when Clemson scored they would have either:

• Needed a PAT to tie it up at 28, or
• Needed a PAT to take a 1 point lead 28-27, or
• Gone for 2 to make it a 3 point game 29-26.  

The INT that ended the game happened on 2nd and 7 at the Clemson 23.  The Buckeyes needed a TD because they were down by 6.  If they had been tied, or down by 1 they would have been playing for a FG to win.  Even if they had been down by 3 they would have had it in mind to kick a FG for OT.  From right there it would have been a 40 yard FG.  

If two of tOSU's FG's had been TD's then instead of 16-0 it would have been 24-0.  When Clemson scored three TD's they'd still have been down by a FG.  Then, instead of tOSU's late TD giving tOSU a lead it would have expanded tOSU's lead to 31-21.  Clemson's late TD would have just made it look close as a 31-28 final.  


If all three of tOSU's FG's had been TD's then the game never would have been within less than 7.  Clemson's three TD's would only have gotten them within a TD and tOSU's late TD would have pushed it back to a 14 point game.  Clemson's late TD would have done nothing but make the final close, 35-28.  

*I think he might have.  To me, the math is somewhat different up 5 rather than up 1.  Leading 22-21 Day obviously chose to kick the PAT rather than try to pull ahead by a FG.  Part of that, I think, is that you don't know what will happen from there.  Maybe you score a FG next.  Maybe you give up a Safety.  IMHO, the difference between a 5 point lead and a 6 point lead is less significant than the difference between a 1 point lead and a 2 point lead.  

[847badgerfan]

I have to ask a couple of questions.

How does anyone determine what is just human error and what is purposely done?  I mean, how can you tell that Olave didn’t run the wrong route on purpose?

Also, have you ever seen a bad call in a key moment of a big game and not thought it was done in purpose?

Yes, plenty of times. Bad calls happen on the field all the time. Humans make errors. Shit happens, and all that.

It gets suspicious when the correct call is made on the field, and gets reversed. 

[medinabuckeye1]

I have to ask a couple of questions.

How does anyone determine what is just human error and what is purposely done?  I mean, how can you tell that Olave didn’t run the wrong route on purpose?

Also, have you ever seen a bad call in a key moment of a big game and not thought it was done in purpose?

I don't think you are asking me, but I always try to follow Hanlon's Razor which states:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.  

Stupidity and incompetence are vastly more common than corruption and conspiracy.  Sure, there is a minor possibility that Olave is on the take and ran the wrong route on purpose but the chances of that being true are infinitesimally small.  Similarly, there is a chance that the appropriate official saw the hands to Chase Young's face and didn't call it because it would have offset the PF called against tOSU but the chances are infinitesimally small.  

Miami fans (all three of them) are still convinced that the officials were on the take and the PI call that gave tOSU another shot in the 2002 title game was a fix.  If the game had gone the other way tOSU fans (not all but a lot) would still be convinced that the officials were on the take and the missed Gamble reception for a 3rd down conversion on tOSU's last possession in regulation* was due to a fix.  

I just don't agree.  The game happens fast, officials miss stuff, it happens.  

*Note on the Gamble reception that I am referring to.  It was tOSU's last possession in regulation.  The Buckeyes were clinging to a 17-14 lead with less than three minutes to go.  On 3rd and 6 from the tOSU 32 Krenzel threw the ball to Gamble at the sideline.  The officials called it incomplete.  On review there were actually three missed calls on that play all of which went against tOSU:

• The tOSU receiver (Gamble) ran about six yards then cut inside.  When he cut inside the Miami DB grabbed his shirt.  It was enough to be clearly visible on replay that he was tugged.  This is holding, 10 yard penalty, first down, game over.  
• Gamble then reversed direction and headed for the sideline.  By this time the ball was already in the air.  He was grabbed again and, once again, it was clearly visible on replay that he was tugged.  This is PI, spot foul, first down, game over.  
• Gamble then made the catch and landed on the field in bounds.  This is a catch, first down, game over.  

[847badgerfan]

Even if only one of tOSU's FG's had been a TD that still would have made it a very different game.  Instead of 16-0 it would have been 20-0.  When Clemson scored three TD's instead of 21-16 it would have been a one point game.  When Ohio State scored again that would have made it 26-21 instead of 22-21.  Would Day have gone for 2 up 5*?  It would have been either 26-21 (missed 2pt conversion), 27-21 (made PAT) or 28-21 (made 2pt conversion).  Then when Clemson scored they would have either:

• Needed a PAT to tie it up at 28, or
• Needed a PAT to take a 1 point lead 28-27, or
• Gone for 2 to make it a 3 point game 29-26. 

The INT that ended the game happened on 2nd and 7 at the Clemson 23.  The Buckeyes needed a TD because they were down by 6.  If they had been tied, or down by 1 they would have been playing for a FG to win.  Even if they had been down by 3 they would have had it in mind to kick a FG for OT.  From right there it would have been a 40 yard FG. 

If two of tOSU's FG's had been TD's then instead of 16-0 it would have been 24-0.  When Clemson scored three TD's they'd still have been down by a FG.  Then, instead of tOSU's late TD giving tOSU a lead it would have expanded tOSU's lead to 31-21.  Clemson's late TD would have just made it look close as a 31-28 final. 


If all three of tOSU's FG's had been TD's then the game never would have been within less than 7.  Clemson's three TD's would only have gotten them within a TD and tOSU's late TD would have pushed it back to a 14 point game.  Clemson's late TD would have done nothing but make the final close, 35-28. 

*I think he might have.  To me, the math is somewhat different up 5 rather than up 1.  Leading 22-21 Day obviously chose to kick the PAT rather than try to pull ahead by a FG.  Part of that, I think, is that you don't know what will happen from there.  Maybe you score a FG next.  Maybe you give up a Safety.  IMHO, the difference between a 5 point lead and a 6 point lead is less significant than the difference between a 1 point lead and a 2 point lead. 

No doubt on any of this. If OSU is up 28-0, or even 24-0, there is no chance for the replay booth to affect the game. It's over at that point.

[FearlessF]

24-0 at the half and I feel the game is over

[medinabuckeye1]

Somewhat related topic:

What does everyone here think of Day's decision NOT to go for two after tOSU's last TD?  To review, the TD gave tOSU a 22-21 lead with 11:46 to go in the game.  Ohio State kicked the PAT to take a two point lead, 23-21.  

As it turned out, it didn't matter.  Since Clemson scored a TD rather than a FG they went up by 4 (27-23).  They then opted to go for two to make it a 6 point game.  Swinney's decision to go for two was both obvious and irrelevant.  By that time there was only 1:49 to go in the game so Ohio State was obviously either going to score a TD or not.  Clemson going for two simply made it such that IF tOSU had scored a TD, the PAT would have been necessary.  Even if tOSU had gone for, and gotten a 2pt conversion, Clemson's TD would have put them up by three, 27-24 and they would have kicked the PAT to take a four point lead.  Either way, tOSU needs a TD.  

What about earlier in the game though?  I think coaches sometimes make a mistake by "chasing" it too early.  I thought that Harbaugh made that mistake against tOSU back in 2018.  Michigan scored in the 2nd quarter to close to being down by 2, 21-19.  Harbaugh chose to go for 2 to try to tie it up.  IMHO, that was a bad decision because with that much football to be played you should just take the point and figure out later whether or not you need a 2pt conversion.  By the time Michigan scored again they were down 41-25 early in the 4th quarter and Harbuagh went for 2 again to try to get it within 14.  Michigan didn't make that one either but note that if they had just kicked the PAT the first time then they would have only needed a PAT the second time to get within 14 at 41-27.  Instead they missed both 2pt conversions and were still down by 16 (41-25).  

I have always thought that the appropriate time to switch from just kicking the PAT to making the decision based on the score is the beginning of the fourth quarter.  However, this should realistically vary based on how high scoring of a game it is.  Ie, in a defensive low-scoring game maybe that switch should occur at halftime or during the third quarter while in a high-scoring shootout it should probably be put off until sometime later in the 4th quarter.