Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:32 pm to nc14
the sec was tgrrible last year, espcially at QB position. your bias is obvious.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:28 pm to Tillman
quote:
i'm deadly serious. it seems like a self pass in basketball to me. i think the other team should have to touch it first, or it hit the ground, before kcking team can touch it.
obviously you have to think this is great, b/c your national title hinged on the play.
what i don't like is a recieving team is being forced to field a short kickoff. i think a team who kicks it short deservs to be punished by giving good field position, not rewarded with a recovery. The incentive on any kick or punt should be to kick it as far as possible and/or pin the reciefing team near their own goal line.
Serious question -- are you a football fan or a Clemson fan? You seem to lack even the most basic knowledge of the rules of a kick-off or why certain approaches are used. The team that kicks it short does give good field position to the receiving team if they fail to recover. The fact that happens approximately 80% of the time is the reason onside kicks are rare. Also, the kicking team can't touch the ball before it goes 10 yards, and by then, they have to fight through the receiving team and hope for a lucky bounce or a bad angle. The end result is usually the receiving team having their distance to the goal line significantly reduced, often by 50% or more.
Also, they scored 38 points that had no relation whatsoever to the onside kick, to say nothing of the fact that the onside kick didn't actually end in a score. It ended in a normal Bama offensive possession that Clemson couldn't stop. The game hardly hinged merely on that one play. You think those other 38 points were magic or something? Hell, Clemson tried to kick a fricking onside kick themselves to get a chance to score again before the game ended. Were they trying to pass to themselves? Shouldn't you be weeping over the fact that your own team betrayed every stupid thing you believe in?
Don't bother answering. We already know that your uncontrollable melt stems entirely from the fact your team lost. Or, to put it in terms that might be too technical for you, they got beaten. They couldn't stop Bama from scoring 45 points, and couldn't muster enough points to exceed that. Had the positions been reversed, you'd be crowing for joy. And few, if any, Bama fans would be bitching that onside kicks should not be allowed because real football fans actually understand the vagaries of the game.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:57 pm to randomways
Ok, well I can tell you there are a lot of people who think the onside kick is dumb. It is a cheap way to get ball back and getting it back 20 percent of the time makes it more disturbing to me. You would hope it was like 5 percent at best. lol the fact it is 20 percent is proof to me that the kicking team is too close to the receiving team.
i don't need your validation for an opinion.
you are kidding yourself if Bama fans wouldn't say we got lucky and say they would have won if not for the kick recovery. lol
I don't see why you and others are so defensive, special teams is part of football and all I am saying is Bama won b/c their special teams was much better than Clemson's. There is no need to apologize for it. I would prefer teams to have to kick the ball off furthur than 10 yards and not be able to catch the ball that they kicked. I find that to be bizarre that a 'kicking' team is catching the ball that they kicked to the 'recieving team'. lol
i think my self pass basketall analogy is pretty good.
i don't need your validation for an opinion.
you are kidding yourself if Bama fans wouldn't say we got lucky and say they would have won if not for the kick recovery. lol
I don't see why you and others are so defensive, special teams is part of football and all I am saying is Bama won b/c their special teams was much better than Clemson's. There is no need to apologize for it. I would prefer teams to have to kick the ball off furthur than 10 yards and not be able to catch the ball that they kicked. I find that to be bizarre that a 'kicking' team is catching the ball that they kicked to the 'recieving team'. lol
i think my self pass basketall analogy is pretty good.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 10:09 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:14 pm to Othello
Freeze knows how to win 1 big game a year too
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:49 pm to Tillman
quote:
Ok, well I can tell you there are a lot of people who think the onside kick is dumb. It is a cheap way to get ball back and getting it back 20 percent of the time makes it more disturbing to me. You would hope it was like 5 percent at best. lol the fact it is 20 percent is proof to me that the kicking team is too close to the receiving team.
i don't need your validation for an opinion.
you are kidding yourself if Bama fans wouldn't say we got lucky and say they would have won if not for the kick recovery. lol
I don't see why you and others are so defensive, special teams is part of football and all I am saying is Bama won b/c their special teams was much better than Clemson's. There is no need to apologize for it. I would prefer teams to have to kick the ball off furthur than 10 yards and not be able to catch the ball that they kicked. I find that to be bizarre that a 'kicking' team is catching the ball that they kicked to the 'recieving team'. lol
i think my self pass basketall analogy is pretty good.
Yes, because a play with a 20% chance of success is considered cheap. One...in...five. If your QB had a 20% completion rate, he'd be kicked off the team.
There are also a lot of people who think crystals can heal diseases. Argumentum ad populum is a really stupid way to approach the discussion. And until you started melting, I had literally never heard a fanbase for a change the basic rules of football because they didn't like the fact that their team fricked up. But, then, most football fans I know don't have the mental maturity of a six year old. Your team and coach fricked up. Just be an adult and admit Clemson lost the game fair-and-squar.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 11:16 pm to Quicksilver
quote:
I think the two are very comparable, except Hugh's rise has been faster. Dabo was recruiting lights out when he took over but couldn't do better than 8-5 in a really bad ACC for several years. Then he hired Chad Morris.
The thing I love about tRant is that people consistently show their stupidity by posting factual errors that could have been avoided with one Google search.
Excluding the season where he took over mid year, Dabo has won fewer than 9 games exactly ONCE in his entire career.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 11:17 pm
Page 8 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News