Started By
Message
re: Stats how Alabama is blessed with targeting calls; even in the games they don't play...
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:07 pm to magildachunks
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:07 pm to magildachunks
quote:
Email this shite.
ok
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:08 pm to Errerrerrwere
I'm not sure how may targeting calls there have been this year but last year there were 27 in the SEC.
So, is it unusual that 4 targeting calls would benefit Alabama more than it might benefit other teams? Let's work with some numbers...
To make the math a little simpler, let's say there are 28 targeting calls this year in the SEC. (This is a working assumption. I don't know the actual stats. But 27 was 2nd most out of any conference last year; so, 28 might be high and would make the math conservative here when we start dividing.) Let's assume further that NO MORE calls benefit Alabama for rest of the season (even though we've only played 2/3 of the regular season games so far). If we go with these assumptions, by the end of the season 4 out of 28 targeting calls, or 1 out of 7, would directly benefited Alabama in one game OR the next game. That would leave 24, of 6 out of 7, for the other 13 schools to divvy up. 24 divided by 13 would be a little shy of 2 per school, assuming that these were called somewhat evenly. That said, some schools might have 3 called on opponents while others have 1.
What is striking, though, is how (1) the players called in these Alabama cases are TOP players on their respective teams, and (2) the timing of these calls benefit Alabama (in first quarter of game against Alabama, so players miss 3/4 of the game, of the very end of the prior game, meaning players miss a guaranteed 1/2 of the game).
So, what are the chances that a team benefits from FOUR ejections AND that all four are TOP players AND that the timing is such that the game time missed is MAXIMIZED.
Also, remember that my math was conservative here. Alabama could have 1 more called in their favor (to make it 5) and there might be fewer than 27 this year (let's say 25)...then we could get numbers like 5/25 (1/5) or 4/24 (1/6) benefiting Alabama.
So...do we have smoke here?
Or did I just have a bunch of fun playing the crazy, obsessed LSU fan?
quote:
[In 2017] The SEC confirmed 27 instances of its players being flagged for targeting but declined to provide details of five calls not reported on play-by-play sheets or by the media. In all, the AP could not account for seven targeting penalties out of the 188 reported by the NCAA. source
So, is it unusual that 4 targeting calls would benefit Alabama more than it might benefit other teams? Let's work with some numbers...
To make the math a little simpler, let's say there are 28 targeting calls this year in the SEC. (This is a working assumption. I don't know the actual stats. But 27 was 2nd most out of any conference last year; so, 28 might be high and would make the math conservative here when we start dividing.) Let's assume further that NO MORE calls benefit Alabama for rest of the season (even though we've only played 2/3 of the regular season games so far). If we go with these assumptions, by the end of the season 4 out of 28 targeting calls, or 1 out of 7, would directly benefited Alabama in one game OR the next game. That would leave 24, of 6 out of 7, for the other 13 schools to divvy up. 24 divided by 13 would be a little shy of 2 per school, assuming that these were called somewhat evenly. That said, some schools might have 3 called on opponents while others have 1.
What is striking, though, is how (1) the players called in these Alabama cases are TOP players on their respective teams, and (2) the timing of these calls benefit Alabama (in first quarter of game against Alabama, so players miss 3/4 of the game, of the very end of the prior game, meaning players miss a guaranteed 1/2 of the game).
So, what are the chances that a team benefits from FOUR ejections AND that all four are TOP players AND that the timing is such that the game time missed is MAXIMIZED.
Also, remember that my math was conservative here. Alabama could have 1 more called in their favor (to make it 5) and there might be fewer than 27 this year (let's say 25)...then we could get numbers like 5/25 (1/5) or 4/24 (1/6) benefiting Alabama.
So...do we have smoke here?
Or did I just have a bunch of fun playing the crazy, obsessed LSU fan?
This post was edited on 10/23/18 at 11:08 pm
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:08 pm to Errerrerrwere
I know targeting when in see it. They were all targeting.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:09 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Entire post invalidated
:youkeepsayingthat:
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:11 pm to johnfredlsu
quote:
Or did I just have a bunch of fun playing the crazy, obsessed LSU fan here?
No. That is the Bama shtick. to make you think you are crazy. Some of the newer schools will eventually begin to see it as well.
What you see and common sense says it all, bro!

Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:14 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Alabama vs A&M:
Senior DB Donovan Wilson.
7 career INTs. 2nd on team in tackles. 19 career tackles for loss.
Ejected for Targeting with 4:00 left in First quarter.
Was that DB worth 22 points for A&M? B/c that's what they needed just to tie the game.
quote:
Alabama vs Missouri:
SR MLB Terez Hall.
Team Captain. Butkus and Nagurski nominee.
Ejected for Targeting with 9:00 left in Second quarter
That kid worth 29 points for Mizzou?
quote:.
Alabama vs Tennessee:
Back Up to Previous Game ... Tennessee vs Auburn:
JR MLB Daniel Bituli.
UT’s leading tackler.
That MLB worth 37 points for UT?
Get real man.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:15 pm to Errerrerrwere
By newer schools do you mean A&M
, Mizzou, Arkansas, and USC?

Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:15 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:Unless there's 2 David Smiths that referee in the SEC, he can't referee Alabama games since he went to Alabama.
How so?
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:15 pm to bamasgot13
quote:
Was that DB worth 22 points for A&M? B/c that's what they needed just to tie the game.
quote:
That kid worth 29 points for Mizzou?
quote:
That MLB worth 37 points for UT?
We'll never know, will we?
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:18 pm to bamasgot13
quote:
Was that DB worth 22 points for A&M? B/c that's what they needed just to tie the game.
unfortunately the conference will never know
quote:
That kid worth 29 points for Mizzou?
unfortunately the conference will never know
quote:
That MLB worth 37 points for UT?
unfortunately the conference will never know
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:19 pm to Errerrerrwere
Um, your post is missing a couple of very key pieces of information. To wit:
1) How do these numbers for Bama compare to other schools across the conference? I remember when “Schools playing Bama get called for holding all the time and Bama never does!” was the battle cry around here, until someone ran the actual numbers and proved that the opposite was actually true. So forgive me if I don’t just blindly accept that these numbers for Bama are out of whack.
2) Perhaps even more germane to the question at hand, did the players in question actually commit a legitimate targeting foul during the plays for which they were penalized? Because if they did, then, it doesn’t matter if 100 players were disqualified for a half against Bama this year. The rules are the rules.
Without those two pieces of information, your post is just useless whining, as is every single Errerrerrwere post in the history of this board.
Edited to correct grammatical error.
1) How do these numbers for Bama compare to other schools across the conference? I remember when “Schools playing Bama get called for holding all the time and Bama never does!” was the battle cry around here, until someone ran the actual numbers and proved that the opposite was actually true. So forgive me if I don’t just blindly accept that these numbers for Bama are out of whack.
2) Perhaps even more germane to the question at hand, did the players in question actually commit a legitimate targeting foul during the plays for which they were penalized? Because if they did, then, it doesn’t matter if 100 players were disqualified for a half against Bama this year. The rules are the rules.
Without those two pieces of information, your post is just useless whining, as is every single Errerrerrwere post in the history of this board.
Edited to correct grammatical error.
This post was edited on 10/23/18 at 10:22 pm
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:20 pm to cyde
quote:
If so, put up some billboards! That'll show em.

Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:20 pm to Errerrerrwere
None of the Bama trash want to even discuss the reality of the OP!
Muh conspiracy theories
Muh that player wasn't good enough to begin with
Muh you are wrong because I say you are wrong
Let's resort back to the OP


Muh conspiracy theories
Muh that player wasn't good enough to begin with
Muh you are wrong because I say you are wrong
Let's resort back to the OP



Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:20 pm to Errerrerrwere
Guys, calm down. OP is just trying to say that since Alabama is fricking good, the refs should just ignore people targeting if they're playing Bama or playing in a game before Bama.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:24 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
1) How do these numbers for Bama compare to other schools across the conference?
OP doesn't address that, let's try to stay on topic.
quote:
I remember when “Schools playing Bama get called for holding all the time and Bama never does!” was the battle cry around here, until someone ran the actual numbers and proved that the opposite was actually true. So forgive me if I don’t just blindly accept that these numbers for Bama are out of whack.
Strawman bullshite...STAY ON TOPIC BAMA FANS!
quote:
2) Perhaps even more germane to the question at hand, did the players in question actually commit a legitimate targeting foul during the plays for which they were penalized?
Has anyone benefited more from targeting calls then Bama and the instances in the OP this year?
quote:
Because if they did, then, it doesn’t matter if 100 players were disqualified for a half against Bama this year. The rules are the rules
STRAWMAN...TRY TO STAY ON TOPIC, GUMP!
quote:
Without those two pieces of information, your post is just useless whining, as is every single Errerrerrwere post in the history of this board.



CHicken shite!
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:25 pm to MykTide
quote:
Guys, calm down. OP is just trying to say that since Alabama is fricking good, the refs should just ignore people targeting if they're playing Bama or playing in a game before Bama.
18 more posts and you got yourself a whole dollar, Myk!

Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:25 pm to Errerrerrwere
Well show me where they weren’t targeting and Bama got the benefit of the doubt.
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:26 pm to labamafan
quote:
Well show me where they weren’t targeting and Bama got the benefit of the doubt.
Show me how Bama hasn't benefited from the targeting rule during SEC play.

The whole prove a negative thingy, huh?
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:27 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
he can't referee Alabama games since he went to Alabama.

BAMA REF HELPING BAMA IN OTHER GAMES!!
Posted on 10/23/18 at 10:31 pm to Errerrerrwere
Those boys ought be more careful to obey such an important rule -- most of all for player safety, but also to ensure they don't hurt their own team by getting ejected and suspended for part of their next game -- especially if their next game is big one.
This post was edited on 10/23/18 at 10:33 pm
Popular
Back to top
