PonyFans.com

Phxfan,

Sorry dude. Time to face the music. To the tune of 52-34. And it wasn't that close. Texas dominated the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball and if not for a gimme touchdown by the refs, this thing could have gotten real ugly real early. Congrats to the Sun Devils on a great season, but they just didn't have the athletes to match up with the Horns.

Yet Rudy Carpenter is still not impressed.

That guy is a tool in the Graham Harrell mold. I like my quarterbacks confident but that guy takes it way too far.

I didnt realize that Colt McCoy had thrown for less touchdowns and thew same amount of ints as Willis.

StallionsModelT wrote:That guy is a tool in the Graham Harrell mold. I like my quarterbacks confident but that guy takes it way too far.

agreed. he's a total DB. sacked much?

I actually felt kind of bad for Mack's stepson. Guy looked like he wanted to hole up in a room with a noose, warm water and razor blades.

KnuckleStang wrote:I actually felt kind of bad for Mack's stepson. Guy looked like he wanted to hole up in a room with a noose, warm water and razor blades.

Did you see the interview after the game? The guy at least got a chance to somewhat vindicate himself.

That poor guy. Thankfully for Texas his brainfart had no bearing on the outcome of the game. Now its just a funny story. Had Texas lost the game he'd probably have to get a job somewhere else.

Erickson did a great job this year for turning things around.

Pony_Fan wrote:Erickson did a great job this year for turning things around.

Agreed. Unfortunately for him, he couldn't out-coach the stupidity of his qb.

StallionsModelT wrote:That poor guy. Thankfully for Texas his brainfart had no bearing on the outcome of the game. Now its just a funny story. Had Texas lost the game he'd probably have to get a job somewhere else.

Honestly, I don't see how they could have called it that he touched the ball. I was always under the opinion that when Instant Replay is involved that it had to be "indisuptible" evidence. Unless there was a replay that the officials saw that the viewers didn't, I didn't see anything to indicate he touched the ball. From the view ESPN was providing, it looked to me as though he got right out of the way and his thumb did not touch the ball. If it had, it would have probably bounced back or taken a different spin than it did. Of course, he had no business being that close to the action but I didn't think he touched the ball.

Peruna_Ate_My_Rolex wrote:

StallionsModelT wrote:That poor guy. Thankfully for Texas his brainfart had no bearing on the outcome of the game. Now its just a funny story. Had Texas lost the game he'd probably have to get a job somewhere else.

Honestly, I don't see how they could have called it that he touched the ball. I was always under the opinion that when Instant Replay is involved that it had to be "indisuptible" evidence. Unless there was a replay that the officials saw that the viewers didn't, I didn't see anything to indicate he touched the ball. From the view ESPN was providing, it looked to me as though he got right out of the way and his thumb did not touch the ball. If it had, it would have probably bounced back or taken a different spin than it did. Of course, he had no business being that close to the action but I didn't think he touched the ball.

Speaking of, can anyone confirm the ruling on the field that the penalty was to take place from the original line of scrimmage? Seems like the logical thing would have been to penalize Texas 15 yards from the touching and give them 1st and 10. Half the distance and 4th down, while it worked out for them, did not seem advantageous at the time.

An interference penalty nulifies the play, therefore, the penalty is marked from the original line of scrimage. Much like if defense is called off sides, the play is allowed to continue, but anything that happens during the play can be nulified and the penalty is marked from the original line of scrimage. This is a very fair way to assess an interference penalty because there is no way to determine what would have happened had the interference not occurred.

LonghornFan68 wrote:Speaking of, can anyone confirm the ruling on the field that the penalty was to take place from the original line of scrimmage? Seems like the logical thing would have been to penalize Texas 15 yards from the touching and give them 1st and 10. Half the distance and 4th down, while it worked out for them, did not seem advantageous at the time.

Looked to me that they had no idea what to call. I was thinking that because it was an unsportsmanlike conduct that it would have been an automatic 1st down but I guess it wasn't. Not that it mattered after that but it did seem strange.

What is meant by "donkeypunch"??