Page 8 of 30
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:31 pm
by indianmustang
we need some points here
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:31 pm
by Mustangs35SMU
That should've been blocked.
7-3 UCF, 1:18.
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:31 pm
by Junior
nice 3 by hover
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:32 pm
by indianmustang
3 -7 smu
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:32 pm
by Junior
15?
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:32 pm
by Junior
damn. coulda been roughing.
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:32 pm
by Mustangs35SMU
lol 2 penalties on UCF and we decline both.
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:33 pm
by CalallenStang
Should have been roughing the kicker, not running into. They planted him.
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:33 pm
by JasonB
For some reason they called running into instead of roughing the kicker. Only a 5 yard penalty, wouldn't have been a first.
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:34 pm
by redpony
i think our red zone is our bermuda triangle- we seem to always get lost in it
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:34 pm
by Junior
CalallenStang wrote:Should have been roughing the kicker, not running into. They planted him.
that's what i saw too
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:34 pm
by lwjr
CalallenStang wrote:Should have been roughing the kicker, not running into. They planted him.
CUSA referees
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:34 pm
by Junior
need the D to show us something this time
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:34 pm
by Treadway21
What a loser JJ. Thought he was a supposed to be aggressive.
Re: Official SMU/UCF Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:35 pm
by Mustangs35SMU
CalallenStang wrote:Should have been roughing the kicker, not running into. They planted him.
Agreed.