EDSBS PERSON OF THE YEAR: BRET BIELEMA

Yes, it’s brilliant, only it’s the type of thing that’ll get a kick returner paralyzed.

That’s Bob Griese isn’t it? Danielson is w/ Verne…

Bielema angered the football gods with this goofy stunt. Unfortunately, they took out their revenge on Paterno. Maybe JoePa should have gone easy on the brains Saturday morning.

I’d be a lot happier with that:

1) If it had been done in a game where the outcome was a lot less certain. Granted, he did do it before the half.

2) If it wasn’t dangerous, which this is.

Bielema’s tactic wouldn’t’ve worked if Penn State could get a decent kickoff return. They would’ve just declined the penalty. Instead, he had to make sure that the kickoff return team wasn’t just slightly offsides. They were very offsides, and in extremely good position to make a play downfield. Which they did. In the audio, you can actually hear one of the announcers say “What a collision!” Oh, and then the players jump up like they’ve made a great play. Good call, you’re celebrating that you made a play on an obviously illegal play. Kindof like a defensive end celebrating if he just runs over and sacks a quarterback before a play even starts.

and

3) If there wasn’t a rule already in the books to deal with that situation, which should’ve been called. They won’t change the rule because of this. They’ll tell the officials that this tactic should be considered an obviously unfair tactic, and penalized appropriately (as it says in the rulebook), which means time goes back on the clock, plus an unsportsmanlike penalty.

When I first saw it, I thought “well, that’ll get the rule changed, but the guy’s a jerk. Would’ve been nicer if he had done it in a less meaningful game.” After I thought about it a bit more, this is just a case of a coach patting himself on the back for a tactic that was 1) stupid (they could’ve called an unsportsmanlike penalty, and thus he would’ve just simply hurt his team), 2) dangerous, and 3) in the end, won’t change anything.

couldn’t penn state have added 5 yards to the end of the return instead of making wisconsin rekick? Or is that just an NFL rule?

It will change things—it will force an institutional response to the rule because someone’s working a flagrantly stupid loophole in the rule. Officials—and through them the NCAA—will have to come up with some kind of tweak to the rule, which will illustrate the stupidity of the rule once again.

As for danger: kickoffs are not anymore dangerous than any other phase of the game. In fact, they may be safer than the passing game: quarterbacks and dbs lead the way in concussions suffered, though the kick return game does show a signifcantly higher percentage of severe concussions.

That’s a good coaching move, take every edge you can get. Good contrast to JoePa, if they being unable to defend himself wasnt a clue to get off the sidelines, the obviousness of being totally out coached should do it.

BUT, we should have expected this out of the SEC though, b/c if you ain’t cheat’n, you ain’t try’n.

oh, one more thing,

Brady for Heisman!

A meaningful game is even more reason to pull this trick out of your bag. Fuck being a “jerk” or not, and fuck this rule.

Paul McGuire sucks. That’s all.

man. that really is brilliant. you get a distinct advantage, all within the rules of the game. i’m not saying he was following the rules, per se, just breaking them is a perfectly allowed way. they probably should make it less obviously off-sides, but still, i salute them!

Absolute genius. My vote for coachh of the year.

I suppose they could have called unsportmanlike conduct, but they did not. Even if they had, the penalty would have taken them to the 20, and then the 10. He still would have accomplished what he wanted.

Either way, he pointed out the silliness of the rule change.

lordy, lordy

only JoPa could tell the Mighty Mighty Media to take a hike and get away with it

I can see the offensive coordinators scheming right now… “…. score a field goal in the first qtr, kick the ball 200 times at about 15 sec per kick, voila!! victory!!”

Pat, what happens if you just make it less obvious? Bielema was making a point here, but you could just as easily make it much closer, thus taking away any ability for the refs to say that it was intentional, time goes back on the clock, etc. I want my 6% back, and if this gets it back, so be it.

"…or faking your own death for ten hours in order to disappear to the bar for a tripleheader. "

Hey! Quit giving away secrets, that’s a clear violation of The Code™.

The first time they kicked offsides, I figured it was just one of those horrific football plays… like when the right tackle completely forgets the snap count and is 5 yards down the field and wailing on a linebacker before anyone notices. The second time, and as it got explained, it made perfect sense?

Kind of a bush league move? Maybe. But smart, especially with how stagnant Wisconsin was on the field that day. and brought to light how ridiculous some of the new timing rules are. The only better example was the end of the Illinois-Ohio State game, where Illinois had to sprint out to have a haphazrd formation for a last-second win attempt. Yeah, that’s what the fans want to see… who the hell wants to watch a succesful Hail Mary pass or something?

Besides, even if Bielema was out of line, he wasn’t as out of line as Wisconsin’s soft ranking. I’m not saying they should be #5 in the nation… but #16 seems to still carry too much of the pre-season ranking in it.

real men of genius…..

Don’t worry Senor Pez, Wisconsin will win out, go to the Capital One Bowl and hammer another SEC team. Hopefully, they’ll put up over 500 yards in offense like they did on Auburn’s vaunted “defense” last year.

#14:

If that happens, then Penn State just declines the penalty, wanting to keep the time on the clock. It only works if the kickoff return Penn State gets sucks.

They had to make it that obvious, because they had to put Penn State in a situation where it was a lose/lose proposition for them.

Orson:

Officials–and through them the NCAA–will have to come up with some kind of tweak to the rule, which will illustrate the stupidity of the rule once again.

No. There’s no tweak needed. The rule’s already on the books. It’s Rule 3-4, under Unfair Game Clock Tactics. The only change is that the head of officiating will remind the officials that “being flagrantly offsides on a kickoff is considered an unfair tactic under Rule 9-2, and should be penalized appropriately, and as under Rule 3-4, unfair tactics used to consume game clock should be negated by the officials.”

As for danger: kickoffs are not anymore dangerous than any other phase of the game.

Normal kickoffs aren’t. That’s like saying “Blitzes aren’t any more dangerous than any other phase of the game, therefore, it’s not dangerous for a defensive end to just run right at a quarterback and sack them before the play starts.” This wasn’t a normal kickoff. And I dare anyone to look at that play and think it’s not more dangerous than a normal kickoff.

Even if they had, the penalty would have taken them to the 20, and then the 10. He still would have accomplished what he wanted.

They could have, and should have, put time back on the clock. The announcers (was it Maguire?) confirmed this in the second half after talking to the head of officiating. The officials just made a mistake in not calling it. They will in the future, and there’s no rule change that needs to be made. It’s already in the books.

Paterno understood the implications immediately, and he was pissed. For that alone, it was worth the amusement it gave me.

but #16 seems to still carry too much of the pre-season ranking in it.

Umm what pre season ranking? We were ranked at best 40th, we didnt even enter the polls until week 6. Nice try.

I’m still pissed that the Penn State guy dropped the ball on the play that broke Zombie Joe in half, and the ref’s gave him a first down anyway.

Oh, and those announcers were the worst announcing crew known to man. They completely skipped 2 penalties (never told you what they were, never told you who they were against, magically, teams just started at different yard lines), constantly screwed up rules (they got the college/NFL tuck rules completely backwards), and forgot the way the game actually went (the announcer first said “the only thing the officials could’ve done is if it had happened multiple times…” when, in fact, it had).

It’s like they took a page out of ESPN’s Monday Night Football presentation.

I’m still pissed that the Penn State guy dropped the ball on the play that broke Zombie Joe in half, and the ref’s gave him a first down anyway.

Yeah, what was up with that? I remember seeing that play on replay and thinking “wait, how did they call that a first down?” And why wasn’t that even mentioned by the announcers?

And why wasn’t that even mentioned by the announcers?

They were too busy worrying about another AARP member, and dealing with Paul’s horrible gas from all the brats he ate…

What the hell is Senor Pez talking about??

“Besides, even if Bielema was out of line, he wasn’t as out of line as Wisconsin’s soft ranking. I’m not saying they should be #5 in the nation… but #16 seems to still carry too much of the pre-season ranking in it. "

Carries too much preseason ranking in it?? You mean not being ranked in the top 30 in the country in the preseason?? This team has only 1 loss, at Michigan, albeit against a soft schedule otherwise, but they are still only ranked at number 16. It seems this Wisconsin program gets less respective for what it has accomplished over the last ten years than any team in the country. Have to wonder when people will start to realize that Wisconsin is a legit program.

CS

Rabid Badger, #16 was agreeing with you in saying that UW’s lack of a preseason ranking is still playing into their ranking now.

Personally, as a Minnesota fan, I love this rule. How could it not benefit a team that has a spectacular run game and offers less defense than “Pull N Pray”?

I mean, it would be great for us if we could still run the ball.

Maybe this was covered upthread, but you can’t decline a dead ball penalty in your favor, right?

For the people who complain about this being dangerous, it’s football, and it’s WITHIN THE RULES OF THE GAME, people. It was a completely brilliant move on Bielema’s part. I abso-freakin’-lutely loved the total mockery he made of the NCAA Rules Committee and their total lack of foresight regarding these horrendous new clock rules.

Go Coach B. You have a new fan!

The best part of that is the fact Paterno was cogent enough to understand the situation.

Your homework assignment: contrast and compare the reaction out of one Bobby Bowden in a similar circumstance.

Please note a sideline reporter once had to remind Bowden that one of his players (Darnell Dockett, to the surprise of no one) had been tossed from a game.

That was beautiful. It not only gave Wisconsin a strategic advantage, but it obviously gave them a psychological advantage as well. JoPa was so incensed that I’m sure it was all he could think about at half-time. The only thing more infuriating for Penn St. would have been Bielema smirking and waving at Paterno while he was doing it. That is exactly the sort of thing Spurrier would have done and it would have made me sick too, but you have to tip your cap and say well played. I personally believe that it will be the impetus for changing that stupid rule. There are plenty of blanket rules in college football to cover the gray areas, but they can already see that it is wildly unpopular and the last thing they should want is another rule where the officiating crew is left to interpret the intent of the play.

Is it unsportsmanlike to take a five yard delay-of-game to get into better punting position?

If the Rulebook allows for it, work it.

is that coach jacket?

I think Pat’s probably right in that the next team that tries this will get immediately flagged for unsportsmanlike and the clock reset. Bielema caught the refs off guard more than he found a loophole.

And he’s a jerk, IMO, and this was a bush league move.

I love the fact that JoePa got so angry! At first I thought he was confused about the new clock rules (remember, he’s still trying to figure out when they got rid of leather helmets…). But when he flashed those two fingers, signifying he’d been outcoached TWICE on the same play, that was priceless. And of course, his near-attack on the cameraman was just frosting on the cake. BRAAAAINS!!!

Good for Bielema. Huzzah to you sir.

Was Paterno telling the camera crew to get off his lawn?

Go Bret, great call. Bonus points for eliciting more crabby-old-man footage from JoePa, who looks like he’s telling the cameraman to “get off my lawn!”

I don’t see how this is any more unsportsmanlike than taking intentional delay-of-games or taking intentional PI flags. The clock start on kickoffs is a dumb rule and good on Bret for exploiting it. I’m just annoyed my man Weis didn’t do it first and piss off the media even more than he already has.

You know, EDSBS Person of the Year sounds so PC or metrosexual or whatever. Can’t we go with something manlier, like “EDSBS Badass Dude of the Year” or something?

On election day – Bielema gets my vote for Coaching Move of the Year.

The move makes a mockery of this terrible new rule. Shows the Refs don’t know how to apply existing rules & can’t think for themselves – they have the flexibility to call unsportsmanlike at any time.

And finally, it manages to quiet the JoePa critcs by displaying that JoePa really does know what’s going on.

Brilliant

I’m not going to say what they did was classless, but it was definitely unsportsman like. He directed his players to intentionally commit a penalty. There should be some punishment for that. I watched the game live and it was extremely boring to watch as a fan. They need to put a stop to this quickly before some other team decides to use this at the end of an important game.

First, obviously, they should repeal 3-2-5e. But if they don’t do that, they should make offsides on a kickoff similar to kicking it out of bounds. First and 10 on the 35 yard line. I gaurantee Bielema wouldn’t have done it if he knew PSU got the ball at the 35.

Here’s the text of the rule cited above for unfair game-clock tactics (Rule 3-4-3):

Unfair Game-Clock Tactics ARTICLE 3. The referee shall order the game clock started or stopped whenever either team conserves or consumes playing time by tactics obviously unfair. This includes starting the clock on the snap if the foul is by the team ahead in the score. The clock will start on the ready-for-play signal after an illegal forward or backward pass that conserves time for Team A

And here is the text of the rule for Unsportsman Like conduct (Rule 9-2):

There shall be no unsportsmanlike conduct or any act
that interferes with orderly game administration on the part of players, substitutes, coaches, authorized attendants or any other persons subject to
the rules, before the game, during the game or between periods.

Rule 9-2-3© contains a catch-all provision that would work here:

Unfair Acts
ARTICLE 3. The following are unfair acts:
a. If a team refuses to play within two minutes after ordered to do so by the
referee.
b. If a team repeatedly commits fouls that can be penalized only by halving
the distance to its goal line.
c. If an obviously unfair act not specifically covered by the rules occurs during the game.

Here is the most interesting part, and probably what JoePa was asking for:

PENALTY—Dead-ball foul. 15 yards [S7, S27] from the succeeding spot. Flagrant offenders, if players or substitutes, shall be disqualified [S47]. If a player or an identified squad member in uniform commits two unsportsmanlike fouls in the same game, he shall be disqualified.

Was this flagrant? Like said above, I think it sure will be next time someone tries it.
-————————-
I would recommend that referees call offsides on the first intentional kick off, and then declare that at the moment they threw the flag, they were also stopping the clock at the moment of the kick pursuant to 3-4-3 because Wisconsin was “consum[ing] playing time by tactics obviously unfair” Thus, the head ref would give one of those “please reset the game clock to such-and-such seconds” instructions. Wisconsin would thus have gained nothing and would have lost 5 yards.

Nobody would ever do it again because of the lack of advantage, and so we probably would not have to address the unsportsmanlike conduct issue.

Wizard of Odds reports that North Dakota State copies Bielema:

“Wisconsin coach Bret Bielema’s slick move that exploited a loophole in the new 3-2-5-e rule Saturday didn’t go unnoticed. North Dakota State coach Craig Bohl was among those watching the Penn State-Wisconsin game and copied Bielema’s strategy in the Bison’s 28-24 victory at California Davis. After North Dakota State scored with four seconds remaining to take the lead, Bohl intentionally had his kickoff team go offside. Because the new rule calls for the clock to start when the kicker touches the ball, the four seconds ran off the clock. Davis never had a chance to set up a return because Bison players had surrounded the Aggies’ Nevan Bergan when he fielded the ball at his two-yard line. The five-yard offside penalty was enforced and North Dakota State had to kick again. This time kicker Shawn Bibeau booted a dribbler that went about 20 yards downfield that was easily covered.”

Sweet tap-dancing baby Jesus, that was magical.

Paul McGuire is still alive?

Maybe this was covered upthread, but you can’t decline a dead ball penalty in your favor, right?

It’s not a dead ball foul. If it was, they’d blow the play dead before it even started.

I’m pretty darn sure it’s declinable.

“I watched the game live and it was extremely boring to watch as a fan.”

Well, Shit. That should be a penalty too.

illegal = Boring = Defense = The SEC = Screwed

Rabid Badger, #16 was agreeing with you in saying that UW’s lack of a preseason ranking is still playing into their ranking now.

Comment by italiangator

Fair enough. I misconstrued his point, regarding us being “soft”, when in fact it seems he refers to our ranking.

Apologies to Senor Pez

Anyone else find it funny that this exploitation of the new clock rules took more real time to do than than had there been no new rules at all?

I’ve been too busy weeping blood over the mental image of Mangino in a pink sundress to reply before now.

Count me in with the people who say Bielema can find a way to be a smartass that doesn’t set up opposition players to be leveled. That’s a jackass maneuver.

If boring football could be penalized, Wisconsin would have long since been given the SMU treatment.

This rule would have allowed for Notre Dame to pull a similar stunt at the end of the 1993 BC game. It would have kept David Gordon off the field and the game-winning field goal that ended our national title hopes that year never would have happened.

Of course this would have kept Holtz at the helm for a few more years, and the entire soul-crushing era known as Davieham would not have happened.

I forget, what did you say was wrong with rule?

DC Trojan, give me a break. The Badgers are averaging just a point less per game than your Trojans, while giving up 5 points less. But why bother with facts when you can look up the answer in your gut?

The only reason that there was such a collision is that Penn State was really confused and not ready for this to happen. Now that people have seen this, I would think return units should be more ready for it, limiting catastrophic injury. Also, as mentioned above, teams probably aren’t going to be able to be so far offsides in the future if refs decide to slap them with the 15 yard penalty. Regardless, the point stands that the rule flat out sucks and was not well thought out at all. #16 is absolutely right in pointing to the OSU-Illinois game. At the very least, the rule should be rescinded for the last 2 minutes of each half.

Whether or not you like Bielema’s tactics, you must admit that it makes the NCAA look like a bunch of retards for passing this silly rule.

With that move, Bielema moves just below Spurrier in my list of smartass coaches that I love and hate in equal measure. And JoPa’s reaction was just classic.

Count me unconvinced that the officials can do much about it in the future. Let’s talk about a more crucial hypothesis – end of a game, team up by 4, 10 seconds left. If the coach tells two of his players to be offside, but not blatently so, how can they pull out the unfair-clock-use clause? 7 seconds runs off the clock and they can kick it again and have less to worry about. A confident ref would maybe not start the clock next time until the ball was touched, but I doubt he’d put time back on the clock.

My initial impression was “I hope no one got hurt by it”, which it appears no one did, but I think it did very poignantly draw focus to a huge, game-changing problem.

I have to say I’m bam-fuckin’-boozled over this one. I love the gonads that Bielema has to exploit such a dipshit rule. However, as I sift through the NCAA’s bible, there is nothing that prohibits running offisdes on a free-kick to run out the clock.

If “unsportsmanlike” is going to be called under the guise of Rule 9-2-3©, then it would also be unsportsmanlike to 1) spike the ball to stop the clock, 2) take a knee to run the clock, and the infrequently used 3) intentionally running backwards to take a safety (if nursing a late 3+ pt lead). Spiking and kneeling give distinct clock advantages to the offense…not so much “safety-taking”, but the same principle applies.

If the NCAA is so concerned with cramming a football game into a 3.5-hr block, I’d like to see them just run a continuous clock (similar to europeen “football”; say, 45-min quarters) with no clock stopage for timeouts or reviews. It’ll NEVER happen, but it’s interesting to think about.

DC Trojan, give me a break. The Badgers are averaging just a point less per game than your Trojans, while giving up 5 points less. But why bother with facts when you can look up the answer in your gut?

Re-read the comment: I wrote “boring” not “unproductive.” I don’t care if Wisconsin is proportionally as ho-hum as USC over the course of this season, I don’t enjoy watching them play football. Hooray for freedom of choice!

Speaking of, shouldn’t you be out stuffing ballot boxes / turning away voters (delete as applicable according to local patterns of partisan corruption) or something like that?

De gustibus non est disputandum.

Couldn’t agree more, District Selectman.

Jee-zus. Can the Penn St. fans do any more crying about everything this season?! My fucking monitor is about to short out from the tidal wave of salt water pouring off this thread.

Was it a cheap move? Yes, it was. In that sense, did it demonstrate how asinine the new clock rules are? Why… yes, it did! Amazing. Someone bending the rules to show how they can be bent and how they should be changed (back.) This has never happened in any organized sport before. Ever. Or at least it hasn’t to Penn State before because we’ve certainly never heard this level of caterwauling and whining about the ‘safety’ of their players on a damned kick return.

This is exactly like the aftermath of the Michigan game, when it seemed like every Nittany fan in existence couldn’t just suck it up and admit the Michigan defense ate them alive and instead had to to whine about a ‘helmet-to-helmet’ hit that wasn’t from Branch.

If Bielema had pulled that move against us, I would’ve been laughing my ass off, especially since there was only :23 left in the half and I don’t think anyone but the most mindlessly optimistic PSU fan felt they were going to do anything but sit on the ball and go into the locker room.

Aerobab (at 57), I totally agree with you. I respect Pat (at 19)‘s analysis of the legalities, but reducing penalties to any given ref’s ‘opinion’ of what is ‘obviously’ unfair, or when someone is ‘flagrantly’ offsides, is going very quickly down a nasty slippery slope. Biased celebration penalties will be NUTHIN’ compared to what happens when these SEC homer refs find out they can start calling penalties based not on definable facts/actions, but on their subjective opinions. “I didn’t like the way that boy (spiked the ball/went offsides/took a safety), so that’s Unfair Clock Management. The boys for my team do it much politely.”

If "unsportsmanlike" is going to be called under the guise of Rule 9-2-3©, then it would also be unsportsmanlike to 1) spike the ball to stop the clock, 2) take a knee to run the clock, and the infrequently used 3) intentionally running backwards to take a safety (if nursing a late 3+ pt lead).

Which one of these is an unfair tactic?

None of them. They’re all perfectly legal plays. Spiking the ball is specifically allowed in the rules on forward passes. Taking a knee is just intentionally downing yourself during a play. Running backwards to take a safety is also a completely legal play.

Being blatantly offsides during a kickoff is not a legal play. I really, really don’t understand why this is so difficult to understand. “Unfair tactics” are basically “anything outside of legal play that places the other team at a disadvantage.” The only things that even remotely come close are extremely minor, and more importantly, don’t continue to give advantages when done multiple times.

Can the Penn St. fans do any more crying about everything this season?!

Have you ever heard me whine about anything Penn State related?

No.

So don’t lump my actions (which are done for my own reasons) in with other people’s actions.

I’d complain about this if I had seen it in an Illinois-Indiana game.

Pat, do you dislike it because it’s “unmanly,” or because it’s a coach knowingly doing something illegal to gain advantage? In that case, all knowingly illegal penalties committed frequently are included.

Example: holding and taking a penalty rather than surrendering a grievous sack or touchdown. The only way to punish this is to establish intent, which is impossible. The next violators will only do it with more subtlety; parsing penalties like this even further will result in a further legalization of the game, which will only please the lawyers. And that’s the last thing this site would ever endorse.

Iowa provided a very nice model of just how subtle offsides can be in the Outback Bowl last year, in case you would like a primer on proper technique.

I don’t know what is more impressive, Bielema’s sack for doing this or the massive amount of pussies this thread brought out of the woodwork.

Paterno came off as more of a jackass in the clip than the Wisconsin coach. Is there an NCAA bylaw that that the prohibition on touching officials does not apply to zombies?

I wish someone would take a four point lead in the second half and do this for the rest of the game.

It is no more unsporting than a team that has been snapping the ball with 10 seconds on the playclock and passing throughout the game suddenly snapping with one second on the clock and running between the tackles to nurse a lead.

How is spiking the ball legal anyways? I’ve always wondered why there isn’t an intentional grounding penalty for that one, esp. since that’s pretty much the definition of intentional grounding (i.e., intentionally throwing the ball into the ground to avoid an adverse situation, in which there is no possibility of the pass being completed). So, in conclusion, FREE SCOOP!

I don’t really care about the new clock rules. Maybe it’s because I root for Iowa State and Notre Dame.
ISU: I want to see as little of their football as possible…it’s painful to watch.
ND: Their games are long enough as it is, and their coaches are smart enough to get the most of the time that’s available.

That said, I was watching when this happened, and I laughed my ass off. My hat goes off to you, Coach Bielema.

Along the lines of #57 and #61 and Pat, spiking the ball behind the center (and behind the LOS, without intent to reach an eligible receiver), in order to gain clock advantage, should be an intentional grounding penalty and an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty.

Alternatively, an intentional running beyond the LOS before the ball is in play on a kickoff, in order to gain an unfair clock advantage, is an offsides penalty but is not an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty.

Now, which rule is more unfair?

The only way this offsides revolution garners the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty is if the same powers-that-be who came up with rule 3-2-5e create an ammendment to the rules: “No coach or representative of any team shall devise strategy under these written rules or otherwise mock God in order to gain ANY advantage whatsoever.”

Pat, you’re simply a whining PSU fan whose assertions to the contrary don’t compute with your hyperlink.

Props to #67, as well.

Pat is an ND fan.

Orson, You may have this one Pat confused with an ND Pat.

Or maybe Pat’s intentionally misleading the site with his “bleedblueandwhite” affiliation.

Dammit, we’re arguing for the wrong fucking Pat.

After reading through all 71 comments I have to say that Pat makes the most sense by far. How this incident is getting compared to intentional grounding is unbelievable.

Whats to prevent the Wisconsin guys from being 30 yards offsides instead of just 10? And I like how they act all tough after they make the tackle; the whole damn kick off team was in a full sprint 15 yards from the return man when he caught the ball. Yeah, that’s not dangerous. What’s next, get a second half lead and then just repeat this debacle for 3 hours?

They could—that’s the point. Until the rule makes sense, that is.

Sorry, did someone call my name?

Also, let’s be fair in all this- I want to be clear that I’m not saying Pat’s not making sense, but what I’m saying is that it’s the rule that doesn’t make sense and thus allows this sort of situation to occur. What makes this example so awesome is the fact that Bielema didn’t just tell his guys to go offsides a little bit- they were instructed to do it in such a way that conversations like this would be had and this would be used as a reason that the rule needs to change. He knows it could be reversed next time, and so it needs to be changed.

Also, J-Skool, good to know you think Scoop should be free as well.

I can’t quote chapter and verse, but spiking the football is specifically allowed in the rules. There was a time in the not so distant past where it was not—quarterbacks would take one step back and throw it out of bounds over a receivers head who made a half-hearted effort to jump and catch the ball. (Some of us old QBs were taught to aim for the down marker.) It was a big deal when the rule allowing the spike was introduced.

As a Citadel graduate, I must defend my fellow alum Paul Maguire. You have to admit, he’s a ton better without Joe T. And if you think MNF sucks, then it’s not too difficult to figure out why.

Plus, I think the analyst is Griese, not Danielson. Both are very good.

As for the coaching tactics, I applaud the effort to exploit the insane rule change. I do not consider it to be unsportsmanlike at all. The clowns who created the rule should have seen this coming.

Gary Danielson was over on CBS, providing colour analysis on what’s harder to do, tackle Jamarcus Russell to the ground or to keep Phil Fulmer from a fresh warm donut when he is able to get inside and use that swim move of his.

Gary Danielson came over to CBS from ABC after Todd Blackledge left CBS for the 7:45est ESPN night game. No one knows was Ron Franklin did to get banished from that ESPN slot, but it is rumored that the old man’s voice and abilities were irresistible to network executives’ wives and daughters. I also heard that he had some not so kind opinions of The Playmakers and Herbstreit, involving words like “more retarded than autism ward at St. Jude’s” and “more fucked than the glory hole at the Male Box in San Francisco”

I hereby declare that the NCAA rules committee is found guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct by virtue of implementing 3-2-5(e).

Penalty: Repeal 3-2-5(e) at the conclusion of the 2006 season and force a boot up the ass of every committee member that voted in favor of the rule. Not to mention 15-yds and rekick of the ball.

spiking the ball behind the center (and behind the LOS, without intent to reach an eligible receiver), in order to gain clock advantage, should be an intentional grounding penalty and an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty.

As I said above, spiking the ball is in the freaking rulebooks as not intentional grounding, and not illegal.

or because it’s a coach knowingly doing something illegal to gain advantage? In that case, all knowingly illegal penalties committed frequently are included.

It’s because it’s a coach knowingly doing something illegal because there is no punishment, whatsoever. The yardage penalty is immaterial because they’ll continue to be offsides until there’s no time left, at which point they’ll squib it.

The only thing that even comes remotely close is taking a delay of game to move into better punting position. And that’s such a ridiculously minor thing compared to running a completely illegal play to eliminate almost half a minute from the clock.

What makes it “unfair” is that Wisconsin’s committing an illegal action for which there is no compensation to Penn State. It’s a perfect example of something that should fall under Rule 3-4. It should’ve been called.

Holding to prevent a sack, pass interference to prevent a touchdown: those are perfectly fair actions because the team committing the penalty ends up in a worse situation than they were before the play started. This isn’t the case here.

Notice the only people really bitching about this are crying blue and white tears.

Yeah, it sucked. Yeah, it’s unfortunate for you. But the rest of the world loves it!

You would too, if you weren’t on the receiving end.

"Holding to prevent a sack, pass interference to prevent a touchdown: those are perfectly fair actions because the team committing the penalty ends up in a worse situation than they were before the play started. This isn’t the case here. "

Did I miss something? It looks pretty clear to me that Wisc. was penalized the standard 5-yards (when not offset by PSU’s holding). Your point doesn’t hold water, Pat.

Did I miss something? It looks pretty clear to me that Wisc. was penalized the standard 5-yards (when not offset by PSU’s holding).

Quoth I:

The yardage penalty is immaterial, because they’ll continue to be offsides

Hence the reason it falls under Rule 3-4 – they’re attempting to consume clock by committing a penalty. The way they’re committing the penalty actually allows them to commit it over, and over.

Officials are supposed to deal with it when a team attempts to consume clock like that. It’s the same thing as if a team would constantly commit penalties in order to stop the clock.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but couldn’t the return man have signaled fair catch and avoid taking the hit? How is it any more dangerous that playing for a blocked punt and not blocking the gunners? The punt return man has the option to either attempt to make a play or signal fair catch to avoid having his head taken off.

Great move by the Wisconsin coach. And agreed with the Penn State crying…after just about every game there has been tears about something. Weis was classless for running the fake punt, Michigan classless for hitting their quarterback hard, Wisconsin classless for taking advantage of a dumb rule and also hitting their coach out of bounds (Iike that was intention). Not to mention the near constant complaining about calls not going in their favor and how the Big 10 is out to get them.