Week 14 Rivaly Week Other Games Thread

Donate To GopherHole
S

Stan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,068
Reaction score
3,858
Points
113
Navy at Memphis
Ole Miss at Mississippi
Utah at KU
Iowa at Nebraska
Georgia at Georgia Tech
San Diego State at New Mexico
Indiana at Purdue
Texas A&M at Texas
Arizona at ASU
OSU at Michigan
Texas Tech at West Virginia
Miami at Pitt
Houston at Baylor
Clemson at South Carolina
Iowa State at Oklahoma State
UCF at BYU
BC at Syracuse
Oregon at Washington
LSU at OU
Vandy at UT
Mizzou at Arkansas
PSU at Rutgers
Alabama at Auburn
FSU at Fla
UCLA at USC
Northwestern at Illinois
UNC at NC State
SMU at Cal
Notre Dame at Stanford
Etc.
 

Mass knocking on the door of an 0-12 season, just scored to make it 7-24 in favor of Bowling Green shortly before half

Joe Harasymiak in his first year as a HC

​

 





Nebraska is playing Iowa heads up. I've attached Nebraska's availability report. But no excuses about this guy or that being out.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2025-11-28 at 12.01.54 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2025-11-28 at 12.01.54 PM.png
    690.7 KB · Views: 8



upnorthkid said:
Nebraska OL is beating the shit out of Iowa
Click to expand...
Yep. I will say it here, we are a good offensive line away from having eight or nine wins right now. We have to fix that problem before next year. A lot of people are saying the OC is the problem. I don't think we should give up on him yet. We need an offensive line that can allow time for the receivers to get open and the routes to develop. We also need an offensive line that can block well enough for us to average 4 yards a carry instead of two.

Our defense sucks. Our offense could be pretty decent if we had an offensive line.
 




Breakin' The Plane said:
Yet again, I have no idea how that isn't targeting.
Click to expand...
Did you play football? When you lead with your shoulder? You still have to put your head down. He put his head down a foot ahead of the front of the Nebraska players jersey. The Nebraska player is running forward and put his head down to try to gain more yardage. They hit helmets. There was no intent to hit helmets. He was simply leaning forward to make a shoulder tackle. He's targeting. Calls were designed to stop people from aiming helmet on helmet. That was not an intentional helmet on helmet. Those calls should never be penalties. Thank God they didn't go p**** in this situation either and call it targeting.

If you have ever played football, you understand what I am saying.
 

Texan Gopher said:
Did you play football? When you lead with your shoulder? You still have to put your head down. He put his head down a foot ahead of the front of the Nebraska players jersey. The Nebraska player is running forward and put his head down to try to gain more yardage. They hit helmets. There was no intent to hit helmets. He was simply leaning forward to make a shoulder tackle. He's targeting. Calls were designed to stop people from aiming helmet on helmet. That was not an intentional helmet on helmet. Those calls should never be penalties. Thank God they didn't go p**** in this situation either and call it targeting.

If you have ever played football, you understand what I am saying.
Click to expand...
Intent is not officiated and he initiated contact with the 6in crown of his helmet. It could have easily been targeting and upheld. The rules expert thought it was targeting. The huge call went Iowa’s way and resulted in a safety.
 






Looks like there will be no third year bump in Lincoln for Rhule, like he had at Temple and Baylor.

Losing your QB doesn't help.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Not a bad catch. Wow. Iowa kicking themselves for the losses they have.
Click to expand...
The only "bad" one is to a blood rivalry, @ Iowa State by 3 points.

Others: Indiana by 5, Oregon by 2, @ USC by 5. Two playoff teams and USC will finish top 15 and just outside the playoff.

Iowa is easily the best 8-4 team in the country.
 

Iowa has won 4 in a row against Wisconsin and 5 of last 6
Iowa has won 10 of last 11 against Minnesota
Iowa is about to win 10 of 11 against Nebraska

The fact Iowa is dominating the upper Midwest is nauseating
 

MaxyJR1 said:
Intent is not officiated and he initiated contact with the 6in crown of his helmet. It could have easily been targeting and upheld. The rules expert thought it was targeting. The huge call went Iowa’s way and resulted in a safety.
Click to expand...
I know. I'm watching it. I disagree 100% with the rules analyst and everything about that rule. The rule was designed to stop purposeful targeting, which I think is great. When a person does not Target but the actual person with the football ducks his head and puts it down to gain yards. You cannot control when helmet hits helmet. This was one of those situations. The pussification of football has to stop.
 

Iowa finishing the season strong and better than I thought they’d do, since they found some offense. Nebraska has fully folded up the tents as of their last 2 road games. Ruhle looks kinda checked out, maybe bummed he blew his chance at auditioning for the PSU job.
 

Texan Gopher said:
Did you play football? When you lead with your shoulder? You still have to put your head down. He put his head down a foot ahead of the front of the Nebraska players jersey. The Nebraska player is running forward and put his head down to try to gain more yardage. They hit helmets. There was no intent to hit helmets. He was simply leaning forward to make a shoulder tackle. He's targeting. Calls were designed to stop people from aiming helmet on helmet. That was not an intentional helmet on helmet. Those calls should never be penalties. Thank God they didn't go p**** in this situation either and call it targeting.

If you have ever played football, you understand what I am saying.
Click to expand...
I played football. I don't understand what you're saying. You hit someone in the facemask with the crown of your helmet, that's targeting. Intentional doesn't matter. You think that every player who ever grabbed a facemask meant to do that?
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
I played football. I don't understand what you're saying. You hit someone in the facemask with the crown of your helmet, that's targeting. Intentional doesn't matter. You think that every player who ever grabbed a facemask meant to do that?
Click to expand...
Watch the play again. The defender starts to shoulder tackle 5 seconds before the ball carrier ducks his head down and shifts to the right. It is absolutely impossible to stop your helmet from hitting their helmet when the ball carrier does that.

Do you watch baseball? If the batter steps across home plate and gets hit by the pitch? It is not a hit by pitch as they moved too far inside. That's exactly what happened here. The problem is this stupid penalty is being called on plays. It should not be called on like this one where thank God it was not.

Again, I am a huge fan of the targeting call. But it was designed for when a defender lunges at the ball carrier with his helmet first to try and destroy him head-to-head. This was not one of those issues.
 

I didn't realize Iowa had a pretty tough schedule. With our schedule, they'd most likely be ending the season at 10-2. Which is fringe playoff spot.
 

Texan Gopher said:
I know. I'm watching it. I disagree 100% with the rules analyst and everything about that rule. The rule was designed to stop purposeful targeting, which I think is great. When a person does not Target but the actual person with the football ducks his head and puts it down to gain yards. You cannot control when helmet hits helmet. This was one of those situations. The pussification of football has
Click to expand...

I agree but that didn’t happen on this play in my opinion. He hit him square in the facemask. That doesn’t happen if offensive player ducks head.

 
Last edited:

MaxyJR1 said:
I agree but that didn’t happen on this play in my opinion. He hit him square in the facemask. That doesn’t happen if offensive player ducks head.

Click to expand...
It's all good. We are simply going to agree to disagree on this play. Watch it again and you will notice the defender's head never goes above the shoulder pad level of the person with the ball. The person with the ball ducks their head and that is what causes the helmet to helmet contact. Again, I've played football so many times as a defender, I was not trying to hurt anybody, but they ducked their helmet and we hit helmet to helmet. You simply cannot control it at that speed.

Targeting should be called on plays where the defender intentionally leads with the helmet. You can tell when those plays happen. In my opinion, this is not one of those plays. And Gene Sarato needs to freaking go back to the 1980s when he played and realized the game is different now.
 

Texan Gopher said:
Did you play football? When you lead with your shoulder? You still have to put your head down. He put his head down a foot ahead of the front of the Nebraska players jersey. The Nebraska player is running forward and put his head down to try to gain more yardage. They hit helmets. There was no intent to hit helmets. He was simply leaning forward to make a shoulder tackle. He's targeting. Calls were designed to stop people from aiming helmet on helmet. That was not an intentional helmet on helmet. Those calls should never be penalties. Thank God they didn't go p**** in this situation either and call it targeting.

If you have ever played football, you understand what I am saying.
Click to expand...
You should post here more often:

Reddit - The heart of the internet

www.reddit.com www.reddit.com
 

Texan Gopher said:
It's all good. We are simply going to agree to disagree on this play. Watch it again and you will notice the defender's head never goes above the shoulder pad level of the person with the ball. The person with the ball ducks their head and that is what causes the helmet to helmet contact. Again, I've played football so many times as a defender, I was not trying to hurt anybody, but they ducked their helmet and we hit helmet to helmet. You simply cannot control it at that speed.

Targeting should be called on plays where the defender intentionally leads with the helmet. You can tell when those plays happen. In my opinion, this is not one of those plays. And Gene Sarato needs to freaking go back to the 1980s when he played and realized the game is different now.
Click to expand...
They can’t get the interpretation of the rule right or consistent. Seems to change every year.
 


Texan Gopher said:
Yep. I will say it here, we are a good offensive line away from having eight or nine wins right now. We have to fix that problem before next year. A lot of people are saying the OC is the problem. I don't think we should give up on him yet. We need an offensive line that can allow time for the receivers to get open and the routes to develop. We also need an offensive line that can block well enough for us to average 4 yards a carry instead of two.

Our defense sucks. Our offense could be pretty decent if we had an offensive line.
Click to expand...
Agree 100 percent. Hard to judge the OC with no o-line. Get some lineman and a new OL coach that can recruit and judge talent better.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
They can’t get the interpretation of the rule right or consistent. Seems to change every year.
Click to expand...
Completely agree. It leaves fans of the game like us, without a clear and decisive answer.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom