January 20, 200620 yr This is somewhat true. You cant deny though that USC wasnt dominant and is the best of the three teams on that board i remember the day after the sugar bowl some news assosiation said that they would host and pay for a USC LSU champ game but the ncaa denied it beacuse it would ruin the integrity of the bcs lol. You cant say that LSU was the best team in 03/04 they won by a crappy computer system.
January 20, 200620 yr This is somewhat true. You cant deny though that USC wasnt dominant and is the best of the three teams on that board i remember the day after the sugar bowl some news assosiation said that they would host and pay for a USC LSU champ game but the ncaa denied it beacuse it would ruin the integrity of the bcs lol. You cant say that LSU was the best team in 03/04 they won by a crappy computer system. Well, you also can't say definitively that USC was the best team that year either
January 20, 200620 yr well, that looks like a photoshop right now, but let's hope that ghetto website does what it says it's going to do.
January 20, 200620 yr This is somewhat true. You cant deny though that USC wasnt dominant and is the best of the three teams on that board i remember the day after the sugar bowl some news assosiation said that they would host and pay for a USC LSU champ game but the ncaa denied it beacuse it would ruin the integrity of the bcs lol. You cant say that LSU was the best team in 03/04 they won by a crappy computer system. Well, you also can't say definitively that USC was the best team that year either Actually I think LSU would of beat them and I think Auburn would of beat them the next year. That Auburn team was amazing on both sides of the ball and went undefeated through the SEC, alot harder then USC's cakewalk division.
January 20, 200620 yr What happened to USC is exactly what happened to Miami a few years ago. BCS shafts them year 1, title year 2, and get edged out year 3.
January 21, 200620 yr What happened to USC is exactly what happened to Miami a few years ago. BCS shafts them year 1, title year 2, and get edged out year 3. Well, the only difference is Miami should've won in year 3 save for one of the poorest calls by a ref in all sports. But other than that I agree.
January 21, 200620 yr Author What happened to USC is exactly what happened to Miami a few years ago. BCS shafts them year 1, title year 2, and get edged out year 3. Well, the only difference is Miami should've won in year 3 save for one of the poorest calls by a ref in all sports. But other than that I agree. Oh God.
January 21, 200620 yr What happened to USC is exactly what happened to Miami a few years ago. BCS shafts them year 1, title year 2, and get edged out year 3. Well, the only difference is Miami should've won in year 3 save for one of the poorest calls by a ref in all sports. But other than that I agree. Oh God. Heh, it's like clockwork. http://home.earthlink.net/~ohiobort/Cryami.html And because I finally have the picture to back it up... Yeah, that's not defensive holding AT ALL. Never should have been overtime. Oh and you weren't called for holding on any of these either:
January 21, 200620 yr What happened to USC is exactly what happened to Miami a few years ago. BCS shafts them year 1, title year 2, and get edged out year 3. Well, the only difference is Miami should've won in year 3 save for one of the poorest calls by a ref in all sports. But other than that I agree. Oh God. Heh, it's like clockwork. http://home.earthlink.net/~ohiobort/Cryami.html And because I finally have the picture to back it up... Yeah, that's not defensive holding AT ALL. Never should have been overtime. YES! YES! YES! You finally used it! You just got Krenzel'd:
January 21, 200620 yr Author What happened to USC is exactly what happened to Miami a few years ago. BCS shafts them year 1, title year 2, and get edged out year 3. Well, the only difference is Miami should've won in year 3 save for one of the poorest calls by a ref in all sports. But other than that I agree. Oh God. Heh, it's like clockwork. http://home.earthlink.net/~ohiobort/Cryami.html And because I finally have the picture to back it up... Yeah, that's not defensive holding AT ALL. Never should have been overtime. Oh and you weren't called for holding on any of these either: owned!!!
January 21, 200620 yr Hugg, I am sure Cane fans can come up with dozens of similar photos. The defensive holding call you're talking about isn't the call in dispute here. It's the pass-interference in overtime in the end-zone that people usually refer to. The ref wasn't going to call it and didn't do so until the Canes started celebrating thinking it was the end of the game. Ref f***ed up. I'd like to add that it's funny that the website you gave us only shows a photo of the Canes and Ohio state players in the end-zone doesn't show anything at all. I'd like to see the actual video instead of some picture that distorts what really happened. They were both going for the ball and there was some contact. That's allowed. Also, I'd like to show you the photo of an Ohio St. player going right at McGahee's knees. It was blatantly obvious he was trying to take him out.
January 21, 200620 yr Yeah, but why is it that you get to pick and choose which calls are in dispute? No one is willing to acknowledge that if they make that blatantly obvious call above that there wouldn't even have been overtime? And it should also be noted that on that same exact play Chris Gamble STILL caught the ball, drug a foot, and they called him out of bounds. So, we got screwed twice on the same play. Your favorite call of all-time that Canes fans continue to use as a scapegoat never even would have happened. You can't tell me that this isn't just as important as the other, it hurts all your guys fun "we really won that game" claim, so you won't acknowledge. And then we can still talk about how you had 1st and goal on the 2 and couldn't score. And I'm not even going to bother to respond to your attack on Will Allen's character. Notes: Months later, 'Canes interference call looks right July 16, 2003 By Dennis Dodd SportsLine.com Senior Writer Terry Porter was right. Six and a half months after the most controversial call of the Bowl Championship Series era, the Big 12 field judge has been vindicated. That's not going to please Miami players, fans and coaches who are still grinding their teeth over Porter's decision to signal pass interference against Miami defensive back Glenn Sharpe in the Fiesta Bowl. Earlier this year Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg said game films had been reviewed and that, in fact, Porter had made the right call. The Big Ten supervisor of officials, who is used by the NCAA to assign officials for bowl games, concurred this week. The problem is, few people saw the actual infraction. All the replays focused on Sharpe jumping for a ball in the end zone intended for Ohio State receiver Chris Gamble. The penalty occurred on fourth-and-3 from the Miami 5 in the first overtime of Ohio State's 31-24 victory. At the line of scrimmage, Sharpe tried to "jam" Gamble and impeded his progress. When the official who apparently had the call in the end zone didn't make one, Porter came rushing from the back of the end zone to throw the flag four or five seconds after the play had ended. "The timing of the flag might have looked not good," said Dave Parry, the Big Ten supervisor of officials, who works with the NCAA. "Terry was probably trying to be very thorough. He signaled a push for a defensive pass interference, then a signal for holding. There is a time lapse there. When the camera showed it they didn't see the line of scrimmage. They saw the downfield play about 7 or 8 yards." Porter has been the subject of Miami fans' message board rants for months since the call. Miami's stance seems to be that while the call might have been right, it was inexcusable that Porter waited those pregnant seconds before throwing the flag after running from the back of the end zone. "I replayed it in my mind," Porter said after the game. "I wanted to make double-sure that it was the right call." Without saying it was the case, Parry said this week there could have been a "small, small little downgrade" in Porter's evaluation for shoddy mechanics in waiting so long to make the call. Crews are assigned to the national championship game on a rotating basis. The crews are "all-stars" made up of the best official at each position in that conference. A Big 12 crew was supposed to do the 2002 Rose Bowl but was delayed a year when Nebraska made the game. That allowed Porter and his mates a chance at the Fiesta Bowl. What bothered Porter and the Big 12 was a report that two letters of apology had been sent to conference schools after games Porter worked. The Big 12 was upset by the report. Porter, a Stillwater, Okla., food broker, denied that was the case. "I ain't talking about (the call)," Porter said brusquely this week when reached by phone. "You can call the Big 12 office." Big 12 supervisor of officials Tim Millis, an NFL official himself, said this year that Porter would be NFL material if he were younger. Porter is in his mid-50s. Millis was out of the office this week and could not be reached. "I talked to Terry about it," Parry said. "His view was the snuggle (contact) was right at the line of scrimmage. (Sharpe) took (Gamble's) shoulder away from him as he tried to get away. That's why he went with holding." Jay Hansen, sports editor of the Mansfield (Ohio) News-Journal, was one of the few lay persons with a closeup look at the play. While everyone else was concentrating on the two players in the end zone, Hansen was watching the line of scrimmage from the floor of the Fiesta Bowl. "From what I saw there was definitely contact," said Hansen, who had come down from the press box and was on the sideline near the end zone when the call was made. "I thought it should have been holding. Gamble caught the defensive back on his heels. I was concentrating on Gamble. Definitely, in my opinion, there was a penalty on the play." The view from South Florida is that the call cost the Hurricanes the national championship. Not even close. During that drive and before the call, Miami's vaunted defense allowed Ohio State to convert a fourth-and-14. A stop there would have won Miami its second consecutive national championship. Even after the controversial call, it took the Buckeyes two plays to score from the Miami 1 in the first overtime to tie it. Then, after trailing 31-24 in the second overtime, Miami had four cracks at the tying (or eventual winning) score from the Ohio State 2. On fourth down, Ken Dorsey crumbled in the face of a withering Ohio State rush and the upset was achieved. Porter was a stand-up guy, explaining the call after the game. In retrospect, Miami, an 11-point favorite, had plenty of chances to put the game away and in the end was outplayed by an Ohio State team that was better prepared. And whether it takes five seconds or five minutes, they teach officials, above all, to get the call right. Porter did.
January 21, 200620 yr The fact that the report came out six and a half months later indicates it is not as trust-worthy. They were trying to back up their man when nobody else was looking. Why didn't they vindicate the call within a few days or a week after the game??? At the very least it was a borderline call that refs usually don't call at the end of a game. That's why they took so damn long to make the call in the first place. If it's borderline, you let it go in a situation like this. That's just how it works. And, yes, it did cost UM the national championship. This doesn't get called and UM wins the championship.
January 21, 200620 yr The fact that the report came out six and a half months later indicates it is not as trust-worthy. They were trying to back up their man when nobody else was looking. Why didn't they vindicate the call within a few days or a week after the game??? At the very least it was a borderline call that refs usually don't call at the end of a game. That's why they took so damn long to make the call in the first place. If it's borderline, you let it go in a situation like this. That's just how it works. And, yes, it did cost UM the national championship. This doesn't get called and UM wins the championship. And if the right call is made in regulation, there is no overtime. Keep on picking and choosing. Continue to skirt the obvious evidence I've given of this. If the ref doesn't make that call in OT, then the rightful national champions wouldn't have won the game, as the overtime never should have happened.
January 21, 200620 yr The fact that the report came out six and a half months later indicates it is not as trust-worthy. They were trying to back up their man when nobody else was looking. Why didn't they vindicate the call within a few days or a week after the game??? At the very least it was a borderline call that refs usually don't call at the end of a game. That's why they took so damn long to make the call in the first place. If it's borderline, you let it go in a situation like this. That's just how it works. And, yes, it did cost UM the national championship. This doesn't get called and UM wins the championship. And if the right call is made in regulation, there is no overtime. Keep on picking and choosing. Continue to skirt the obvious evidence I've given of this. If the ref doesn't make that call in OT, then the rightful national champions wouldn't have won the game, as the overtime never should have happened. You're boy Will Allen did take out McGahee intentionally. It was pretty obvious from the replays. McGahee stays in the game and Canes win in overtime. He was starting to heat up until Willy went for McGahee's knees.
January 21, 200620 yr Shouldn't have been an overtime. This is basically going to be the stock answer to the stock complaining. And again, not even going to bother on the other part.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.