Will NCAA review this play regarding NEW rules?

[govols105]

it happened in bama 05, corey anderson got hit on the 10 yard line with a helmet to ball and it rolled just inside the pylon out of bounds, touchback out of bounds, game over bama won 6-3 and it went downhill from there as we finished 5-7.

 

[Vols520]

Your missing my point. The same principle applies. The opponent should NOT be GIVEN the ball after a player makes a play, only to lose possession at the goal-line. I don't understand why it's so hard to understand that?

Oh we understand what u are saying and correctly mocking you for your moronic ideas.

Our fans are such babies it's a joke.

 

[Morpheus]

I can't understand why so many people find this rule unfair. I'm pretty sure it's one of the most fundamental concepts of American Football, and has been that way from the foundations of the sport. Yes it sucks that it bit us this time, but the rule itself is nothing new, and no amount of complaining is going to change it.

 

[GAVol]

it happened in bama 05, corey anderson got hit on the 10 yard line with a helmet to ball and it rolled just inside the pylon out of bounds, touchback out of bounds, game over bama won 6-3 and it went downhill from there as we finished 5-7.

Also happened against SC that same year.

 

[Vols520]

I can't understand why so many people find this rule unfair. I'm pretty sure it's one of the most fundamental concepts of American Football, and has been that way from the foundations of the sport. Yes it sucks that it bit us this time, but the rule itself is nothing new, and no amount of complaining is going to change it.

It's either fans who are in college and take it too seriously or posters who didn't go to college.

These same guys would be making fun of all their ga buddies had it happen the other way around.

 

[TrueOrange]

it happened in bama 05, corey anderson got hit on the 10 yard line with a helmet to ball and it rolled just inside the pylon out of bounds, touchback out of bounds, game over bama won 6-3 and it went downhill from there as we finished 5-7.

2005 was still an 11 game season. We finished 5-6.

The NCAA changing it to make 12 game seasons the de facto for every school (as opposed to just, you could schedule either a 12 game season if you wanted to or just stay at the baseline of 11 games) came the season afterwards (2006).

 

[TrueOrange]

Also happened against SC that same year.

Wasn't that one earlier in the game though?

Yeah just checked; it happened in the 2nd quarter...that was probably the Foster reference someone else was making though.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Ok for you people who are saying the rule is fine, answer this. Why is the rule not the same for the rest of the field? If Pig would have fumbled on say the 30 yard line and it went out of bounds, what would have happened?

Now had Georgia recovered Pigs fumble, this issue would never have been brought up. So just because it was in the end zone, and for no other reason, the fumble (which was not recovered and went out of bounds) gives Georgia the ball. Stupid rule.

Oh and BTW just because a rule has been around for a long time, doesn't mean it's a good rule.

 

[Vols520]

Ok for you people who are saying the rule is fine, answer this. Why is the rule not the same for the rest of the field? If Pig would have fumbled on say the 30 yard line and it went out of bounds, what would have happened?

Now had Georgia recovered Pigs fumble, this issue would never have been brought up. So just because it was in the end zone, and for no other reason, the fumble (which was not recovered and went out of bounds) gives Georgia the ball. Stupid rule.

Oh and BTW just because a rule has been around for a long time, doesn't mean it's a good rule.

Not sure if serious...

 

[TennesseeOrange]

Ok for you people who are saying the rule is fine, answer this. Why is the rule not the same for the rest of the field? If Pig would have fumbled on say the 30 yard line and it went out of bounds, what would have happened?

Now had Georgia recovered Pigs fumble, this issue would never have been brought up. So just because it was in the end zone, and for no other reason, the fumble (which was not recovered and went out of bounds) gives Georgia the ball. Stupid rule.

Oh and BTW just because a rule has been around for a long time, doesn't mean it's a good rule.

It's the endzone.

 

[Coug]

Dumbest rule in football. If you fumble into the endzone, possession should stay with the offense wherever the loss of control occurred. It's not fair to reward the opponent with a fumble they never recovered.

If opponent made a fumble recovery or interception in the endzone, touchback is fair.

This!

If he had fumbled it and he ball rolled out of bounds at the 1 yard line then it should have been next down and goal. Under this rule he fumbles and it rolls out of endzone and it's an automatic turnover....

Stupid rule.

 

[Vols520]

This!

If he had fumbled it and he ball rolled out of bounds at the 1 yard line then it should have been next down and goal. Under this rule he fumbles and it rolls out of endzone and it's an automatic turnover....



Bad luck doesn't equal stupidity.

 

[Vols520]

Well why is it two points for the other team if u get tackled in yiur own endzone? If u got tackled on the one it would still be yiur ball.
Not fair a stupid rule.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

It's the endzone.

That's why it's a stupid rule. It's not the same for the rest of the field. The only justification is just because "it's the endzone."

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Not sure if serious...

Ok then lets hear a good, detailed justification of this rule. Give a good explanation as to why only in the end zone that a team fumbles, it rolls out of bounds and that team automatically loses possession. Keeping in mind that everywhere else on the field when the same things happen the fumbling team KEEPS possession.

 

[Vols520]

Ok then lets hear a good, detailed justification of this rule. Give a good explanation as to why only in the end zone that a team fumbles, it rolls out of bounds and that team automatically loses possession. Keeping in mind that everywhere else on the field when the same things happen the fumbling team KEEPS possession.

Um...I don't need to justify anything as the rule already agrees with my stance. Since you are looking to alter an existing rule you will need to justify your position. And all u have is it's not fair cuz we would have beat a ranked team and I am a baby.

 

[Vols520]

And if u fumble te ball through yiur own endzone? What happens there? Why should that be a safety?

Fumbles should punish the offense not the defense.

 

[TennesseeOrange]

That's why it's a stupid rule. It's not the same for the rest of the field. The only justification is just because "it's the endzone."

There's a philosophical difference between the endzone and the sideline. It's completely fair, because it works both ways, and it's embarrassing to see people crying over this rule right now.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Um...I don't need to justify anything as the rule already agrees with my stance. Since you are looking to alter an existing rule you will need to justify your position. And all u have is it's not fair cuz we would have beat a ranked team and I am a baby.

Nice deflection. I see you have no intelligent retort to offer. That's ok. I have justified my stance. If a team fumbles anywhere else other than the end zone and the ball goes out of bounds, the fumbling team gets to keep possession. Simple as that. So please explain why this is a good rule?

Wrong. That TD would not have guaranteed victory. A TD could have changed Georgia's game plan and they could have went for a TD instead of just playing safe and settling for a FG.

I realize its a rule that will never be changed. All I am saying is its a stupid rule that is inconsistent and its garbage in the NFL and college. I am still awaiting your explanation as to why this rule is just fine.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

And if u fumble te ball through yiur own endzone? What happens there? Why should that be a safety?

Fumbles should punish the offense not the defense.

If nobody recovers the fumble then the offensive team keeps possession and gets the ball wherever it was spotted before the play.

If you cannot see the huge difference between the defense recovering the fumble and nobody recovering the fumble then you are lost in this issue.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

There's a philosophical difference between the endzone and the sideline. It's completely fair, because it works both ways, and it's embarrassing to see people crying over this rule right now.

Not crying just stating an opinion that this rule is stupid. It always has been and always will be.

Basically your justification is because its the endzone and its different than the sideline. Got it. Still a stupid rule.

 

[bradisbrad]

If the ball is fumbled elsewhere on the field and goes out, sure possession stays with the fumbling team, but you don't get it at the point of last possession. Why should you in the end zone? It obviously can't be a touchdown, but it can't go to the point of last possession. It gives the offense an unfair advantage on a play where the defense really has virtually no chance to recover the ball. The only reason the entire fan base is complaining about it is because that sort of turnover has a lot bigger impact in OT than it does in regulation. Regardless, I think the rule is fair given the near impossibility of a defensive return in a situation like that. I've also not heard sound justification as to why it should be changed. You get sacked or tackled behind the line anywhere else on the field, and it's a loss of yards, but if it's in the end zone, it's a safety. You complete a pass anywhere else on the field, it's a first down; in the end zone, it's a touchdown. To me, it's the same argument. End zones are different, that's the point of the game, that's the point of the rules. We had a bad break, but I'll be damned if anyone else wouldn't have chosen to do the exact same thing given the situation.

 

[UT_Dutchman]

It stinks because it hurt us, but if you think about you cannot reward the offense at this point. If you make it all the way to the opponents endzone and fumble through it, it shouldn't be your ball.

 

[governmentmule]

The only change that needs to be made is each team should start possession in OT at midfield. You should have to earn the ability to score instead of starting out already in most kickers' FG range.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

i was thinking the same thing too,it shouldn't be a automatic FG kick

but wasn't it put in to stop there being no points scored ? to avert the all mighty tie game ? lol i do remember them

 

[Coug]

This!

If he had fumbled it and he ball rolled out of bounds at the 1 yard line then it should have been next down and goal. Under this rule he fumbles and it rolls out of endzone and it's an automatic turnover....

Bad luck doesn't equal stupidity.

Never said bad luck = stupidity. The rule is stupid was my point.