I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

Last time I checked, the head has a "back"…

JohnLA762 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

Last time I checked, the head has a "back"…

---

Defenders head went into the name on the back of the jersey.

milner79 said:

---

---

EOT

Who cares about natty's, we have a big stadium, SEC, Jimbo and a lot of oil money to piss away on a worthless football program. A&M > TCU

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

He made no contact to his neck or help? Funny I saw Michigan guys next pop forward. Hit me in the back and my head with go back.

Nino Brown said:

---

---

There is another part of the rule about striking a player on the ground with the crown of the helmet anywhere on his body

zwhag2010 said:

---

I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

---

Lol Georgia is more or less considered a blue blood as well.

What a game! Hopefully we now steal Riley off the purple turds.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

JohnLA762 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

Last time I checked, the head has a "back"…

---

Defenders head went into the name on the back of the jersey.

---

It didn't have to hit him in the head. They were reviewing it for targeting with the crown of the helmet, not targeting a defenseless player.

Go look up the hit that got Clemson's LB Slolski ejected for targeting against OSU in the CFP a few years ago.

milner79 said:

---

---

The funny thing here too, even if they had gotten the first down and the yardage nothing is saying they would've scored a touchdown. I don't think it was targeting, but some of the other calls during the game not great, yes. There were horrible calls in the Kansas/Arkansas game the other day.

But I wasn't commenting on those. But I think people always alleging that there is a conspiracy to get a certain teams to win is not what's happening here. I think that excuse is overplayed. And more with just not very good referees or people that are human and make mistakes. It just seems like more this year than it's been in the past and it's all conference refs, not just one.

I hate games that end on controversy.

But I also wish people would quit jumping in saying that certain teams are being led to win. I mean yes Alabama and tu get a lot of favorable calls but is it because someone's being paid off or they media wants it to go that way I don't think so.

Good thing that blown review didn't matter.

Someone make next game thread!!

pinche gringo said:

---

Matt Montgomery said:

---

Love it, NO CALL

---

Every time targeting is not called it's a win for the game of football.

---

unless it's Alabama on defense.

Congrats to TCU for making the most of A&M's "100 year decision".

How many of us "experts" ever thought we would see a Dykes coached team in a national championship game?

BTHO tu forever!!!

Aggieair said:

---

zwhag2010 said:

---

I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

---

Lol Georgia is more or less considered a blue blood as well.

---

Just the last few years though. Winning football programs flip-flop just like everything else. Remember how dominant Colorado and Nebraska were in the 80s/90s? Now look at them.

Hell even tu has been on the down slide for quite a while now.

annie88 said:

---

Aggieair said:

---

zwhag2010 said:

---

I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

---

Lol Georgia is more or less considered a blue blood as well.

---

Just the last few years though. Winning football programs flip-flop just like everything else. Remember how dominant Colorado and Nebraska were in the 80s/90s? Now look at them.

Hell even tu has been on the down slide for quite a while now.

---

I'd say Georgia was closer to a blue-blood than Clemson was before their run with Dabo. Now that UGa looks to be starting a dynasty with Kirby, I'd say they're back in blue blood territory.

Nebraska and tu are still probably considered blue bloods just based off all-time wins alone.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

JohnLA762 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

Last time I checked, the head has a "back"…

---

Defenders head went into the name on the back of the jersey.

---

Aggieair said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Aggieair said:

---

zwhag2010 said:

---

I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

---

Lol Georgia is more or less considered a blue blood as well.

---

Just the last few years though. Winning football programs flip-flop just like everything else. Remember how dominant Colorado and Nebraska were in the 80s/90s? Now look at them.

Hell even tu has been on the down slide for quite a while now.

---

I'd say Georgia was closer to a blue-blood than Clemson was before their run with Dabo. Now that UGa looks to be starting a dynasty with Kirby, I'd say they're back in blue blood territory.

Nebraska and tu are still probably considered blue bloods just based off all-time wins alone.

---

I would say Nebraska and tu are former blue bloods that have the ability to get it back but I don't think they are right now. That's the difference between current play and historically. But they will always have that edge.

Clemson has had such a good run because they don't play very tough opponents in their conference. That's not saying that Dabo and Clemson aren't good but look at their schedules every year. They're not in the same league as several other conferences.

Just imagine if somehow Texas A&M had been put in the east division of the SEC instead of the west. Up until the last few years I think we would've done a lot better. Tennessee, Georgia and even Kentucky have come on stronger in the last few years but nothing like the West on average.

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet
ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I)

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

• Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area.
• A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground.
• Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.
• Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.

Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield.
• A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
• A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
• A player on the ground.
• A player obviously out of the play.
• A player who receives a blind-side block.
• A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
• A quarterback any time after a change of possession
• A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet-first.

The problem with "blue bloods" is that it's a vague term that's highly subjective. I've always understood it to be used most frequently when talking about the all-time history of a program. So I figured if you had to quantify it in a measurable way, it would be the top 10 winningest programs of all time.

Off the top of my head, I figured that would be Bama, Michigan, OSU, tu, OU, USC, ND, and Nebraska. PSU, UT, and UGa would probably round out the top 10.

Clemson would probably still be an outsider given their program's performance pre-Dabo was similar overall to ours.

But bottom line, UGa was always that program which was a perennial 9 to 11 win program that could never quite turn the last corner. Now that they've won a championship recently, the media seems to treat them like a blue blood again.

The difference is had the ball already been across the 50, they'd have called targeting based on the pure definition of the rule.

This is what makes the call and how it's determined to be bull*****

Outside scoring range in this instance, no scrutiny.
towards the refs.

Inside scoring and had they not called it, scrutiny towards the ref.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

JohnLA762 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

Last time I checked, the head has a "back"…

---

Defenders head went into the name on the back of the jersey.

---

No it did not.....it hit the back of the helmet. He lead with the crown of his helmet and it should have been called.

Aggieair said:

---

annie88 said:

---

Aggieair said:

---

zwhag2010 said:

---

I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

---

Lol Georgia is more or less considered a blue blood as well.

---

Just the last few years though. Winning football programs flip-flop just like everything else. Remember how dominant Colorado and Nebraska were in the 80s/90s? Now look at them.

Hell even tu has been on the down slide for quite a while now.

---

I'd say Georgia was closer to a blue-blood than Clemson was before their run with Dabo. Now that UGa looks to be starting a dynasty with Kirby, I'd say they're back in blue blood territory.

Nebraska and tu are still probably considered blue bloods just based off all-time wins alone.

---

Starting a dynasty? They won one championship.

DGrimesAg92 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

JohnLA762 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Nino Brown said:

---

---

I don't see the word 'back' in that rule.

---

Last time I checked, the head has a "back"…

---

Defenders head went into the name on the back of the jersey.

---

No it did not.....it hit the back of the helmet. He lead with the crown of his helmet and it should have been called.

---

.
Lol nah. Sorry. It was into his back.

Aggieair said:

---

zwhag2010 said:

---

I am happy for TCU. Knocking off a team that is part of the "country club" of CFB. The media is weeping now. Their only hope is "THE" Ohio State University. Whatever breaks up these blue blood entitlements is a win for programs that get screwed out of nation championship opportunities (see A&M 2020)

---

Lol Georgia is more or less considered a blue blood as well.

---

Their last national championship was in 1980.

First season was in 1892.

In addition to its storied history, the team is known for its unique traditions and rabid fan base, known as the "Bulldog Nation." Georgia has won over 850 games in its history, placing them 11th all-time in wins and has finished in the Top 10 of the AP Poll 26 times, 13 of which were Top 5 finishes.

Blue blood or just a rich history?

Dr Lane Trowlan said:

---

TCU head coach Sonny Dykes had some words for the SEC! 👀

Story: https://t.co/0DC1olp4ml pic.twitter.com/9Bt16uUsn1

— On3 (@On3sports) December 29, 2022

I expect UGA to win, so Sonny will get his shot. Better be prepared, Georgia ain't Michigan.

---

Does someone wanna go ahead and tell him the BDF basically IS the Citadel?

Actual Talking Thermos said:

---

Actual Talking Thermos said:

---

---

---

Aggie2 said:

---

JohnLA762 said:

---

Georgia looking forward to TCU like:

---

So did Michigan.

---

Michigan gave away 28 points. I don't know how they kept it as close as they did. TCU will have all they can handle on defense, and will need another fast start.

Feels like it will be a blowout vs UGA, but that's what Michigan felt like too. Will need to up the ante for whatever sacrifice to the football gods they made for last night. Two pick-six games don't come around all that often and certainly not back-to-back in the CFP.

I tend to agree. Feels like a blowout but we thought that vs Michigan…however…Michigan now has a pretty solid track record of being poor in playoffs.

TCU's most glaring weakness is deep throws to slot receivers. With UGa's tight ends alone, that would seem to be a matchup problem. I keep seeing "Michigan gave up" this or that but the reality is TCU took some of those with their play and they had just as many questionable calls against them as for. The obvious holding on TCU DEs is just a given with SEC officiating. Whatever, I hope TCU wins going away against UGa. They have a good team.

milner79 said:

---

---

One of the risks of attending a nationally televised game is impulsively doing something that will forever embarrass you, making you "that guy" or "that girl."