It's ok, the more teams that get screwed by sip refs the more people will see what we dealt with for years….and for years to come.

True but they don't GAS about us . Some acknowledge that we tried to warn them tho. I recall some Georgia fans doing so recently.

Was probably shortly after the great longhorn bottle throwing tantrum or maybe after tu authorities were unable to identify ANY of the offending fans .

100% rigged system

Targeting it seems is the new rule that can be used in any shape or manner to help influence a game as they like.

lol. I'm reminded in the ND game of Brooks being called for targeting by jumping over Riley and tapping the top of his head with his helmet.

I don't want to believe in preferred status for some teams but it is almost impossible to argue otherwise.

SociallyConditionedAg said:

---

aeon-ag said:

---

Noble Men said:

---

I do not understand how that obvious favoritism is allowed.

I want the NCAA to burn.

---

I've seen targeting enforced that was no where as blatant as what the sips just got away with!!
NOW, do all you children understand why us "OLDS" hate sips like we do??!!

---

The BMAs were apparently thrilled to play the sips again, even though we had a great series going against LSU. It's all about money so I don't expect we'll ever have another championship in football.

---

I have been told that we have lots of money. Money is not holding us back.

Has there been any explanation on why it wasn't targeting??

Besides it's tu

Everything I seen and read says otherwise.

This. I think the referee should have to explain the outcome when any call goes to the replay booth. Refs will miss calls live in game, but there is no reason they should be missed with replay. An explanation is needed.

“And if your opponent makes forcible contact with the head and neck area, we’ll call it Targeting.”

“With dozens of slow motion camera angles that should be a pretty obvious penalty to enforce, right?”

“Absolutely not” pic.twitter.com/yLZuOjcRI2

— Chad Coleman (@HashtagChad) January 1, 2025

Scott Van Pelt: “I don’t care who it is. That’s targeting 100 times out of 100. It wasn’t [called] in this case.”

Dusty Dvoracek: “I thought it was targeting in the moment. I picked up the phone, made a few phone calls. I talked to Bill Lemonnier, who I think is one of the… pic.twitter.com/Ug0CqFWljR

— CFB Kings (@CFBKings) January 2, 2025

Don't matter. OSU is going to roll them.

My phone has been burning up all morning.

Yes, this should have been a flag for targeting in #TEXvsASU. It meets all of the criteria of targeting (Rule 9-1-4). pic.twitter.com/tv5HPIQgd0

— Gene Steratore (@GeneSteratore) January 2, 2025

Gene is my favorite rules analyst.

I knew he would say it was targeting. Of course 99.9% of the entire college football world knows it was targeting.

Wonder what Gene thinks about the missed penalty on ASUs touchdown where the OL pulls him forward

PatAg said:

---

Wonder what Gene thinks about the missed penalty on ASUs touchdown where the OL pulls him forward

---

Gene would say that no flag was thrown so that play is only reviewable to see if he crossed the goal line.

Quite a bit different than the review for the obvious targeting call.

Onionman said:

---

Gene is my favorite rules analyst.

I knew he would say it was targeting. Of course 99.9% of the entire college football world knows it was targeting.

---

EVERYONE knows it was targeting. Those stating otherwise are lying.

It's funny how it's important for sips to think they won bc they actually won it by being the better team. Would have a little respect for them if they actually said darn right they get calls bc of bias or corruption.

Yes

I believe the reasoning was SEC bias.

Same reasoning for keeping FSU out of playoff last year.

Bill Superman said:

---

Sip will never have anything called against them when it matters most.

Write that down.

---

2012 okie state game is the epitome of this. Refs absolutely robbed osu and cost them the game. Late in the 4th, tu fumbled trying to punch it onto the end zone. Not only did they fumble, they straight up didn't break the plane. Refs gave them a TD, reviewed it, and let it stand because tu was down and okie state has a good chance to run out the clock. It was so bad, the bdf apologized for it the next week.

No one gets the critical blown call or questionable critical drive extending penalty like the sips.

I e said this before and its not very popular opinion. But the rule is useless for what they intend to achieve with it and that leads to all the problems. If you want to get dangerous hits out of the game, they have gone about it all wrong. They are trying to show their "seriousness" by making the enforcement egregious, kicking players out of games, and even enforcing suspensions. The severity of the enforcement makes them not want to call it and makes them put all kinds of disclaimers that still leave dangerous hits in the game as technically legal.

The rule needs to be simplified and theres no need for a judgement call. Make it illegal for an offensive player to lower their head. Make it illegal for a defensive player to hit above the shoulders. Thats all you need and then just call it ALL THE TIME until it stops. You dont need to kick players out, or suspend them, just call the penalties.

I dont care if the defensive player didnt intend to hit him or whatever other garbage. Make it black and white, hit the other player in the head=penalty

I thought it was targeting when it happened. That said, I thought it was targeting when the tu receiver was hit and the ball was intercepted. So, I kind of viewed it as a makeup call. Over all, as much as I hate to say it, I think Arizona State got most of the ref favoritism. Like the defensive holding in the endzone and multiple terrible spots. I think the refs have been generally awful all year.

waynehisler said:

---

I thought it was targeting when it happened. That said, I thought it was targeting when the tu receiver was hit and the ball was intercepted. So, I kind of viewed it as a makeup call. Over all, as much as I hate to say it, I think Arizona State got most of the ref favoritism. Like the defensive holding in the endzone and multiple terrible spots. I think the refs have been generally awful all year.

---

One hit the player completely turned his body and made contact with the opposing players chest. One hit the player launched with his helmet and made contact with the opposing players helmet.

That was clearly targeting. I can't believe it got overturned. I hope Ohio State throttles Texas in their backyard at Jerry World.

It didn't get overturned. No flag was ever thrown.

classof92 said:

---

It didn't get overturned. No flag was ever thrown.

---

Wonder if a flag was thrown if they would have overturned it. Maybe it was easier to say it was not targeting because that was also the call on the field

agree. IMO if a flag was thrown, it would have been upheld.

tu also benefitted from a missed first down spot on a third down throw to their TE on that final drive in regulation. He was a full yard short if the yellow line was mostly accurate. Every other time the refs are quick to review before the next snap but surprise, they let sip get off the snap instead of whistling it dead for review

I guess I disagree. I think there's a lot of confusion over what exactly constitutes targeting. I thought they were both targeting. That doesn't make it right. I, frankly, couldn't believe that it wasn't called on tu. Particularly after the review. So, that's I viewed it as a makeup call. Either way, I think tu would have won that game. But, I also think they are going to get dog-walked by Ohio State.

Also at least one play the sips defensive end was lines up across the black neutral line

Iowaggie said:

---

Noble Men said:

---

I do not understand how that obvious favoritism is allowed.

I want the NCAA to burn.

---

The NCAA doesn't control the playoffs, the networks do.

---

FIFY

dreyOO said:

---

This was the perfect ending for the powers that be. When ESiPN replays this later, they'll scoot by a "questionable call late in the 4th" before they go to 10 more highlights in OT. If that...then they can say officiating had nothing to do with the win.

But it damn sure did.

---

Which is EXACTLY what they did. Predictable as the sunrise

Man, I love hearing from all the conspiracy theorist. It gets me through a slow day in the market.

classof92 said:

---

Man, I love hearing from all the conspiracy theorist. It gets me through a slow day in the market.

---

Well I hate listening to all the sip huggers on an A&M forum. One of the most obvious targeting calls I have ever seen and you are on here trying to argue it.

But the good thing is after next week you will go into hiding after OSU takes care of your beloved sips.