FB: Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[LeoFan83]

Leo, the first thing I noticed is how slow they were too, I think LF is a three touchdown favorite over the Tommies. The issue is exactly what RFB pointed out, the SCIAC has not depth upfront, I have seen many a freshman get playing time in this league when they would have to wait at Midwest schools until their junior year. The Leos got it done with band aids up front. It was apparent watching the feed, that the Tommies would eventually overwhelm the Leos. Nice run for the team, great experience for the kids, something the program can build on. I like your third string QB, he has promise. He can makes throws.

And don't get me wrong St. Thomas is a very good team, I just am not sure they can run with the truly elite teams at this level. I anticipate they'll beat St. Johns this week, and if they do, I am very keen to see how they play Linfield.

I can't say enough how great their facilities were. There's nothing like that in the SCIAC. Really nice set up. Fans there were great. Overall it was a lot of fun and a good experience for the kids.

I agree with you, I like what I saw from the freshman kid. Making your debut on the road in 20 degree weather against a top 5 team in the playoffs is a difficult way to start. He should be prepared for anything after that.

I am curious to take another look at the hit on our starting QB in the first. I didn't see it, but I heard it. I heard some rumbling that it looked like a targeting type play, but haven't looked yet. I'll get some feedback later.

Good luck to the Tommies, and thanks to their fans for being so receptive.

Let's us know on the targeting, would be a shame. It was tough to tell on my pc. The SCIAC conference really is not committed to sports compared to Tex and Midwest schools. Night and day, so when UR upset NCC is was huge, they too have great facilties,....Linfield is the nicest in the west.

I've been to Linfield. Great facilities. Plus it seemed like the whole town showed up for their game.

[LeoFan83]

Leo, the first thing I noticed is how slow they were too, I think LF is a three touchdown favorite over the Tommies. The issue is exactly what RFB pointed out, the SCIAC has not depth upfront, I have seen many a freshman get playing time in this league when they would have to wait at Midwest schools until their junior year. The Leos got it done with band aids up front. It was apparent watching the feed, that the Tommies would eventually overwhelm the Leos. Nice run for the team, great experience for the kids, something the program can build on. I like your third string QB, he has promise. He can makes throws.

And don't get me wrong St. Thomas is a very good team, I just am not sure they can run with the truly elite teams at this level. I anticipate they'll beat St. Johns this week, and if they do, I am very keen to see how they play Linfield.

I can't say enough how great their facilities were. There's nothing like that in the SCIAC. Really nice set up. Fans there were great. Overall it was a lot of fun and a good experience for the kids.

I agree with you, I like what I saw from the freshman kid. Making your debut on the road in 20 degree weather against a top 5 team in the playoffs is a difficult way to start. He should be prepared for anything after that.

I am curious to take another look at the hit on our starting QB in the first. I didn't see it, but I heard it. I heard some rumbling that it looked like a targeting type play, but haven't looked yet. I'll get some feedback later.

Good luck to the Tommies, and thanks to their fans for being so receptive.

Let's us know on the targeting, would be a shame. It was tough to tell on my pc. The SCIAC conference really is not committed to sports compared to Tex and Midwest schools. Night and day, so when UR upset NCC is was huge, they too have great facilties,....Linfield is the nicest in the west.

I just saw an end zone replay of it. Looked helmet to helmet as the defender went high. Don't think it was malicious but may have warranted targeting penalty.

You can see it early in this recap

http://youtu.be/AexiSm1wqg8

[wm4]

Leo, the first thing I noticed is how slow they were too, I think LF is a three touchdown favorite over the Tommies. The issue is exactly what RFB pointed out, the SCIAC has not depth upfront, I have seen many a freshman get playing time in this league when they would have to wait at Midwest schools until their junior year. The Leos got it done with band aids up front. It was apparent watching the feed, that the Tommies would eventually overwhelm the Leos. Nice run for the team, great experience for the kids, something the program can build on. I like your third string QB, he has promise. He can makes throws.

And don't get me wrong St. Thomas is a very good team, I just am not sure they can run with the truly elite teams at this level. I anticipate they'll beat St. Johns this week, and if they do, I am very keen to see how they play Linfield.

I can't say enough how great their facilities were. There's nothing like that in the SCIAC. Really nice set up. Fans there were great. Overall it was a lot of fun and a good experience for the kids.

I agree with you, I like what I saw from the freshman kid. Making your debut on the road in 20 degree weather against a top 5 team in the playoffs is a difficult way to start. He should be prepared for anything after that.

I am curious to take another look at the hit on our starting QB in the first. I didn't see it, but I heard it. I heard some rumbling that it looked like a targeting type play, but haven't looked yet. I'll get some feedback later.

Good luck to the Tommies, and thanks to their fans for being so receptive.

Let's us know on the targeting, would be a shame. It was tough to tell on my pc. The SCIAC conference really is not committed to sports compared to Tex and Midwest schools. Night and day, so when UR upset NCC is was huge, they too have great facilties,....Linfield is the nicest in the west.

I just saw an end zone replay of it. Looked helmet to helmet as the defender went high. Don't think it was malicious but may have warranted targeting penalty.

You can see it early in this recap

http://youtu.be/AexiSm1wqg8

Thanks for passing along clip.  The defensive player has his arms completely around the QB and they were about the same height so there was some helmet to helmet contact as a natural part of the play.  It was a clean tackle.  I think the QB got knocked out when his head hit the turf, which is quite old and worn out, by the way.

[olddog]

That was not targeting, they seem to make that call when a player leads with his helmet, he lead with his chest and there was some incidental contact. The ground whiplash caused the issue not the helmet contact. Clean, football. 

[LeoFan83]

That was not targeting, they seem to make that call when a player leads with his helmet, he lead with his chest and there was some incidental contact. The ground whiplash caused the issue not the helmet contact. Clean, football.

You are probably right.

[olddog]

Happy Thanksgiving to all in the West, even the Regals, (congrats on winning the WVB national champs, nice) . Go Linfield !

[desertcat1]

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone.  Safe travels.

Go Cats
Go BIG D

[(509)Rat]

That was not targeting, they seem to make that call when a player leads with his helmet, he lead with his chest and there was some incidental contact. The ground whiplash caused the issue not the helmet contact. Clean, football.

You are probably right.

olddog is old...this ain't your grandpappy's football anymore, gentlemen. That was 100% targeting according to NCAA rules:

Rule 9, Section 1
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 with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow
or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-
4-I-VI)

Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14):
• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.

It doesn't matter what you lead with or if its the crown of your helmet vs the facemask. You can't hit a QB in the helmet with your helmet anymore.

[olddog]

That was not targeting, they seem to make that call when a player leads with his helmet, he lead with his chest and there was some incidental contact. The ground whiplash caused the issue not the helmet contact. Clean, football.

You are probably right.

olddog is old...this ain't your grandpappy's football anymore, gentlemen. That was 100% targeting according to NCAA rules:

Rule 9, Section 1
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 with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow
or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-
4-I-VI)

Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14):
• A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.

It doesn't matter what you lead with or if its the crown of your helmet vs the facemask. You can't hit a QB in the helmet with your helmet anymore.

The guy came in chest to chest, at the last second he pulls hit head back to make sure, the other contact was minor...Nice try Rat, not taking the Rat-bait...clean hit....did you send this post from your herb shop ?

[(509)Rat]

Him coming in chest to chest doesn't matter, nor does his intent or lack of maliciousness. Did his helmet strike the helmet of the QB? The answer is yes, hence the poor kid going out cold (and it's easy to see on more than one frame of the video). Your or my opinion of the "cleanliness" of the hit is irrelevant. That's just the game these guys have to play nowadays.

[olddog]

Rat, what you call a strike I call a touch...They don't make that call in So Cal ....all I know is I did not see a yellow hankie strike the ground.....

[(509)Rat]

I wouldn't call what you guys do down in SoCal football though...

And the whole "well the ref didn't throw the flag so it couldn't possibly be a penalty" is the 2nd dumbest thing I've read today...

[OzJohnnie]

I wouldn't call what you guys do down in SoCal football though...

And the whole "well the ref didn't throw the flag so it couldn't possibly be a penalty" is the 2nd dumbest thing I've read today...

I see you have had a look at the MIAC boards.

[olddog]

I wouldn't call what you guys do down in SoCal football though...

And the whole "well the ref didn't throw the flag so it couldn't possibly be a penalty" is the 2nd dumbest thing I've read today...

So let's break this down, a Leo who has hudl agrees with me and so does the ref 10 feet away, but an old guy called Rat has it right.

[DBQ1965]

What about that part of the rule that includes the words "make florcible contact to the head"?  If the contact was incidental then no foul ... no flag.