Jump to content

Texas vs A&M - 6:30pm on ABC


Pancho

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, B00M said:

The only one that was debatable was makuba’s hit. 

No. There was no indicator of a targeting at all. That is a required element. He didn't lower his head. He didn't launch. The helmet contact was completely incidental. That wasn't close to targeting. Hell, it was even questionable whether the receiver should have been considered defenseless. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SIAP.  which one of you beautiful assholes did this
 
No idea, but I can't decide which is more impressive...finding a Longhorn steer perfectly fine with being a horse, or how well trained that blue heeler is. All around impressive
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skipper said:

I've come to believe over the years his Texags persona is largely a bit that has made him a shit ton of $$$.  Nothing about meeting him in person really changed that.  I do think he's a true fan for sure and was a bit down, but I didn't get the impression he was surprised at how it played out.  Like I said, was complimentary of Sark, roster he's stacked, what we've done with NIL etc.

Yep. He’s a cartoon. I do think he largely believes the bullshit he shovels (most aggies do), but much is an act. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Funk Doctor Spock said:

Hwy, Zuhn. How you feeling about Ant Hill and the rest of the team now? Have you played the #1 defense before? Cause your ass got shut out on offense. 

Thanks for playing. 

It's even funnier when you watch Zuhn get stood up and knocked back on that play.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tex Pete said:

I don’t know. I think they stopped allowing him when the Big 12 began. I’m sure their excuse was liability. So we shouldn’t allow theirs. 

I can’t even bring my dog to kids soccer games for fear she will piss on thier artificial turf.  Seeing like we have plenty of reason why their dog shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near our million dollar field. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curiosity got the best of me and I took a look at the texags game thread. 

Those morons seem to think that if the football crosses the goal line outside the pylon, even though it was in Arch's hand and Arch was in bounds, that means the ball is out of bounds and not a TD.

Like they don't even know the basics of football.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ajax said:

Curiosity got the best of me and I took a look at the texags game thread. 

Those morons seem to think that if the football crosses the goal line outside the pylon, even though it was in Arch's hand and Arch was in bounds, that means the ball is out of bounds and not a TD.

Like they don't even know the basics of football.

They don’t know the basics of social skills or personal hygiene, either. This should not surprise you. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

No. There was no indicator of a targeting at all. That is a required element. He didn't lower his head. He didn't launch. The helmet contact was completely incidental. That wasn't close to targeting. Hell, it was even questionable whether the receiver should have been considered defenseless. 

Ok, glad to hear it was so by the books.

 

 

12 minutes ago, Bevoette said:

They're so butthurt over Matthew being in the side lines. 

 

FB_IMG_1733115368677.jpg

Doesn’t he have some made up staff position? Minister of culture or some shit with a low salary? 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ajax said:

Curiosity got the best of me and I took a look at the texags game thread. 

Those morons seem to think that if the football crosses the goal line outside the pylon, even though it was in Arch's hand and Arch was in bounds, that means the ball is out of bounds and not a TD.

Like they don't even know the basics of football.

I saw someone on there thought it shouldve been a touchback lol

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Maybe I haven't watched enough primetime games, but how many times have you seen a pregame intro that has an entire fight song with lyrics on the screen? That was so bizarre I'm convinced aggy begged for it to happen

Ya know…..if you think explaining it in script on the screen will help y’all get more people on board….well, it ain’t working for you.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OU Sucks said:

Maybe I haven't watched enough primetime games, but how many times have you seen a pregame intro that has an entire fight song with lyrics on the screen? That was so bizarre I'm convinced aggy begged for it to happen.

Never seen it and yes, fucking strange. Cant think of a more plausible explanation than the dipshit new AD requested it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Frank Drebin said:

Once I saw it was the side of Mukuba’s helmet contact the face mask of the runner, I knew it wasn’t targeting. 

The officials don't even know what targeting is, so don't be so confident. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrashMaster G said:

Why the fuck do they care? I mean, seriously, what difference does it make?

Bitching about it just tells us about their small-dick syndrome insecurities.

1234.  Nothing stopping them from having Johnny Manziel walking their sidelines almost every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Funk Doctor Spock said:

Absolutely awful. He can't rap. His cadence is fucking horrible. He sounds like one of those idiots at a party that tries to rap when they're drunk. 

Has anyone told aggy he's black?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ajax said:

Curiosity got the best of me and I took a look at the texags game thread. 

Those morons seem to think that if the football crosses the goal line outside the pylon, even though it was in Arch's hand and Arch was in bounds, that means the ball is out of bounds and not a TD.

Like they don't even know the basics of football.

To be fair - I thought that was the rule also. Maybe it is in the NFL but who cares now. However I kept wondering how they chose the one yard line. No where close to where it would be if the rule was what I thought. About the 5 inch line

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, The Ace of Aces said:

55 is the guy that was shoving his hands in his face and trying to fight when they both got double personal fouls. Simmons didn’t deserve one at all imo. He prob shouldn’t have listed it but fuck that 55 dude. Just one of several dirty ass players aggy has on its roster. 


image.thumb.png.3a4f3551868fa330d0f1ba91ff2a87a4.pngFuck him

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, B00M said:

Ok, glad to hear it was so by the books.

 

 

Doesn’t he have some made up staff position? Minister of culture or some shit with a low salary? 

While he is sort of an air head he’s a Texas legend and actually tries to be really thoughtful and inspiring to the guys. He understands ball and understands the team and is actually a resource to guide them. 
 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ajax said:

Curiosity got the best of me and I took a look at the texags game thread. 

Those morons seem to think that if the football crosses the goal line outside the pylon, even though it was in Arch's hand and Arch was in bounds, that means the ball is out of bounds and not a TD.

Like they don't even know the basics of football.

In their defense, the announcers didn't know the rule either. The rules guy had to explain it to them. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Zeus said:

While he is sort of an air head he’s a Texas legend and actually tries to be really thoughtful and inspiring to the guys. He understands ball and understands the team and is actually a resource to guide them. 
 

 

He’s also a professor at the college of communications.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Texasrocks said:

In their defense, the announcers didn't know the rule either. The rules guy had to explain it to them. 

The rules guy was also a rube though calling that normal hit by Mukaba targeting. They really shouldn’t opine on targeting because when they over tuned it correctly it made it seem like there was some sort of cover up. 
 

It wasn’t targeting, the announcers and rules guy are biased and actively rooting for aggy. Maybe because they wanted a good game, more likely because they don’t respect or like Texas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zeus said:

It wasn’t targeting, the announcers and rules guy are biased and actively rooting for aggy. Maybe because they wanted a good game, more likely because they don’t respect or like Texas. 

Doubt there was any bias involved. Out of all the “rules expert” grifters, Bill Lemonnier is easily the worst and should be ignored or ridiculed. Fowler and Herbstreit have been nothing but respectful of Texas for a while now.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Zeus said:

The rules guy was also a rube though calling that normal hit by Mukaba targeting. They really shouldn’t opine on targeting because when they over tuned it correctly it made it seem like there was some sort of cover up. 
 

It wasn’t targeting, the announcers and rules guy are biased and actively rooting for aggy. Maybe because they wanted a good game, more likely because they don’t respect or like Texas. 

Targeting is first and foremost a defenseless player and intent to lead with the crown of the helmet - neither of which applied on that play.  It was an incidental, glancing blow

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Targeting is first and foremost a defenseless player and intent to lead with the crown of the helmet - neither of which applied on that play.  It was an incidental, glancing blow

But they called targeting on the hit on Mike Davis the last time Texas was in town. It cost aggy the game./every aggy in existence.

Narrator : there was no targeting then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, CashMcCoy said:

Doubt there was any bias involved. Out of all the “rules expert” grifters, Bill Lemonnier is easily the worst and should be ignored or ridiculed. Fowler and Herbstreit have been nothing but respectful of Texas for a while now.

Herbstreit also has the video where he talks shit about Kyle Field while Fowler laughs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, Mukuba was clearly delivering a shoulder to the chest and the helmets happened to hit. The issue there is that Lemonnier is correct that intent isn't the rule, what actually happens is and Mukuba did accidentally deliver forcible contact to the head. So the only reason that wasn't targeting is if they ruled that the receiver was no longer defenseless in that instant. It was a very close call and that is a part of the targeting rule that sucks. But I'm not sure changing it makes overall sense because it would decrease player safety.

On that play it would have been better all around for Mukuba to just take out their player's thighs because he was well short of the first down, but that's much easier to say in hindsight than at full speed on the field. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...