BA vs. MBA

[itzme]

OK...Robjim insisted on a new thread, so I'm obliging.

 

My evolution on this subject is that while I watched at the game, I thought to myself that it was really close, and I was ecstatic that the kick got off. When I watched the tape I had made, I thought to myself that the refs blew it and that BA was very lucky. After a couple of days reflection, and watching this several times because I was perturbed by the almost universal vilification of the refs, I noticed a new aspect of this, that I think most people missed. Here we go:

 

For the record, here is my take on the subject:

 

1) This thing about a seperate "official" time being kept on somebody's wristwatch is baloney...let's just get that off the table. The scoreboard clock is the official clock.

 

2) Anyone actually attending the game could not physically look at both the play and the clock simultaneously. The field goal took place at the opposite end of the field from the clock. The officials were the only ones who could do that.

 

3) Most of the people commenting about "blatant rip-offs" and referees being paid off are basing their comments on the Comcast coverage.

 

4) The Comcast coverage was critically flawed in a very important aspect. When they showed the scoreboard clock superimposed on the screen, they truncated off the decimals. In other words, when the clock on the screen showed "0", the real game clock in the stadium actually showed "0.9". I admit I didn't think of this until about the third time I watched the ending.

 

5) I actually took a stopwatch and timed the span from when the clock on the screen showed 0, and when the ball was snapped. Remember, it's when the ball is snapped that counts, not when it is kicked. My three times averaged 0.9 seconds. None of us is physically gifted enough to get an exact time down to the tenth when the span is a second or so, but the rhetoric about this being "obvious" and the officials being incompetent or even on the take is ludicrous.

 

6) Did the officials miss this call? I don't know. I know it was very, very close; not obvious. Feel free to repeat my experiment if you have a tape of the game. The replay is on tomorrow (Tuesday) I believe.

 

Now let's all hope MBA and BA meet up again in a few weeks in the Clinic Bowl!

 

Thoughts?

Edited November 4, 2003 by itzme

[dumptruck]

i as well noticed that the clock did not display the decimals as well. at some points in the game it was so bad you could not even see the seconds because the clock was moved over. i also thought Pat Sperduto was hugely in MBAs favor, for whatever reason i dont know. just watch the tape. i counted maybe 1-2 positive comments toward BA. anyway, that doesnt matter, and itzme is also correct that the clock is at the total opposite end of the field than where the field goal happened so they would have to be looking in both directions to tell if they were at the game, sound wierd? i think so.

[WesVLT]

i as well noticed that the clock did not display the decimals as well. at some points in the game it was so bad you could not even see the seconds because the clock was moved over. i also thought Pat Sperduto was hugely in MBAs favor, for whatever reason i dont know. just watch the tape. i counted maybe 1-2 positive comments toward BA. anyway, that doesnt matter, and itzme is also correct that the clock is at the total opposite end of the field than where the field goal happened so they would have to be looking in both directions to tell if they were at the game, sound wierd? i think so.

dumptruck, I strongly agree on both counts. Sperduto was ridiculously biased, which didn't really bother me until folks started signing on here and, as itzme put it friday, started "parroting" what he'd said in the booth. The first words uttered after the final FG weren't "congrats to BA" or "what a game," they were the following:

 

"There will be letters written to the TSSAA this week for sure."

 

Now tell me this; even if that comment was their opinion, why the heck do they insist on undermining the passionate effort of two great teams by spouting off cries of injustice after one questionable call, which their equipment inadequately prepared them to analyze?

 

The call was close and could have gone either way. Meanwhile, the announcing DEFINITELY went only one way. Towards MBA.

 

*Disclaimer: I was only able to watch overtime on my TV. My comments about the announcers are based upon their commentary in OT alone. Still, there was enough unprofessionality during OT alone to shock me.

[WesVLT]

OK...Robjim insisted on a new thread, so I'm obliging.

 

My evolution on this subject is that while I watched at the game, I thought to myself that it was really close, and I was ecstatic that the kick got off. When I watched the tape I had made, I thought to myself that the refs blew it and that BA was very lucky. After a couple of days reflection, and watching this several times because I was perturbed by the almost universal vilification of the refs, I noticed a new aspect of this, that I think most people missed. Here we go:

 

For the record, here is my take on the subject:

 

1) This thing about a seperate "official" time being kept on somebody's wristwatch is baloney...let's just get that off the table. The scoreboard clock is the official clock.

 

2) Anyone actually attending the game could not physically look at both the play and the clock simultaneously. The field goal took place at the opposite end of the field from the clock. The officials were the only ones who could do that.

 

3) Most of the people commenting about "blatant rip-offs" and referees being paid off are basing their comments on the Comcast coverage.

 

4) The Comcast coverage was critically flawed in a very important aspect. When they showed the scoreboard clock superimposed on the screen, they truncated off the decimals. In other words, when the clock on the screen showed "0", the real game clock in the stadium actually showed "0.9". I admit I didn't think of this until about the third time I watched the ending.

 

5) I actually took a stopwatch and timed the span from when the clock on the screen showed 0, and when the ball was snapped. Remember, it's when the ball is snapped that counts, not when it is kicked. My three times averaged 0.9 seconds. None of us is physically gifted enough to get an exact time down to the tenth when the span is a second or so, but the rhetoric about this being "obvious" and the officials being incompetent or even on the take is ludicrous.

 

6) Did the officials miss this call? I don't know. I know it was very, very close; not obvious. Feel free to repeat my experiment if you have a tape of the game. The replay is on tomorrow (Tuesday) I believe.

 

Now let's all hope MBA and BA meet up again in a few weeks in the Clinic Bowl!

 

Thoughts?

Itzme, yours is a comprehensive, appropriate post. I agree with everything you said, and hope people start to collect a cool head about the events that unfolded.

[notredame788]

im glad to see that the people associated with the usa today are smart enough to realize what happened friday night...mba remains ranked in the top 25. they drop from 9 to 25. still the only team from tennessee ranked in it.

[WesVLT]

im glad to see that the people associated with the usa today are smart enough to realize what happened friday night...mba remains ranked in the top 25. they drop from 9 to 25. still the only team from tennessee ranked in it.

Good for them!! It also shows the USA Today's respect for BA. If MBA had lost to some podunk team they wouldn't still be ranked. They deserve to remain ranked.

[5eagleball]

Good thing that they are ahead of BA in just the middle portion of their own state...

[itzme]

im glad to see that the people associated with the usa today are smart enough to realize what happened friday night...mba remains ranked in the top 25. they drop from 9 to 25. still the only team from tennessee ranked in it.

Congratulations to the MBA family. That is great!!

 

BTW, is there any update on the MBA lineman (#51) who was injured early on? Hope he is doing well and recovering quickly.

Edited November 4, 2003 by itzme

[WaCoJaCo]

WOW! that national ranking means a lot. Just wondering, how many teams ranked in the top 25 has MBA played?

 

PS: nobody knows football like USA TODAY!......thats a newspaper ain't it ?

[WesVLT]

WOW! that national ranking means a lot. Just wondering, how many teams ranked in the top 25 has MBA played?

 

PS: nobody knows football like USA TODAY!......thats a newspaper ain't it ?

Trinity was 4th at the beginning of the year and has the top QB in the country if that answers your question.

[WaCoJaCo]

you mean....THATS IT! Dang

 

how do they figure who the top 25 are ?

Edited November 4, 2003 by WaCoJaCo

[ateyfive]

Hey how many times has your team been in the USA Today Top 25 - thats what i thought. Give them some respect, they're a great football team.