You knew it didn't cost them the game. You just didn't expect to get challenged on your revisionist history.
Honestly, your comment was equally as stupid and dumb as those from the PSU revisionist historians (the ones you make fun of).
tOSU and UM discussion
- Thread starter Alphalion75
- Start date
You knew it didn't cost them the game. You just didn't expect to get challenged on your revisionist history.
Honestly, your comment was equally as stupid and dumb as those from the PSU revisionist historians (the ones you make fun of).
I agree that it is not a conference wide conspiracy. And the handful of plays (10 or so) is less than 0.5% which is statistically possible and is certainly way more statistically possible than the 0.0% that went PSU's way. And the average margin of victory means nothing because as you know the course of games is changed by single plays and single bad calls. I don't think there's anyone arguing that OSU is not a superior program, so they certainly don't need the extra help. The fact that these situations do not result in punitive action or concrete changes naturally leads to thoughts of a conspiracy.
This we can mostly agree on.
The only reason I mentioned margin of victory, and I almost didn't, is because I feel very confident that a missed or bad call would not have materially changed the outcome of the game in 2015, 2013, 2012, 2010, 2009, 2007, 2006, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1996, 1994 or 1993 where the closest game was 12 points and I feel like it was clear in every game who the better team on the field was (Ohio State won 11 of the 13 listed here, by an average of 32-16. The total average of these games was Winner: 37, Loser: 11).
A perfect e ample of how conspiracy theories come about. Take some truth, then manipulate it to fit your theory.
Yes, Paterno was vocal about relays because sometimes bad calls are made that effect games. But that doesn't mean there is a agreed upon (or even not agreed upon) condition that purposely keeps PSU down to favor OSU and Michigan.
If there is a conspiracy to keep PSU down it's costing your University money. Why aren't your coaches and administration actually complaining and filing lawsuits?
I'm not supporting a conspiracy theory, but the flip side of your question is if there is no conspiracy, then why aren't these officials that are making these huge mistakes in favor of OSU and UM not being punished, disciplined or removed?
And as I said in a past post, if you think our coaches aren't complaining, then you're not listening. As far as our administration...please. Stupid is as stupid does.
Except there have been and I gave you an example of one which almost cost Michigan the game in 2002. However, in the end Michigan ended up winning which is why we don't lament over it years later. But we have our historic ref. gafs that went against us that did cost us games...a couple ones we remember were against MSU: Desmond getting tripped in the endzone and clockgate which led to a rule change also. The difference though is we don't attribute it to some big B10 conspiracy against us and for MSU.
AWS1022, if you are saying that your coaches are complaining about poor officiating, then I'm not disagreeing. The gist of the majority of the PSU posters is that there is a "conspiracy", even if that's not where you are coming from. That is what I'm asking about.
Why aren't the officials in question being punished? It could be because as you estimate, the plays in question represent about 0.5% of all plays. It could also be because the Big 10 officials who generally police themselves are self-protecting. That may or may not be, but it has nothing to do with the conference working together to keep PSU down in the favor of UM and OSU.
Why aren't the officials in question being punished? It could be because as you estimate, the plays in question represent about 0.5% of all plays. It could also be because the Big 10 officials who generally police themselves are self-protecting. That may or may not be, but it has nothing to do with the conference working together to keep PSU down in the favor of UM and OSU.
It's also that a couple of the calls that PSU fans complain about actually were the correct calls (thus no need to punish the refs) and PSU fans (as do fans of most schools) oddly don't remember the ones that went for them (I know there was one huge one in a game we had with them but in the end we won so we let it go). The B10 refs, overall, are pretty bad but if we fired them for each mistake they made we'd be firing every crew each week. So the bottom line you just hope the bad calls even out in the end.
Correct calls? You mean the ones that articles were written about and discussions were had on talk shows about how bad they were? You mean those were really correct? I guess I forgot the rule that allowed a field goal to be kicked 3 seconds after the play clock expired or that a ball that hits the ground prior to an interception is really an interception. We're not talking about questionable calls, the problem are the ones that are blatantly wrong, are shown on replay to be wrong, but still stand. Those are gross misconduct or complete incompetence on the part of the officials and either way, they should be disciplined. It amazes me the fans of other teams that won't admit a call was wrong even if it's blatantly obvious. It's okay to say PSU got ripped off once in a while, it doesn't make you a bad person.
And as to your last sentence, believe me we all want them to even out, we're just still waiting (it's only been 22 years, so there's still hope).
No conspiracy but a definite bias. Unfortunately it happens (Big 12 has a bias toward Texas and Oklahoma). Not much can be done about it but OSU and UM fans shouldn't deny that it exists just because they don't want it to.
I mean like the Avant catch which even some PA media and 99% of neutral media said was legal. I'm talking putting two seconds back on the clock which even some of your own fans say was kosher.
And I'm not surprised that none of you will respond to me pointing out that in the 2002 game there was a wrong call that went in favor of PSU that if called correctly the few plays later (also wrong) call that went against PSU would have never happened because Michigan would have had the ball with a chance to win before OT.
Oh boy...your arguments are starting to unravel aren't they...
I never did see a reasonable explanation on why the two seconds were put back on the clock, just that they were. And in the 2002 game were those calls upheld by replay...no, because they didn't use it yet.
Again, you just won't admit that PSU has had more than their share of blatantly bad calls...not questionable calls...I mean really bad calls that were grossly incompetent. But I guess it's more important for you to feel that my arguments are unraveling.
Below is a link to one our your instate media outlets saying what happened in the 2005 game was perfectly kosher (Avant catch, 2 seconds). It seems like you are now talking around 2002 saying there was no replay...if there had been the first call (that favored PSU) might have been reversed and the second one never happens because Michigan would have gotten the ball back. So to my point: some of the calls you guys complain about were indeed correct.
So to your point...with the above covered...what are the calls in PSU/Umich games that were blatantly wrong that lost PSU the game? I'm expecting you to have a list of at least a dozen since you are saying it has been so lopsided.
btw...philly.com
http://articles.philly.com/2005-10-...penn-staters-michigan-stadium-michigan-fumble
A tangent .... but as regards the Avant catch:
The college football rulebook as it stood in 2005 was completely agnostic about whether such was a catch. The rulebook never anticipated such a situation.
There were other games later in 2005 (Fresno State/Louisiana Tech) where a similar play occurred and the pass was ruled incomplete. As in the U-M/PSU game, the refs in that game ruled it as they did on-the-field. Because the rulebook provided no further clarification, it really couldn't be overruled.
The rulebook, as it was amended in 2007 and still remains today --- it's definitely not a catch. See approved ruling 7-3-6-15 (page 181 of the link).
http://www.ncfafootball.com/resources/Rules/FR15.pdf
I'm not going to bother checking your link because I'm sure what you say is true...don't doubt it. And if it is true the way the refs interpreted the rule in 2005 was not incorrect. That is the point...the call certainly should not support a conspiracy theory in anyone's mind (assuming they are sane).
You're so full of $hit - 99% of the media did not say it is legal moron and you making such a hyperbolic claim doesn't make it a "fact" either dip$hit. The rule plainly stated it was an incomplete pass (the rule states that if any part of the first foot landing hits the OB stripe upon landing it is incomplete). The only people claiming it was a "completion" were the scUM-loving justify anything, even cheating, fans. Everybody else who could easily read the rule and knew ACTUAL NCAA FOOTBALL RULES (and not the b1g shiz-hole flexible cheating rules) knew it was an incompletion. Your made up bull$hit is really tiresome @sshole.
Here's a link (I posted this prior) to your local media saying it was legal...I picked this one because it was the first one that came up on Google...I could post more if you'd like?
http://articles.philly.com/2005-10-...penn-staters-michigan-stadium-michigan-fumble
So who's making stuff up brah?
Classic, another proven scUM-loving troll posting bull$hit to support a second scUM-loving troll. The rule is not "agnostic" regarding the "FIRST FOOT LANDING" michnitwit. According to you, catches where a receiver is running toward the sidelines and his heel strikes first in bounds followed by the rest of his foot coming down out-of-bounds was routinely called a "catch".....which everybody knows to be the absolute bull$hit, made-up, nonsense of a scUM-loving troll defending cheating in favor of his precious crap team by the disgraceful b1g shiz-hole conference. The rule has ALWAYS stated that the entire "FIRST FOOT LANDING" must be in-bounds - the back half of your foot landing on the OB stripe as it "lands" CLEARLY VIOLATES THE RULE for anybody who understands how to read and has any concern with ACTUALLY following the rule as it is written (e.g., this wouldn't include cheating, zero-integrity scUM fans or b1g shiz-hole field and replay officials).
I don't have a beef with the call in the 2005 game. I like your wording. "It was not called incorrectly" is more precisely worded versus "it was called correctly."
By their nature, approved rulings are in the rulebook to provide clarification on certain football game situations. The football rulebook simply cannot anticipate anything and everything.
Do you really think it's a complete coincidence that the approved ruling FIRST showed up in the NCAA rulebook in 2007?
The rulebook was unclear in 2005. If the ref ruled Avant OOB, U-M fans would have no beef either. NEITHER PSU or U-M has a beef in this situation.
Westcoast. Spot on, brother. That post of his, like so many others, is just SO over the top that you can only regard it as entertainment. .Which I do. LOL...
You obviously haven't been reading my posts...I never said there were a ton of them and I never said they were so lopsided in favor of UM. In fact, I agreed with a poster who said about 5%...the problem is that the ones that were blatantly obvious bad calls (even after replay) all went against PSU and that defies odds that they were just by chance or the old rah rah of the calls even out. How many blatantly horrible calls have been made in Major League Baseball...I mean like the one that cost the pitcher a perfect game? Now what if there were about three or four of those over the course of a few years and they all went against the same team and in favor of the same team? Those types of calls should maybe happen once a year in all of college football yet we got two in the SAME GAME....what are the chances of that happening by accident? At some point it just gets to be a little too much to chalk up to chance.
Bias for OSU and Michigan? Bias like Texas and Oklahoma gets? Like Alabama and Florida State gets? Like the New England Patriots, the Steelers of the 70's, the Cowboys of the 90's, the Lakers and Celtics of the early 80's, the Pistons of the late 80's, and the Bulls of the 90's?
All those teams were accused of getting favoritism. Maybe it's just that the better teams usually win regardless of whether they get the calls or not. The not as good teams usually lose when they don't get the calls, so it becomes more memorable to their fanbases.
Which they then blame the league or officials for being involved in a conspiracy or having bias.
You might have crossed them off the list, but I haven't. And did you even read the article you linked? That certainly didn't clear anything up, if anything it casts more doubts because it mentions that strange sh!t happened in 02 and 05. It also never explained why two seconds were put back on the clock just like no one has ever explained it. So we have an article that you posted talking about two games where Joe Paterno and Penn State felt like they were cheated against Michigan. Now post the article where there were bad calls that cost UM the game against PSU. You want examples, the article you posted gives them to you in not just one, but two games. Hmmm.
Actually the article is pretty much mocking PSU fans...it clearly says the Avant call was correct...adding time back on the clock is normal and Joe Pa didn't challenge the fumble.
And we've covered 2002...yes there was a bad call against PSU...which came right after a bad call against Michigan...thus you should at least concede they cancel out if you aren't willing to go as far as admitting that the second call is moot because the real issue is that Michigan should have gotten the ball back prior with a chance to win...thus it was Michigan and not PSU that really got screwed.
So the net is you have nothing...nada...zilch. Well except a strong belief based on no actual data...
Alabama and Florida State are not in the same conference, by the way so there really can't be any conference bias. But to your other point, it is true that the better teams usually win but it is also true that the better teams do tend to get their share of close calls...just like the better players get their share of the calls (Michael Jordan, LaBron, good hitters often get the benefit of the doubt on close pitches that could be third strikes). It's human nature to think that a player or a team is better so they wouldn't make that kind of mistake or they did something poorly so it must have been something the other team did. Unfortunately, it doesn't make it right but there will always be fans of those teams justifying it. And I am a Celtics fan and I admit they got a lot of the calls during the Bird era...see, it didn't kill me to say that.
Of course I have no data if you just ignore it. Like any fan where their team got a gift, just ignore it or deny it so it didn't really happen. Maybe someday we will be having this discussion about a game that PSU won because of a really bad call...but I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it if I were you.
LOL...I give up trying to be reasonable with you...I'll just try your approach...."I'm right and you are wrong because I say so...na, na, na, na..."
I'd appreciate yes or no answers from you on the following:
1) You saw the part of the article that says the Avant call was correct?
2) You saw the part of the article that said putting time back on the clock is not uncommon?
3) You saw the part of the article Joe Pa could have challenged the fumble but chose not to?
4) You acknowledge that on a 3rd down play on PSU's final drive in regulation in 2002 there was a call, that went against Michigan, that had there been replay could have been overturned giving Michigan the ball back with plenty of time to win before OT?
5) If the call described in Q4 goes the other way another the call (a few plays later) that went against PSU is not in dispute because the play never happens?
Yes or no please.
1. Yes, one man's opinion.
2. Yes, but still didn't explain why it happened.
3. Yes.
4. Don't remember.
5. Maybe, maybe not..since we're dealing wit hypotheticals maybe the refs find another way to screw PSU (two can play that game)
6. Yes, but there was a lot more time on the clock at that point and not as critical.
Now my turn. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish with all this. It's either:
1. You're saying there is no conspiracy against PSU in the Big...which I agree with.
2. You're saying PSU does not get more than their share of biased calls against them in the Big...which I bring up UM in 02 and 05, multiple calls vs. OSU, and the non TD call against Nebraska. And which you bring up???? Oh, that's right, there are none that had a direct impact on PSU winning a game...so at best, bias and at worse, a conspiracy.
3. You're saying PSU never got any calls against UM that helped UM win a game...again I bring up 02 and 05.
So your bottom line is what exactly? You will never convince me there aren't certain officials in the Big that have something against PSU. There's too much smoke to not have at least a little bit of fire. When someone as experienced as Joe Paterno was concerned about it and voiced concern over it, the average fan is certainly going to see it. Pick away at all the details you want but doing that is not seeing the forest for the trees.
Yes I mentioned FSU and Alabama in the same sentence. It wasn't to imply they were in the same conference, just both college teams that have been accused have getting the benefit of bias. But hey, if you feel a need to findi something to correct me on, go right ahead.
On 4 and 5...
4) It happened. I will provide a link to the play at the end of this post. But the bigger point is "you don't remember." You where at your own 17, it was 3 and 12 and if there was replay it is likely overturned, PSU punts and Michigan gets the ball back with likely great field position and plenty of time. If Michigan doesn't make the plays it did in OT (which aren't in dispute) the conversation about the 2002 game is about how the refs screwed MICHIGAN. But I guess your biased and selective memory has blocked it out because it doesn't support your agenda.
5) There's no "maybe." If they called the first play (that went against Michigan) differently (imo and the experts' opinion it was called incorrectly) then the drive is over: thus plays that happened later in that drive would never have happened. If you don't understand that then the tin foil wrapped around your head is thicker than I thought...sorry to be harsh but it is simple logic.
btw...start at the 22 minute mark of the linked video...my favorite part is the announcers reaction when they see the replay...not a catch...drive over
Last edited:
