It was conference home cooking, but you'd have to be crazy to think that there wouldn't be home cooking - even against UNC. NO conference with a FF birth on the line is going to let an underdog ruin the party. They will let the game get close (for ratings), but the favorite will punch their ticket at the end of the game.

I would feel bad about it, but A) everyone involved knew how the reffing would go when they were going into the game, and B) it's not like UNC hasn't benefited from COUNTLESS instances of favorable calls at the hands of ACC refs over the years.

(12-06-2015 12:53 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  It was conference home cooking, but you'd have to be crazy to think that there wouldn't be home cooking - even against UNC. NO conference with a FF birth on the line is going to let an underdog ruin the party. They will let the game get close (for ratings), but the favorite will punch their ticket at the end of the game.

Yes, with Stanford winning, UNC had no chance to make the playoffs. Their only hope going in was to blow Clemson out and the best they could do was win in overtime.

So all they would have done was knock the ACC out of the playoffs. The refs got that news on the field that Stanford had won, and acted accordingly.

That's the ticket.

clemson would havee still got in if UNC won in overtime due to a onside kick recovery. lol Clemson was clearly the better team..


onside kick is the desperate play of college football

lol. whatever. It would have still been a loss. Have fun with Oklahoma.

(12-06-2015 12:22 AM)Chappy Wrote:  I've never understood the whole partial replay system, where some things can be challenged but others can't. If there's video to prove one's case, as there was in the offsides call, then one should be able to challenge the call. The point of replay is to get it right. Why have replay at all if you don't care about getting things right?

This. That call wasn't even close. There wasn't a UNC player, other than the kicker, within a half-yard of the line when the ball was kicked.

Meh. Makes up for the non-call of targeting when Watson was knocked out for a play and for Shaq Lawson getting mugged by Bentley Spain the entire game. Even on the forced fumble Spain had Lawson around the neck and still got beat.

(12-06-2015 01:36 AM)stever20 Wrote:  lol. whatever. It would have still been a loss. Have fun with Oklahoma.

beat Oklahoma 40-6 just last year, with COle Stoudt

UNC would have needed to score a TD plus convert two point try, just to tie it. then stop our offense from scoring in overtime

Clmson haters been picking against Clemson all year and every year but Clemson wins a lot

tonight would have been easy win if our punter didnt decide to try to get a first down instead of kicking it. lol. Mostly likely would have been up 21-9 at half.

(12-06-2015 01:48 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:36 AM)stever20 Wrote:  lol. whatever. It would have still been a loss. Have fun with Oklahoma.

beat Oklahoma 40-6 just last year, with COle Stoudt

UNC would have needed to score a TD plus convert two point try, just to tie it. then stop our offense from scoring in overtime

Clmson haters been picking against Clemson all year and every year but Clemson wins a lot

And Clemson would have had to stop UNC from scoring in OT. No lock there(given they gave up 37 points).

I think Oklahoma has a different QB as well. It'll be a great game.

(12-06-2015 01:52 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:48 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:36 AM)stever20 Wrote:  lol. whatever. It would have still been a loss. Have fun with Oklahoma.

beat Oklahoma 40-6 just last year, with COle Stoudt

UNC would have needed to score a TD plus convert two point try, just to tie it. then stop our offense from scoring in overtime

Clmson haters been picking against Clemson all year and every year but Clemson wins a lot

And Clemson would have had to stop UNC from scoring in OT. No lock there(given they gave up 37 points).

I think Oklahoma has a different QB as well. It'll be a great game.

look at the stats in the game. i don't know how you put ur money on NC but u can be bitter about it you want. UNC's decision to do a punt fake on their side of the field cost them just as much as a bad call did. I guarantee UNC benefited from some bad calls in the gam as well. We also lost a player on defense for the game for targeting.

it might be a good game. or they might play like they did against Tenn and Texas. Clemson might not even get Oklahoma. Probably should get Michigan State.

(12-06-2015 01:39 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 12:22 AM)Chappy Wrote:  I've never understood the whole partial replay system, where some things can be challenged but others can't. If there's video to prove one's case, as there was in the offsides call, then one should be able to challenge the call. The point of replay is to get it right. Why have replay at all if you don't care about getting things right?

This. That call wasn't even close. There wasn't a UNC player, other than the kicker, within a half-yard of the line when the ball was kicked.

Replay was first implemented to get the gambling public to bet on NFL games regularly again. They never stopped but there was a significant dip prior to replay. The problem with replay all along was that it can not be used to overturn officials calls (other than possession and time and distance.) All point spreads can be controlled with holding and interference calls. They can be justified on most any play. If fumbles and interceptions and out of bounds/in bounds, and scoring plays could be cleaned up they felt that the betting interest would return. It did.

College ball is so popular now that it too is being corrupted more and more.

Refs don't throw games, they control the spread against the closing line. The closing line indicates where the heavy money was bet and only the bookies have that line. The betting line is set to try to even the money on either side of a contest. It also is used to tease fans into betting on what seems to be the obvious.

In the 80's and 90's when I was following it (though I never bet but was interested in the sociology of it) the house won against the closing line 85% of the time in the NFL. That's why I quit watching the pros. It wasn't long afterward that I began to notice irregularities in the college game.

Face it guys a conference that gets into the final 4 can NET close to 80 million from all sources associated with the games. Do you think that the ACC refs who are paid by their conference office are ignorant of that fact? Do you think the ACC office wanted to lose out on that money? You have motive and opportunity and evidence to support, now do you really believe the game is clean?

Note: Gambling had little to do with this game IMO. I'd say that if indeed there was motive behind the call it was to protect revenue for the conference. And remember they didn't throw the game, they just eliminated the possibility of it being thrown into doubt at the end. In college ball I have seen an obviously good extra point called bad, have seen scores awarded or taken away by review, have seen a fumble recovery returned for a touchdown by Iowa State against Texas voided, have seen a fifth down awarded, and time extended on a spurious hanky to permit another field goal attempt on more than one occasion and numerous extensions of time. I have also witnessed one of my own team's head coaches take a safety that dropped us below the spread, when the game was not in doubt and the safety was not needed. Open your eyes, open your minds, and get real.

(12-06-2015 01:48 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:36 AM)stever20 Wrote:  lol. whatever. It would have still been a loss. Have fun with Oklahoma.

beat Oklahoma 40-6 just last year, with COle Stoudt

UNC would have needed to score a TD plus convert two point try, just to tie it. then stop our offense from scoring in overtime

Clmson haters been picking against Clemson all year and every year but Clemson wins a lot

tonight would have been easy win if our punter didnt decide to try to get a first down instead of kicking it. lol. Mostly likely would have been up 21-9 at half.

Ywah, WTH happened there? It looked like he just went rouge. Is there more to the story?

lol

anybody thinks the ACC refs wanted Clemson to win is foolish. why call the targeting call and trhow out a Clemson player. that obviously helped UNC a lot

(12-06-2015 01:56 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:48 AM)ClemVegas Wrote:  

(12-06-2015 01:36 AM)stever20 Wrote:  lol. whatever. It would have still been a loss. Have fun with Oklahoma.

beat Oklahoma 40-6 just last year, with COle Stoudt

UNC would have needed to score a TD plus convert two point try, just to tie it. then stop our offense from scoring in overtime

Clmson haters been picking against Clemson all year and every year but Clemson wins a lot

tonight would have been easy win if our punter didnt decide to try to get a first down instead of kicking it. lol. Mostly likely would have been up 21-9 at half.

Ywah, WTH happened there? It looked like he just went rouge. Is there more to the story?

apparently he thought he could get the first down. it was a dumb play. i think he only got 4 yards. lol

Clemson seems to play better on defense when we don't have a good sized lead. lol

(12-05-2015 11:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 10:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 07:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 07:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  If UNC beats Clemson tonight, I don't believe the Heels would jump up to the CFP. Neither do I think that Clemson would drop out of the NY6. My question would be, with Baylor losing to Texas today, would that leave the ACC with 3 teams in NY6 bowls?

That might actually be better for the ACC, since if UNC loses tonight, I think they drop out of the NY6.

Baylor losing doesn't impact the number of NY6 bowl slots available, as OK-State will now replace them in the Sugar Bowl.

If Clemson loses to UNC and the ACC misses the playoffs, UNC will play in the Peach Bowl as ACC champion. The ACC will surely not get 3 teams in. Maybe not even two.

Assuming Stanford gets the playoff spot, the bowls would look like:

Playoff: Alabama vs Stanford
Playoff: Oklahoma vs Michigan State (let's assume)
Rose: Oregon vs Iowa
Peach: UNC vs Houston
Sugar: Ole Miss vs Oklahoma State
Fiesta: Ohio State vs ... ? Clemson or Notre Dame

But FSU is definitely out. If Stanford loses to USC, then Ohio State moves to the playoffs and Clemson plays ND in the Fiesta and FSU is out.

FSU basically cannot make an NY6 bowl.

The B1G very well could get three in. If MSU beats Iowa, they will definitely get three in. If Iowa wins, MSU still might make it three for the B1G. Probably not but maybe.

Clemson will probably make this moot. But, if Stanford loses then USC gets the PAC's automatic spot and they go to the Rose Bowl.

FSU is currently ranked #9 and Stanford is #7. Stanford would likely drop below FSU.

Autobids would go to:

UNC, Alabama, Oklahoma, Iowa/Mich St and USC.

Ole Miss and Oklahoma State get contract bids to the Sugar Bowl.

If Clemson, Ohio State and the Iowa/MSU loser get at-large bids, there is still one at-large spot left. No school ranked below FSU had another win this week.

It seems to me that there is no way FSU should get left out. If Clemson and Stanford win, FSU should not be ranked lower than their current #9. Two lower ranked schools - Ole Miss and Oklahoma State - also get an NY6 bowl, but nobody else should jump FSU for the last spot.

You are forgetting Notre Dame, ranked ahead of FSU. In that scenario, ND gets a bid over FSU.

If both Clemson and Stanford win (which they did) then Stanford does not make the playoffs, and they go to the Rose Bowl as a contract team. Oregon, currently ranked #16, does not jump #9 Florida State for the final NY6 slot.

(12-06-2015 09:01 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 11:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 10:45 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 07:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2015 07:26 PM)ken d Wrote:  If UNC beats Clemson tonight, I don't believe the Heels would jump up to the CFP. Neither do I think that Clemson would drop out of the NY6. My question would be, with Baylor losing to Texas today, would that leave the ACC with 3 teams in NY6 bowls?

That might actually be better for the ACC, since if UNC loses tonight, I think they drop out of the NY6.

Baylor losing doesn't impact the number of NY6 bowl slots available, as OK-State will now replace them in the Sugar Bowl.

If Clemson loses to UNC and the ACC misses the playoffs, UNC will play in the Peach Bowl as ACC champion. The ACC will surely not get 3 teams in. Maybe not even two.

Assuming Stanford gets the playoff spot, the bowls would look like:

Playoff: Alabama vs Stanford
Playoff: Oklahoma vs Michigan State (let's assume)
Rose: Oregon vs Iowa
Peach: UNC vs Houston
Sugar: Ole Miss vs Oklahoma State
Fiesta: Ohio State vs ... ? Clemson or Notre Dame

But FSU is definitely out. If Stanford loses to USC, then Ohio State moves to the playoffs and Clemson plays ND in the Fiesta and FSU is out.

FSU basically cannot make an NY6 bowl.

The B1G very well could get three in. If MSU beats Iowa, they will definitely get three in. If Iowa wins, MSU still might make it three for the B1G. Probably not but maybe.

Clemson will probably make this moot. But, if Stanford loses then USC gets the PAC's automatic spot and they go to the Rose Bowl.

FSU is currently ranked #9 and Stanford is #7. Stanford would likely drop below FSU.

Autobids would go to:

UNC, Alabama, Oklahoma, Iowa/Mich St and USC.

Ole Miss and Oklahoma State get contract bids to the Sugar Bowl.

If Clemson, Ohio State and the Iowa/MSU loser get at-large bids, there is still one at-large spot left. No school ranked below FSU had another win this week.

It seems to me that there is no way FSU should get left out. If Clemson and Stanford win, FSU should not be ranked lower than their current #9. Two lower ranked schools - Ole Miss and Oklahoma State - also get an NY6 bowl, but nobody else should jump FSU for the last spot.

You are forgetting Notre Dame, ranked ahead of FSU. In that scenario, ND gets a bid over FSU.

If both Clemson and Stanford win (which they did) then Stanford does not make the playoffs, and they go to the Rose Bowl as a contract team. Oregon, currently ranked #16, does not jump #9 Florida State for the final NY6 slot.

Last night, we were speculating about situations that involved Clemson losing. In those situations, FSU would have been left out of the NY6 bowls as i described. FSU could not make an NY6 bowl if UNC beat Clemson because UNC would have taken their place, so to speak, and there would have been no room for FSU.

But since Clemson won, UNC will not be in an NY6 bowl, so FSU will get an NY6 bid. In all likelihood, the Peach Bowl vs Houston with a slight chance it will be Notre Dame.