BE rules against Toledo

[Dick_in_MI]

Haha, so typical. "If you disagree with me, then you are not a Syracuse fan"
-the recourse of someone who has just lost an argument.

I have mixed feelings about the "win:" I want the victory in the W column, but I hate to see the Cuse lose so much face nationally: obviously, many national commentators are burying Cuse, mocking us for desperately clinging to a win gift-wrapped by a Big East officiating crew. So close to the Pin Stripes bowl, this doesn't help our effort to win back national respect.

.

"Many national commentators" have nothing else to talk about today. By Saturday, they'll have moved on to something else. If not much sooner.

 

[tep624]

As I see it, there are only 2 ways to go here. You either just shut up and move on and realize that people make mistakes and sometimes they go your way, sometimes they done. Or, you go back and replay the final 2:09 of the game with Syracuse leading 29-27. Anything else is way off the mark.

Exactly. Some people just have a distorted perception of reality unfortunately.

 

[suloyalfan]

The change in the score for the USC game is not comparitive, as it did not have any impact on the outcome of the game whatsoever. This would be taking a win off the board for one team and giving it to another team that did not EARN the win. To earn the win, Toledo would have needed to drive down and kick a field goal with the score 29-27 Syracuse. Because the OFFICIALS blew it TWICE, now Syracuse has egg on their faces! As a fan of Syracuse, I would have much rather had the proper call made and then watched it play out. It's unfortunate for both teams, and also unfortunate that such a good game has been soiled by an OFFICIALS mistake (not the players).

Who get's punished if the win is overturned? The players, not the OFFICIALS! Does anyone really think that the Toledo players want a game decided by some lawyers and administrators in a conference room? No way... if they are competitors and have any honor, they would want to decide it on the field. I'm sure Syracuse players don't feel good about this win either. I know that I have felt like crap about this issue since I saw the replay on Saturday night. It's the same way I felt after the Pinstripe Bowl when I got back to the hotel room and heard all of the discussion over the personal foul on K-State, and how Syracuse "got lucky"... and how they K-State should have won the game. People who didn't watch the game wouldn't realize that Syracuse played very well and deserved the win. I still think it was a crappy call, but it happens in games... every game has bad calls... sometimes they go for you, sometimes they go against you.

 

[fanfanclubclub]

"Many national commentators" have nothing else to talk about today. By Saturday, they'll have moved on to something else. If not much sooner.

Sure, that is true. However, Syracuse football only makes national news every so often.

The last time the national news media was talking about Syracuse football? The Pin Stripes Bowl. Now this: not a great pattern.

 

[Moontan]

Probably the best case scenario, as a fan, would be for the NCAA to step in, change the score to 32-30, put the replay officials on probation, and vacate Toledo's loss but uphold our win. That accommodates pretty much everyone. The fact that Toledo got seriously screwed makes us look bad. If the NCAA vacated Toledo's loss, we wouldn't look so bad by comparison.

Look, there is no fair way to resolve this issue. It's a game with human officials. Mistakes are made. They've been made for hundreds of years. That's life.

Please, give it up. After 800 posts repeating the same logic I think I speak for most on the board: it's time to move on.

 

[fanfanclubclub]

The change in the score for the USC game is not comparitive, as it did not have any impact on the outcome of the game whatsoever.

Yes, the change of the USC/Utah score is a relevant comparison. It is not necessarily dispositive of the issue to simply say "well that didn't change the outcome of the game," because from a legal/rules perspective, there is no rule that says "final scores can only be changed when they don't change the outcome of a game."

I agree that the USC/Utah changed score is weird, and probably a poor decision. It is hard to say how sports leagues should handle these issues, and since even the sports leagues are in disagreement, they themselves handle this matter in various ways (see MLB).

The AD I spoke to informed me that much of the reasoning involved in the USC/Utah decision had to do with gambling concerns. This AD was not the Maryland Mole, in case any of you were wondering. Similar concerns are being repeated nationally regarding the Cuse/Toledo game.

 

[chakka3421]

My contact, Vice President Biden, just told me as a SU grad that he will take this issue to the President for an official ruling by executive order.

 

[tep624]

Look, there is no fair way to resolve this issue. It's a game with human officials. Mistakes are made. They've been made for hundreds of years. That's life.

Please, give it up. After 800 posts repeating the same logic I think I speak for most on the board: it's time to move on.

It's pretty common that when people can't form a convincing argument, they throw as much noise as possible out there to try to distract the reader and attempt to bully the reader into siding with their argument. Hence the exaggeration about the national media and bringing gambling into the conversation.

This guy is a clown - don't pay any attention to him. The second he can come up with a D1 team that has vacated a victory over an officiating call is the second I will start giving a stuff about anything further he has to say.

 

[Avatusstone28]

I'll take the win, even though it may be tainted.

Let's assume that the Orange finish 6-6, or 7-5, with several other schools with similar records. Will this win hurt Syracuse's chances when the Bowl selection committees make their selections?

 

[javadoc]

Wasn't the U$C score change (which I still think is bunk) a ruling on the last play of that game? In other words, there are no considerations about how the rest of the game might have evolved were the ruling different at the moment it occurred. As far as I can tell the U$C example does not directly apply for that reason, and this remains a case of first impression.

 

[suloyalfan]

The AD I spoke to informed me that much of the reasoning involved in the USC/Utah decision had to do with gambling concerns. This AD was not the Maryland Mole, in case any of you were wondering. Similar concerns are being repeated nationally regarding the Cuse/Toledo game.

Gambling concerns over a Syracuse football game against Toledo? So, let's follow this line... Syracuse was given the extra point so they could have a 3 point lead? I supposed Syracuse settled for a FG in OT so they could win by 3 points instead of going for a TD to win by 6 points?

I think some suit in a board room changing the score of a game after it's over would be more of an issue. That's a lot more fishy.

If you watch the side and front replay of the kick, on the side angle view it looked like the ball went through the uprights. The officials are told that it has to be INDISPUTABLE evidence. I can understand how if they were following those rules, with the 2 camera angles they had along with the fact that the officials standing on the field ruling it good, why they made the replay decision. Again, I'm not saying that they were right... it seems quite obvious that the front shot shows the ball going in front of the goal post. I'm just saying that to say that they made this decision on the fly to make sure Syracuse covered the point spread seems pretty far outside reality to me.

 

[dash-30-dash]

This is too funny. I also wish the right call was made. I hope it is made every time. I wish the pass interference was called. Or the facemask. I think the refs should be punished. But Syracuse did nothing wrong. They were not given the opportunity to defend a 2 pt lead. Different game. That's sports. That's life. The rest of this talk is nonsense. And To question your fan creds sir is not losing an argument. I have been posting on this board (or the ones that came before) and I have never heard of you before. makes one wonder when you come here and talk about how lucky we are and how we really lost. We didn't get lucky against wake. We fought hard and won. fair and square. Toledo got a very bad break but we led at the time. That is what we know for certain.

 

[dash-30-dash]

I don't think fan fan is saying that the fix was in. Only that the point had an impact on the line

 

[Cusefan95]

As someone interested in athletic administration, probably the best outcome would be to vacate the game because of gambling concerns, with an effort to replay the game. The line was Toledo +2, and anyone familiar with the history of sports gambling and the Donaghy saga will not dismiss gambling concerns as a conspiracy theory. The possibility of some funny business isn't a matter to be taken lightly.

The best solution is to not set a new precedent - once they let that genie out of the bottle they'll regret it. If they are going to start replaying games, I want to start paying for me ticket after the score is certified final, because otherwise I just paid to watch two teams scrimmage. And if a bad call with two minutes left can cause a replay, what's the cutoff point - the fourth quarter? Halftime? Opening kickoff?

For the record, count me in the crowd that's starting to think you're a Rutgers fan that disappears after the beat down on 10/1.

 

[suloyalfan]

I don't think fan fan is saying that the fix was in. Only that the point had an impact on the line

Fair enough... how would overturning the game result impact gambling? What would the final score be? I think some people in Las Vegas would be very interested in the answer. Making that decision would be alot more fishy to me, from a gambling perspective instead of allowing the results on the field to stand on their own (including mistakes from the officials).