We lost that game, lucky season so far

[fanfanclubclub]

we've had a really lucky season so far:

we were in a real bad spot against WF until we knocked out the QB;
we were tied in the fourth quarter against an FCS team;
we lost by three touchdowns to USC; and
we lost, but somehow won, at home against Toledo.

the line between our 3-1 and a bizarro 1-3 season is very, very thin.

Alot of credit to the staff, not only do they make the winning decisions, but the whole Marrone staff has an auspicious aura to it.

 

[rrlbees]

we've had a really lucky season so far:

we were in a real bad spot against WF until we knocked out the QB;
we were tied in the fourth quarter against an FCS team;
we lost by three touchdowns to USC; and
we lost, but somehow won, at home against Toledo.

the line between our 3-1 and a bizarro 1-3 season is very, very thin.

Alot of credit to the staff, not only do they make the winning decisions, but the whole Marrone staff has an auspicious aura to it.

We lost that game? How so? And please don't sound like a rutgers fan and say we lost 30-29.

 

[RF2044]

Actually, no we didn't.

I understand your point, but we did not lose today's game. The transitive property doesn't apply.

 

[qdawgg]

We won the game, are you ed. Holy crap some people are just born morons.

 

[fanfanclubclub]

We won the game, are you ed. Holy crap some people are just born morons.

We did lose the game. The score was simply miscounted. I'm glad we got the W in the standings, but there really is no disputing that we scored fewer points in regulation. This isn't like Kansas State where we simply got a nice break: instead, there was indisputable evidence that we scored 29 points, but for some crazy reason our point total was counted at 30.

We lost that game? How so? And please don't sound like a rutgers fan and say we lost 30-29.

I hate how Rutgers comes up in topics that have nothing to do with them. Who cares what Rutgers fans are saying? Under the rules, we only scored 29 points in regulation, and they scored 30.

 

[rrlbees]

We did lose the game. The score was simply miscounted. I'm glad we got the W in the standings, but there really is no disputing that we scored fewer points in regulation. This isn't like Kansas State where we simply got a nice break: instead, there was indisputable evidence that we scored 29 points, but for some crazy reason our point total was counted at 30.

I hate how Rutgers comes up in topics that have nothing to do with them. Who cares what Rutgers fans are saying? Under the rules, we only scored 29 points in regulation, and they scored 30.

How do you know the would score 30 down only 2 instead of 3? You think the exact plays would be called on both sides of the ball if Toledo only needed to get in FG range to win? Interesting.

 

[fanfanclubclub]

How do you know the would score 30 down only 2 instead of 3? You think the exact plays would be called on both sides of the ball if Toledo only needed to get in FG range to win? Interesting.

I'm not predicting anything. The game played out the way it did, and we scored 29 points, while they scored 30 in regulation. The officials simply screwed up the score. Sometimes, the people who write down the wins get it wrong, like today. Still, gotta feel great about it, this is the sort of break Marrone earns.

 

[BoomStickO]

:bat:

we've had a really lucky season so far:

we were in a real bad spot against WF until we knocked out the QB;
we were tied in the fourth quarter against an FCS team;
we lost by three touchdowns to USC; and
we lost, but somehow won, at home against Toledo.

the line between our 3-1 and a bizarro 1-3 season is very, very thin.

Alot of credit to the staff, not only do they make the winning decisions, but the whole Marrone staff has an auspicious aura to it.

:bat:

 

[rrlbees]

I'm not predicting anything. The game played out the way it did.

Exactly, it played out like it did with us up 3. It may have played up differently if we are up 2. Having to keep them out of field goal range to win, we may play more aggressively.

This isn't really difficult.

 

[BoomStickO]

It isn't worth it sometimes... You can't change people who don't want to change Even if reality is different.

 

[BORZAK]

Exactly, it played out like it did with us up 3. It may have played up differently if we are up 2. Having to keep them out of field goal range to win, we may play more aggressively.

This isn't really difficult.

+1

 

[JohnCuse44]

It was ugly thats for sure but I win is a win. Sometimes the calls go your way sometimes they don't. Like the pass interfernce that was never called in the endzone and the first down we clearly had but was marked a good yard and a half short.

They even reviewed the play on tape and couldn't find enough evidence to overturn it why are we even talking about this.

 

[fanfanclubclub]

Exactly, it played out like it did with us up 3. It may have played up differently if we are up 2. Having to keep them out of field goal range to win, we may play more aggressively.

This isn't really difficult.

But it didn't play out differently.

Syracuse scored 29 points in regulation, and the other team scored 30: that is a loss, regardless of how it is written down, or what you think might have happened in a counterfactual alternative universe. There is no way to dispute the fact that Syracuse, by the rules, scored fewer points than their opponent during regulation. Similarly, there is no way to dispute that if a team scores fewer points during regulation than their opponent, the rules dictate that such a team should lose: but the officials screwed up. These obvious facts cannot be disputed, so you keep saying that maybe the game would have been different somehow (even though Toledo was playing for a FG either way).

The game played out the way it did, and we scored fewer points during regulation.

 

[JohnCuse44]

But it didn't play out differently.

Syracuse scored 29 points in regulation, and the other team scored 30: that is a loss, regardless of how it is written down, or what you think might have happened in a counterfactual alternative universe. There is no way to dispute the fact that Syracuse, by the rules, scored fewer points than their opponent during regulation. Similarly, there is no way to dispute that if a team scores fewer points during regulation than their opponent, they lose. You can't dispute this point, so you keep saying that maybe the game would have been different somehow (even though Toledo was playing for a FG either way).

The game played out the way it did, and we scored fewer points during regulation.

Yeah but you miss the point they didn't score 29 points in regulation they scored 30.

Maybe they "should have" only scored 29 points but the ref's didn't call it that way. Ref's are human they make mistakes and that is part of the game.

 

[rrlbees]

But it didn't play out differently.

Syracuse scored 29 points in regulation, and the other team scored 30: that is a loss, regardless of how it is written down, or what you think might have happened in a counterfactual alternative universe. There is no way to dispute the fact that Syracuse, by the rules, scored fewer points than their opponent during regulation. Similarly, there is no way to dispute that if a team scores fewer points during regulation than their opponent, the rules dictate that such a team should lose: but the officials screwed up. These obvious facts cannot be disputed, so you keep saying that maybe the game would have been different somehow (even though Toledo was playing for a FG either way).

The game played out the way it did, and we scored fewer points during regulation.

I guess the part you don't understand is that coaches play things differently depending on score. You also make the incorrect assumption that of the 7-8 plays Toledo ran they would run the EXACT same plays and SU would have played the EXACT same defenses, coverages etc if all it took was a FG to win/lose. Real leap of faith there and totally wrong.

Btw, as wrong as the XP call was, so was the PI with Lemon. That coat us points most likely. So let's call it. 36-30 SU.

Sent from my DROIDX

 

[Dcuse]

But it didn't play out differently.

Syracuse scored 29 points in regulation, and the other team scored 30: that is a loss, regardless of how it is written down, or what you think might have happened in a counterfactual alternative universe. There is no way to dispute the fact that Syracuse, by the rules, scored fewer points than their opponent during regulation. Similarly, there is no way to dispute that if a team scores fewer points during regulation than their opponent, the rules dictate that such a team should lose: but the officials screwed up. These obvious facts cannot be disputed, so you keep saying that maybe the game would have been different somehow (even though Toledo was playing for a FG either way).

The game played out the way it did, and we scored fewer points during regulation.

NO, we scored 30 points in regulation. The guy on Toledo didn't interfere with Chew on the pass to the end zone, Micah Robinson wasn't held once all day long.
Do you get the picture buddy?

 

[PeteCalvin]

we've had a really lucky season so far:

we were in a real bad spot against WF until we knocked out the QB;
we were tied in the fourth quarter against an FCS team;
we lost by three touchdowns to USC; and
we lost, but somehow won, at home against Toledo.

the line between our 3-1 and a bizarro 1-3 season is very, very thin.

Alot of credit to the staff, not only do they make the winning decisions, but the whole Marrone staff has an auspicious aura to it.

And Tennessee won the National Championship because of a bogus pass interference call in the Dome back in 1998. Shite, as they say, happens. If two refs standing directly underneath the uprights are going to call a botched PAT good, oh well. It's about time something fell our way for a change. Even though the video clearly showed the kick was no good, there is no way in hell they are going to reverse that call. It was a bizarre situation with probably very little precedence, if any, to dictate a reversal. Besides, if they reverse it, they are confirming that their fellow refs are jackasses.

 

[mantonio]

On the other camera angle, it appeared as though the ball went through the uprights. They showed it 17 times at each camera angle, & each angle showed a different result. In that situation, you MUST rule it inconclusive evidence...

If the refs did their jobs properly, Syracuse would have been up that point by more than 7 points, so sometimes karma pays you back...

FINALLY !!!

 

[GoSU96]

We did lose the game. The score was simply miscounted. .

That's nuts.

 

[BoomStickO]

But it didn't play out differently.

Syracuse scored 29 points in regulation, and the other team scored 30: that is a loss, regardless of how it is written down, or what you think might have happened in a counterfactual alternative universe. There is no way to dispute the fact that Syracuse, by the rules, scored fewer points than their opponent during regulation. Similarly, there is no way to dispute that if a team scores fewer points during regulation than their opponent, the rules dictate that such a team should lose: but the officials screwed up. These obvious facts cannot be disputed, so you keep saying that maybe the game would have been different somehow (even though Toledo was playing for a FG either way).

The game played out the way it did, and we scored fewer points during regulation.

Since you've decided to pander the board with your well-played out and often discussed point before yourself, I'd like to inform you that reading the Rutgers forum for your news or listening to Marin-, BE Commish, is bad for your mental health. Did not score the touchdown with the extra point you contend on the final drive of the game, but the drive before it.

Therefore, your argument that Toledo scored 30 and SU 29 is moot. Toledo drove down the field with the explicit notion that the score was 30-27 SU and needed at least a field goal to go to overtime. Do you really think this doesn't change the way both teams play the ball? Really? You keep mentioning the extra point, but since you either 1) didn't watch the rest of the game - or - 2) don't understand football ; you obviously missed the TWO HUGE NO-CALLS IN FAVOR OF TOLEDO THAT SCRAPPED SU'S ABILITY TO SCORE TWO TOUCHDOWNS INSTEAD OF FIELD GOALS.

1) No-call personal foul on Bailey where his helmet was ripped off intentionally and arguably after the play - one hand on the face mask, the other on the back of his helmet. This could have been the difference between 3 and 7

and

2) The no-call pass interference with Lemon in the end zone on third down, which forced SU to settle for another field goal.

In your line of logic, that puts the score with -6 for field goals, -1 for extra point, +7 for two touchdowns. By my count that leaves the game score at 37-30.

It must be very hard to see SU's record of 3-1, so in protest, you should consider not watching the rest of the season

--Since you have a hard time understanding minimally abstract things, I'm kidding.

 

[fanfanclubclub]

Guys, there is a very big difference between my point, which is based on what actually happened:

my stance: "Any accurate tabulation of points scored puts Syracuse with less points during regulation than its opponent (no need to image what might have happened, or other counterfactual scenarios)"

and your view, which is based on what you think should or might have happened:

the stance of those clinging to the legitimacy of this win: "If we pick and choose a few plays where the refs didn't throw a flag but should have, we can pretend that maybe the game would have happened differently than it did, or alternatively, we can pretend that the game would have come out differently if the other team had been down by 2 instead of 3: even though they were going to go for the field goal either way."
________________________________

You guys worry way too much about what gets said on the Rutgers board.

Doug is wrong when he says that Syracuse isn't "yet good enough to have a bad win." He is simply saying the PC/humble thing in front of the cameras, but behind the scenes, he is ripping into the players and letting them know that this was a loss. If Doug really meant what he said, then I'd be worried that he was dealing with an inferiority complex. Fortunately, I've heard that Doug is absolutely ripping into the players, so apparently its just a few fans who cling to a win that would have been a loss if not for an official gifting us a point that we didn't earn.

 

[rrlbees]

Guys, there is a very big difference between my point, which is based on what actually happened:

my stance: "Any accurate tabulation of points scored puts Syracuse with less points during regulation than its opponent (no need to image what might have happened, or other counterfactual scenarios)"

and your view, which is based on what you think should or might have happened:

the stance of those clinging to the legitimacy of this win: "If we pick and choose a few plays where the refs didn't throw a flag but should have, we can pretend that maybe the game would have happened differently than it did, or alternatively, we can pretend that the game would have come out differently if the other team had been down by 2 instead of 3: even though they were going to go for the field goal either way."
________________________________

You guys worry way too much about what gets said on the Rutgers board.

Doug is wrong when he says that Syracuse isn't "yet good enough to have a bad win." He is simply saying the PC/humble thing in front of the cameras, but behind the scenes, he is ripping into the players and letting them know that this was a loss. If Doug really meant what he said, then I'd be worried that he was dealing with an inferiority complex. Fortunately, I've heard that Doug is absolutely ripping into the players, so apparently its just a few fans who cling to a win that would have been a loss if not for an official gifting us a point that we didn't earn.

Since you know how Doug feels so well. Go ask him if the defense may have made different calls based upon the other team only needing to get to about the 30 to win or in the end zone.

 

[chakka3421]

Fanfanclubclub - by your comments you don't know Coach at all - not his approach at all. I think that maybe that would be your approach to coaching and obviously you probably have never coached before.

 

[Millhouse]

We did lose the game. The score was simply miscounted. I'm glad we got the W in the standings, but there really is no disputing that we scored fewer points in regulation. This isn't like Kansas State where we simply got a nice break: instead, there was indisputable evidence that we scored 29 points, but for some crazy reason our point total was counted at 30.

I hate how Rutgers comes up in topics that have nothing to do with them. Who cares what Rutgers fans are saying? Under the rules, we only scored 29 points in regulation, and they scored 30.

You're a troll. We don't know what happens had they made the right call. Maybe they gamble more on defense.

 

[GoSU96]

Guys, there is a very big difference between my point, which is based on what actually happened:

my stance: "Any accurate tabulation of points scored puts Syracuse with less points during regulation than its opponent (no need to image what might have happened, or other counterfactual scenarios)"

and your view, which is based on what you think should or might have happened:

the stance of those clinging to the legitimacy of this win: "If we pick and choose a few plays where the refs didn't throw a flag but should have, we can pretend that maybe the game would have happened differently than it did, or alternatively, we can pretend that the game would have come out differently if the other team had been down by 2 instead of 3: even though they were going to go for the field goal either way."
________________________________

You guys worry way too much about what gets said on the Rutgers board.

Doug is wrong when he says that Syracuse isn't "yet good enough to have a bad win." He is simply saying the PC/humble thing in front of the cameras, but behind the scenes, he is ripping into the players and letting them know that this was a loss. If Doug really meant what he said, then I'd be worried that he was dealing with an inferiority complex. Fortunately, I've heard that Doug is absolutely ripping into the players, so apparently its just a few fans who cling to a win that would have been a loss if not for an official gifting us a point that we didn't earn.

uh, you do realize that the point wasn't added after the fact, right?

If you don't understand that makes a difference you aren't half as smart as you obviously think you are.