ADVERTISEMENT

End of game question- Kizers non touchdown

hoopsstar12

Posts Like A Champion
Jan 16, 2008
3,416
1,122
113
On our last touchdown with 30 seconds there was a flag. Could we have taken the penalty and given back the TD? I really believe the Pac 12 review team knew Stanford had no chance because we could have scored a TD with small seconds left so they confirmed a non touchdown which gave Stanford back the ball with time.
 
You are reaching on this one. I do wish it was called short now simply because ND was going to get in anyway and more time would have come off the clock but to think the refs were thinking about that I feel is ridiculous. The defense needed to make a stop with 30 seconds left on the clock and didnt do it.
 
I didn't think it was a TD and neither did the announcers. So what else could it be? Are they blind?
 
On our last touchdown with 30 seconds there was a flag. Could we have taken the penalty and given back the TD? I really believe the Pac 12 review team knew Stanford had no chance because we could have scored a TD with small seconds left so they confirmed a non touchdown which gave Stanford back the ball with time.
that is pretty funny. rooting against getting the td so you don't have to play d. what if stanford did somehow stop the next few plays. or what if time ran out if the back was stopped in the backfield on the next play or 2. . you have to take the td when it is there.
 
On our last touchdown with 30 seconds there was a flag. Could we have taken the penalty and given back the TD? I really believe the Pac 12 review team knew Stanford had no chance because we could have scored a TD with small seconds left so they confirmed a non touchdown which gave Stanford back the ball with time.
Wow. So they conspired to give a TD to go ahead with 30 seconds left, FOR STANFORD's BENEFIT? Again, wow.
 
Holy crap, now this is reaching. All we needed to do was play defense for 30 seconds. If you can't do that, you certainly don't deserve to win. Clearly we are not a top 4 team, we're a really good team, but not top 4.
 
that is pretty funny. rooting against getting the td so you don't have to play d. what if stanford did somehow stop the next few plays. or what if time ran out if the back was stopped in the backfield on the next play or 2. . you have to take the td when it is there.
Yeah, like we've never been stopped on the goal line before, or never fumbled on the opponent's one yard line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennick4
One thing people should take note of is David Shaw 's non reaction to the TD being confirmed. Wasn't it Shaw who went nuts in 2012 when Stephen Taylor supposedly scored and it was ruled down even after replay. Yet he has no reaction when an obvious non touchdown gets ruled a touchdown. Hmm. Everyone knew that 30 seconds was plenty of time for Stanford's potent offense to move into field goal range penalty or no penalty.
 
One thing people should take note of is David Shaw 's non reaction to the TD being confirmed. Wasn't it Shaw who went nuts in 2012 when Stephen Taylor supposedly scored and it was ruled down even after replay. Yet he has no reaction when an obvious non touchdown gets ruled a touchdown. Hmm. Everyone knew that 30 seconds was plenty of time for Stanford's potent offense to move into field goal range penalty or no penalty.
I can't tell, are you being serious with this conspiracy theory, or is this tongue in cheek?
 
One thing people should take note of is David Shaw 's non reaction to the TD being confirmed. Wasn't it Shaw who went nuts in 2012 when Stephen Taylor supposedly scored and it was ruled down even after replay. Yet he has no reaction when an obvious non touchdown gets ruled a touchdown. Hmm. Everyone knew that 30 seconds was plenty of time for Stanford's potent offense to move into field goal range penalty or no penalty.
If it was an obvious non-TD it would have been overturned. You could not see definitively where the ball was when Kaiser's butt hit the ground, and obviously the replay official couldn't see it either. If there would have been a replay shooting down the goal line from the other side, maybe it would have been more definitive. But there was no evidence to overturn the TD call.
 
On our last touchdown with 30 seconds there was a flag. Could we have taken the penalty and given back the TD? I really believe the Pac 12 review team knew Stanford had no chance because we could have scored a TD with small seconds left so they confirmed a non touchdown which gave Stanford back the ball with time.
I must admit it is rather far fetched but I was also wondering why there was no scoring play review when the Stanford back was stopped in mid air on the goal line. I also thought for sure that the refs would overturn Kizers' t.d. hmmmm?[smile]
 
Yeah, like we've never been stopped on the goal line before, or never fumbled on the opponent's one yard line.
Didn't nd have a fumble near the goal line against sc a few years ago? And sc brought it back for a td? The last drive by ND was brilliant. It chewed up a ton of clock. I thought Stanford would have called more timeouts to preserve more clock, but they did not. I thought the clock management was really good by ND. Then ND picked up that final key first down and then scored. ND should have played man to man on their wr's and left 3 guys deep. Then ND could have made the tackle immediately even if a ball was completed. No idea how stanford had a guy running free through a zone of 7 players. Well designed play by Stanford or bad concept by ND.
 
This is the ultimate "hindsight is 20/20" post. Can you imagine if we would of given back the points and elected to run another play.... only to be stopped or fumble?

It would of gone down as the biggest blunder of all time.... BK would not of made the flight back to Indiana.

I think one thing that we are not crying about as much as we should be is the facemask. That was when I knew we were screwed. That was the worst thing that could happen in that situation.

Horrible loss, much like Clemson, but I can not complain as I thought this was a 8-9 win team before the injuries. I am looking forward to a healthy (or somewhat) team playing in a good bowl game against a good program.
 
This is the ultimate "hindsight is 20/20" post. Can you imagine if we would of given back the points and elected to run another play.... only to be stopped or fumble?

It would of gone down as the biggest blunder of all time.... BK would not of made the flight back to Indiana.

I think one thing that we are not crying about as much as we should be is the facemask. That was when I knew we were screwed. That was the worst thing that could happen in that situation.

Horrible loss, much like Clemson, but I can not complain as I thought this was a 8-9 win team before the injuries. I am looking forward to a healthy (or somewhat) team playing in a good bowl game against a good program.
I think the face mask was inadvertent. Just bad luck. It was a powerful face mask as it caused hogan to fumble. I thought the real reason for the loss was the fact t hat Stanford kept marching up and down the field with their offense. ND could not stop them. Stanford has one of the best oline's in the nation. And if you stack the box they have a pretty good passing game too. But you can score on Stanford. They play 4 down linemen. And drop the rest of their players deep. Then they have to play tighter coverage when you get inside the 20 and are able to hold team's to field goals. Do you see how deep they play their corners and safeties. Funny thing is, they still gave up the big plays. Their defense is so spread out that that when a nd player got a crease, he was gone. NDF has some really fast players. Pretty impressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nemeth#5
More 'after the fact' Monday morning QB. No coach is going to take 7pts off the board to accept a penalty.

In your case, maybe he would if he could foresee the future AND see ND would score anyway and keep Stanford from scoring a late FG to win. Honestly, I wouldn't want a coach that gambled like that because more often than not he would lose. BK did the right thing and his defense needs to not extend plays with facemask penalties and give up 20+yds across the middle.
 
After the game, David Shaw said to the announcer, "this is the type of game that whoever had the ball last would win". The OP was not intended to question our decision to accept the touchdown. It was merely a question asking if a touchdown was allowed to be reversed by accepting a penalty. If we did accept the penalty it would have been a percentages game. What are the odds we score from the 1 yard line and run the clock down versus taking the touchdown and the odds of not having a last second field goal kicked. The game could have come down to a lucky catch off of a long pass or pass interference too. The OP was also focusing on my point of view that Kizer was short of the goal line which is my opinion based on what I saw. The decision in the 2012 game was based off of a replay as well. So I guess law of averages in the end.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT