|
|
#721
10-29-2007, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
[ QUOTE ]
From Jaguars.com Ask Vic 10/29 Link to article [ QUOTE ] Greg from Atlanta, GA: I was saddened to see Mark Richt pull a classless Bill Belichick antic and tell the Bulldogs “if they didn't get a penalty for celebrating after the first score, he would be mad at them,” and I am sure you were, too. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Vic: Coaching college football is very different from pro football. Money is the motivation in pro football. Money is the ultimate motivator in life, right? College coaches have to access other means of motivation. In Richt’s case, he was attempting to sell the all-for-one and one-for-all theme. He was trying to get his team to dedicate itself to winning and nothing short of winning. Georgia had been dominated by Florida in recent years and Richt needed to establish a new mindset. I think his celebration idea was genius. It was the best 30 yards he ever spent. He lit a fire under his team that Florida couldn’t extinguish. [/ QUOTE ] Edit: The reason I posted this I am curious to how you guys will react to reading this. Was he right? or was he wrong? [/ QUOTE ] Personally I think the idea that celebrating a 1Q TD "lighting a fire" and "leading UGA to the win" is ridiculously asinine. I guess if UF wins, Richt is a moron for giving UF 1/4th of the field on the next possession. There are plenty of reasons why UGA won the game, and none of them are "team celebrating a TD on the field". 
|
|
#722
10-29-2007, 10:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
It's a really bad idea because there is just so much for potential a fight breaking out especially in such a rivalry game. I also think it sends a very mixed message to his team because later in the game, they got called for another penalty for doing the chomp, yet continued to do it all game and could easily have been called for it. In fact, UF & UGA players were ON the field at different points during timeouts barking across the field & could have been easily called a penalty both ways. It seems like the refs decided they had called enough for 1 game. Also, I think you set a really bad precedent for future games if you have to do that to motivate your team in a huge rivalry game. It could easily backfire on them the rest of the season & if they lose to Auburn & KY, even this "gigantic" win will be for nothing.
Other than that, the consequences of penalties & such are fair & were costly and could have been even more so. His mock apology today didn't do anything for me though.
|
|
#723
10-29-2007, 11:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
[ QUOTE ]
It's a really bad idea because there is just so much for potential a fight breaking out especially in such a rivalry game. I also think it sends a very mixed message to his team because later in the game, they got called for another penalty for doing the chomp, yet continued to do it all game and could easily have been called for it. In fact, UF & UGA players were ON the field at different points during timeouts barking across the field & could have been easily called a penalty both ways. It seems like the refs decided they had called enough for 1 game. Also, I think you set a really bad precedent for future games if you have to do that to motivate your team in a huge rivalry game. It could easily backfire on them the rest of the season & if they lose to Auburn & KY, even this "gigantic" win will be for nothing. Other than that, the consequences of penalties & such are fair & were costly and could have been even more so. His mock apology today didn't do anything for me though. [/ QUOTE ] The game had stopped being a rivalry for UF until UGA rushed the field. Overall, I liked it if only for the fact that Richt got his game on.
|
|
#724
10-30-2007, 11:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
[ QUOTE ]
The Saturday night ESPN games have been ridiculous. I think they've all been decided on the final play. [/ QUOTE ] Two come to mind: Arkansas 38 Bama 41 Auburn 9 Arkansas 7 [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
|
#727
10-30-2007, 01:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
I didn't forget; those games didn't matter to me because I wasn't watching my team get beat...
|
|
#728
10-30-2007, 02:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
In general I agree that too much is made of vague concepts like "momentum" and "team chemistry" and all that. But oftentimes I think some of you guys tend to emphasize game theoretic and rational choice logic at the expense of the psychological. I understand good decisions of course do always come down to maximizing utility -- I'm not arguing otherwise. But, this often means, imo at least, that the correct choice is sometimes, on its face, irrational.
I tend to think the GA endzone celebration was an overall positive for GA. It likely unified the team, and may have had psychological effects that focused the players for the next several minutes more than they otherwise would have been. You can come back and say, "yeah well it likely pissed off and motivated UF too!" Fair enough. But there are also metagame considerations at play here. Richt can use that point -- the celebration -- as a reference point for YEARS to come. "When we came together as a team!" Whatever. Those things matter on a psychological level to players. It can be a unifying experience. (Plus, he can remind them when he mentions that "I never expect to see that kind of stupid thing again, but I love you big stupid morons!" Thereby enforcing some degree of discipline. Also, if it was player organized, he can essentially create more of a collective team identity by running their asses off for doing it!) Was all this worth 30 yards of field position? Likely, yes.
|
|
#729
10-30-2007, 03:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's a really bad idea because there is just so much for potential a fight breaking out especially in such a rivalry game. I also think it sends a very mixed message to his team because later in the game, they got called for another penalty for doing the chomp, yet continued to do it all game and could easily have been called for it. In fact, UF & UGA players were ON the field at different points during timeouts barking across the field & could have been easily called a penalty both ways. It seems like the refs decided they had called enough for 1 game. Also, I think you set a really bad precedent for future games if you have to do that to motivate your team in a huge rivalry game. It could easily backfire on them the rest of the season & if they lose to Auburn & KY, even this "gigantic" win will be for nothing. Other than that, the consequences of penalties & such are fair & were costly and could have been even more so. His mock apology today didn't do anything for me though. [/ QUOTE ] The game had stopped being a rivalry for UF until UGA rushed the field. Overall, I liked it if only for the fact that Richt got his game on. [/ QUOTE ] Even if it had been dead prior to this stunt, it was alive and well after it. We're not arguing that though, it could have easily caused a fight even if it revived the rivalry.
|
|
#730
10-30-2007, 03:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2007 SEC Football Thread
Also, if SEC refs knew the rules, there could of been ejections:
No substitute(s) may enter the field of play or end zones for purposes other than replacing a player(s) or to fill a player vacancy(ies). This includes demonstrations after any play (A.R. 9-2-1-I). PENALTY—Dead-ball foul. 15 yards [S7, S27] from the succeeding spot. Flagrant offenders, if players or substitutes, shall be disqualified [S47]. It doesn't have to be your 2nd penalty or in addition to any other penalty. If that wasn't flagrant, then what is? I really don't care that they weren't ejected, but just goes to show you that the refs have NO idea when it comes to calling these type of rules properly.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
