I question about Cyclones Cotton-Moya ..........

[ndsubison1]

I don't think that was it, I wondered if it was something for the radio communication to helmet? Do those use a box for that or are those devices all self contained in helmets? Since this box was rectangular and larger than a hand. Didn't look at all like the picture they showed.
Sent from Win8 phone on a bullet train from Hillsboro.

yeah the device was prolly for communicating plays/assignments

[missingnumber7]

yeah the device was prolly for communicating plays/assignments

Not allowed under NCAA rules. It is more than likely the tracking thing brought up last year.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2..._will_ele.html

[NorthernBison]

As I recall, the announcer said that he talked to an official who said if the call had gone the other way (no flag for targeting), the video evidence wouldn't have been enough to reverse it (and make it a targeting violation). I know it is just a hypothetical discussion. It just makes the point that this was a judgment call (like many NDSU fans have already said), not a blatant case-closed call. And no one is saying it was a blatantly bad call. Some of us just wish that the judgment call had gone our way.

And technically, I think the review official determined that "the call on the field stands," not that "the call on the field was confirmed."

P.S. Do you argue this hard for the refs after a call goes against you?

The answer to your P.S. Is Yes.

I recall a targeting call against one of our dbacks (Shepard?) that I agreed with and most fellow fans didn't. Basically the same arguments about intent etc.

And I don't think the review was really in doubt. He hit the defenseless receiver in the head/neck. Intent and shoulder contact shouldn't matter based on how the game is being officiated.

[ndsubison1]

Not allowed under NCAA rules. It is more than likely the tracking thing brought up last year.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2..._will_ele.html

or that...