UND Post Game Thoughts & Discussion

[GreenfieldBison]

If indy says everyone was set on the trick play, I'm good with that. That play exposed a huge tell in the Bison defense. I'm not sure I would have used that moment to use it. Knowing how many times the Bison and the bunnies have met in the playoffs, if you think your program is there, save that for a game that really matters. I don't think you can do that play again.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Entz and co. should probably send Bubba a thank you card. Or a nice gift package like one of those Harry & David deals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NDSU92]

I assume no since I haven’t heard about him in a while, but does UND still have that random guy in a cowboy hat leading them out onto the field before every game?

[OrygunBison]

I assume no since I haven’t heard about him in a while, but does UND still have that random guy in a cowboy hat leading them out onto the field before every game?

Was that after the Bleacher Geek?

[oldmantutters]

Entz and co. should probably send Bubba a thank you card. Or a nice gift package like one of those Harry & David deals.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bartles & James

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[NDSU92]

Was that after the Bleacher Geek?

I believe it was somewhere between the “Division 2 is the best place for UND” announcement and them paying students to show up for games. My understanding is the bleacher creature was like mid-90’s?

[Hammersmith]

Wasn't the second punt past the LOS though so there should have been a 10 yard penalty? I was and still am confused by this rule.

[note to everyone else - we're talking about the double punt in the Thursday night NFL game]


That's what I thought at first, too. But that's not what that part of the rule is talking about.

Here's a link to the rule: https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/stat...929474/photo/1 (note that the author of the tweet was initially incorrect about the interpretation; he later tweeted again with a correction)

Before we talk about the punting rule, refresh yourself on the rule about passing beyond the line of scrimmage. Remember that it doesn't matter where the ball is, what matters is where the passer's body is. If any part of the passer's body is on or behind the LOS, it's a legal pass. Only if the passer's ENTIRE body is beyond the LOS is it illegal. Now look at Note #2 in the kicking rule. Look familiar?

All of that other stuff in the rule about the ball crossing the LOS is meant for the original kick. Say it's a low kick or punt and the ball crosses the LOS in the air before being knocked back. If it's kicked again: illegal. If the ball is kicked and blocked behind the LOS but the ball continues forward, crosses the LOS on the ground, hits a player and is batted back behind the LOS, then kicked: illegal(I'm pretty sure).

But if the ball is blocked behind the LOS, never crosses the LOS, then is picked up and kicked, it's legal.

But here's the thing: once the ball is picked up and in the kicker's possession, now the rules have changed slightly. Instead of the location of the ball being important, it's now the body of the kicker that's important. As long as some part of the kicker's body stays on or behind the LOS, it's legal to kick the ball. It doesn't matter if the ball has crossed the LOS as long as a foot, or arm, or shoulder, or butt is still on/over the LOS. You can even have both feet beyond the LOS as long as your butt, torso, head, arm, etc. is still above/behind the LOS. And the official(line judge?) reset himself right on the LOS when the punt was blocked so he had the perfect angle to see whether that was the case or not. During the announcement of the call, the official said the heel of the kicker's plant foot was on the LOS. That's why it was legal.
(I should add that the kicker can't completely pass the LOS with possession of the ball and then retreat back and kick it. As soon as 100% of the body+ball of the kicker passes the LOS, any kick from that point will be illegal.)




That being said...

Others are arguing that there should have been an illegal man downfield penalty applied instead. In the NFL, only the end men and any eligible receiver that is aligned or in motion behind the line and is one yard or more outside the end men can advance more than a yard beyond the line before the kick. Those other people are saying that, because of the block and resulting confusion, ineligible players advanced more than a yard beyond the line before the second kick happened. I can't speak to that part.

[Answer Guy]

If you want to see it: https://www.espn.com/watch/player/_/...6-04ad5c4a39ad

00:32:50
1:44 left in the 1Q



Speaking of interesting calls, that double punt in the Seahawks/Rams game was fun. Lots of armchair officials giving their opinions on whether the call on the field was correct or not. I thought they got it wrong at first(as did Mike Pereira), but after reading the whole rule several times, I understand why it was legal.

While you’re here, can you explain why 2 different networks were broadcasting the game last Saturday?

I’ve never heard the reason for that.

[Hammersmith]

While you’re here, can you explain why 2 different networks were broadcasting the game last Saturday?

I’ve never heard the reason for that.

Midco has the rights to UND home games. They were the primary.

WDAY has the rights to NDSU games. In and of itself, that only means they could broadcast the game as long as they got permission from the home team(UND).

WDAY had three choices:
1. Do nothing and lose out on ad revenue and piss off NDSU.
2. Negotiate with Midco to pay to carry their feed. This would also cost ad revenue.
3. Negotiate with Midco, UND, the Alerus Center, or some combination of the three to produce their own broadcast. I'm sure this resulted in the biggest up front cost to WDAY, but they must have thought the extra ad revenue made it worth it.

It's not the first time KVLY or WDAY has done their own broadcast of an NDSU away game.

[CAS4127]

While you’re here, can you explain why 2 different networks were broadcasting the game last Saturday?

I’ve never heard the reason for that.

You should be ecstatic that there were 2 networks interested in broadcasting a UND sport, let alone actually doing so ...

[Bisonator98]

[note to everyone else - we're talking about the double punt in the Thursday night NFL game]


That's what I thought at first, too. But that's not what that part of the rule is talking about.

Here's a link to the rule: https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/stat...929474/photo/1 (note that the author of the tweet was initially incorrect about the interpretation; he later tweeted again with a correction)

Before we talk about the punting rule, refresh yourself on the rule about passing beyond the line of scrimmage. Remember that it doesn't matter where the ball is, what matters is where the passer's body is. If any part of the passer's body is on or behind the LOS, it's a legal pass. Only if the passer's ENTIRE body is beyond the LOS is it illegal. Now look at Note #2 in the kicking rule. Look familiar?

All of that other stuff in the rule about the ball crossing the LOS is meant for the original kick. Say it's a low kick or punt and the ball crosses the LOS in the air before being knocked back. If it's kicked again: illegal. If the ball is kicked and blocked behind the LOS but the ball continues forward, crosses the LOS on the ground, hits a player and is batted back behind the LOS, then kicked: illegal(I'm pretty sure).

But if the ball is blocked behind the LOS, never crosses the LOS, then is picked up and kicked, it's legal.

But here's the thing: once the ball is picked up and in the kicker's possession, now the rules have changed slightly. Instead of the location of the ball being important, it's now the body of the kicker that's important. As long as some part of the kicker's body stays on or behind the LOS, it's legal to kick the ball. It doesn't matter if the ball has crossed the LOS as long as a foot, or arm, or shoulder, or butt is still on/over the LOS. You can even have both feet beyond the LOS as long as your butt, torso, head, arm, etc. is still above/behind the LOS. And the official(line judge?) reset himself right on the LOS when the punt was blocked so he had the perfect angle to see whether that was the case or not. During the announcement of the call, the official said the heel of the kicker's plant foot was on the LOS. That's why it was legal.
(I should add that the kicker can't completely pass the LOS with possession of the ball and then retreat back and kick it. As soon as 100% of the body+ball of the kicker passes the LOS, any kick from that point will be illegal.)




That being said...

Others are arguing that there should have been an illegal man downfield penalty applied instead. In the NFL, only the end men and any eligible receiver that is aligned or in motion behind the line and is one yard or more outside the end men can advance more than a yard beyond the line before the kick. Those other people are saying that, because of the block and resulting confusion, ineligible players advanced more than a yard beyond the line before the second kick happened. I can't speak to that part.

Thanks for the explanation but my gosh could these rules be any more convoluted! IMO it should be determined by the ball's location, would make much more sense to me and actually be easier to determine and interpret.