Good clean hit. <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rSsLkBG_64Y&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rSsLkBG_64Y&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object> DD
Yes Kindle did in the process wrap his arms around Potts but from the last angle it still shows that Kindle did lower his helmet least from what I know is illegal. Oh well will agree to disagree here, I am sure if it happened the other way around I guarantee Texas fans would be saying the same stuff.
he lowered his helmet to get below the head and hit the ball, which he did. I don't know what you expect a guy running right at a guy who is the same height to do otherwise - flying drop kick or leaping crotch to the face?
But he lowered his helmet and had helmet to helmet so how is that legal? There are plenty of ways he could have tackled him with the force the way he was running into him. Oh well I am done talking that play if it was a regular sack it would have been 3rd and long and who knows if we would have picked it up.
It wasn't straight helmet to helmet. It was helmet to ball, then helmet to chest(right below the chin). Then as the momentum is taking potts to the ground, and kindle is still driving through the hit, his helmet hits potts face/helmet. That is why it is a perfectly legal hit.
Rule 9, Section 1, Article 3a of the NCAA rulebook states "No player shall initiate contact and target an opponent with the crown of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul." (emphasis added) The Points of Emphasis state that "intentional helmet-to-helmet contact is never legal..." The bottom line is that helmet-to-helmet contact was made. Even if it were questionable, it is supposed to be a penalty. It is not why Tech lost the game, but I believe the ref swallowed his flag on the play.
As I remember, you weren't impressed with the womp they threw on aTm last year either. Dude just stay out of UT threads. You are incapable of being fair or logical. Actually, I take it back because I (and I'm guessing other bbsers) look forward to reading whatever dumb things you have to say about Horns football that is fueled by this huge UT hatred. Really great showing by Tech. I sat near their fans at the game and they were good sports after it was all over.
Kindle hit the ball and Potts upper chest before ever getting to the helmet. It wasn't a case of "targeting with the crown" or "intentional contact." Therefore, I think the refs got it right. It was his momentum going upwards and potts coming down after the blow to the chest that caused the helmet to hit Potts face.
Tech looked good..I hope UH can keep it close at Robertson..maybe pull out a late game win. Case can replicate Colts performance tonight..but I dunno if the talent around him is as good.
Tech played well, but speaking as a Texas alum, I wasn't pleased with the inconsistency in each half. When you hold Tech to 3 points at half, the lead needs to be bigger than seven points. Conversely, when you twice go up by 14 in the 3rd, you need to get a stop to put them away.
Sure there were some moments where the UT defense looked awful, but overall the D was solid. Kept Texas in the game when Colt and the o-line were struggling. Giving up 24 points to Tech isn't that bad. Nice try. Moral victory denied. Colt struggled, but it should be noted that he played with a flu. He skipped multiple practice sessions this week. Lets hope Tech puts UH in its place to strengthen UT's strength of schedule.
Not really. If UT wins out, they are pretty much in regardless of what happens next week. And Tech's "place" is still much superior to UH's. Would be pretty amusing to see Tech crap all over the Coogs' dream season.
The initial contact did not occur to the helmet of the QB, but rather the football and shoulder. That's as clean a sack as you're ever gonna see.
Please explain why bigtexx should have been impressed with UT mopping the floor with A&M last year. UT should have handled A&M with ease. My freshman year was 2002. We weren't relevant then. A&M won't be relevant until we prove that we should be. A&M beating Texas is relevant the last few times A&M has won due to how bad we have been in the last decade. UT coming out and beating the crap out of A&M should not be. Why should bigtexxx be impressed by UT beating the crap out of one of the current bottom dwellers of the Big XII South?
Wow, and that's the number 2 ranked team in the nation I watched today? If they play like they did today against OU that will be a nasty beatdown.
