Oh, and just to be clear, the deadspin link says nothing about the play being illegal. It's just a link that has the video. So no, this has nothing to do with the fact that it's Alabama.
It's called the play where Marshall fakes like he's running and then up and passes to it an Auburn receiver who doesn't have a Bama defender in the same area code and for that reason would have worked every single damn time they ran it (unless Marshall goes over the LOS)> You want a name? How about we call it "Clueless Indy". Yeah, that'll work. They tied up the game with the ole Clueless Indy. Works every time.
Your ignorance of the game is showing. The play was a read option, was not a planned pass, and was illegal.
Why state an unsupported conclusion? Everything I wrote in my post supports every word in the portion you responded to with 'laughable". Three possibilities: 1) You don't know what "laughable" means 2) You do what it means and you mean to convey that we are all laughing at you for sayiingstupid as shit like... 3) You couldn't think of anything to say at all. Thought "laughable" would be cryptic enough to avoid further exposure of your horrible argument. Didn't consider that somebody might pick up on that response in and of itself establishes that you had no good reply and conscionscly thought about what reply would give the next responded the least ammo in their continued assault on the imbecilic arguments you've been making in this thread. Like remember: Oh right, it wasn't just the call but the momentum change. It is at this point that I would like to publicly award Indy with the prestigious honor of Worst. Argument. Ever. Words words words. One team got all the bad calls. Sure thing, guy. That always happens. Indy, in sum: Indy: what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Yours is, actually. Which is a bummer for you since you ostensibly play the game. In the read-option, which defender is read? Can you answer that for me, Indy?
I'll clarify: Indy thinks a missed call on an illegal downfield block would account for a 4td swing. Which is totally sensible. Totally.
Lol you're an idiot. I said "laughable" because I had nothing else to say, huh? Here's the post that had "laughable" in it: You picked one word out of like five responses. I provided you with the rule and the video. Watch the damn thing, admit the TD should have been brough back, and then go back to talking about something you have even the slightest bit of knowledge about, which is obviously not football.
::indy realizes he said something completely indefensible; scours internet for an article that mischaracterizes the term "read option" as badly as he did. Will report back when found:: I'll set the over/under 9.5 minutes.
If the game isn't tied, Bama doesn't kick the field goal at the end. That's a 14 point swing. If they don't get the awful spot, they probably score again. If they don't miss three field goals, they're up by more than two scores. They were in the driver's seat the whole god damn time.
Lol I can't wait for this. Let's hear it! EDIT: I couldn't resist. I googled read option and here's what I got: Watch the video. Reads the DE... DE goes down toward the RB, so the QB chooses the OPTION of keeping the ball.
Relevance? Yeah. Have you looked at the play? Because you keep calling it a read option play and nothing more. And this is nonsense. So much so, that I'm going to make you pull up the play and show us how that play was just a read option. I eagerly eagerly await your breakdown. I'm so glad we've got somebody on the board here who plays football. Otherwise who would we turn to?
I already posted the video. Watch it. The DE gets sucked in, the QB pulls it. That's a read option, KB. He READS the DE, and chooses an OPTION (give or keep) based off of what the DE does.
The QB illegally throws the ball across the line of scrimmage while ineligible players (linemen) are past the line of scrimmage because they are run blocking. That. Is. Illegal. Why is this so hard for you?
Is that when your dad busted in and saw that your mom was getting the train run on her raw dog by 24 guys in a line, and proceeded to pick her up and throw her in the pantry, a room to which only he had the key, thus blocking the eager men continued running of the train on your mom? Yeah, I've heard of it.
Holy shit... Did Hat hack your account or something? A simple "I'm wrong and apologize for trying to insult you" would suffice here.
I can understand arguing Bama wasn't on the verge of a 2-3 TD win. That's debatable. Whether that play was legal or not is not debatable. I posted a rule and a video or you. The play was ****ing illegal. Get that through your dense skull.
So hard for me? This is coming from the guy that play a read option, and nothing more. Are you really unaware that that statement was completely false? This is coming from the guy who insists Marshall was over the line, even though he wasn't. This is combing from the guy who is somehow stunned that a called that is never ****ing made in college football wasn't made on that play. This is coming from the guy whose description of the play included only the stuff that happened before Marsahll even rolled left. This is combing from the guy who can't see the plain as day fact that this particular play completely befuddled Bama and left them without in his area code. This is combing from the guy who is not only making an indefensible argument that Bama should have won by 3 Tds because of: - missed field goals - a bad sport - and a non-call And then has proceeded to support that indefensilble argument with sub-arguments that are arguably even less defensible than your overarching argument. Basically, in this thread, you have made a bold claim. Nobody has agreed that this bold claim is a sensible statement. And you have proceeded to advance arguments that support your indefensible ultimate claim. Now, I don't know if your intent here is to persuade others that you're right, but if so, you're sitting on a gooseegg. Or perhaps your intent was not to persuade but just to vent because you clearly love Bama and woudl willingly fellate Saban even after one of his workouts and prior to his show. Either way, you're fighting a lost cause.: (a) zero people have been persuaded by your argument, (b) nobody who is reading gives a rat's ass if your stupid ass remarks are born out of a need to vent, But we all do wish you the best of luck in your quest to get your lips firmly around Saban'smember and slide the lips from the base to the tip with enough pressure such that Saban eventually becomes invevitably orgasmic and showers you with his emotions.
