menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Blair Brown
Page: 1 of 1
Paul Graham
General User
Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424
mail
Paul Graham
mail
Posted: 10/1/2016 10:39 PM
settings_applications edit_note
The most underrated player I can remember to wear an Ohio uniform. The guy is an absolute beast!
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,683
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 10/1/2016 10:42 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Paul Graham wrote:expand_more
The most underrated player I can remember to wear an Ohio uniform. The guy is an absolute beast!
+1 He's very good.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 10/1/2016 10:57 PM
settings_applications edit_note
He definitely can play. His career also includes some untimely penalties, too. I'm hoping that he can avoid those this year.
ytownbobcat
General User
Y
Member Since: 8/7/2006
Post Count: 1,253
person
mail
ytownbobcat
mail
Posted: 10/1/2016 11:08 PM
settings_applications edit_note
He plays with a lot of intensity and has great speed and strength. The intensity has resulted in a few personal fouls which I assume he regrets after the fact.
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 8:30 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Agree with Paul here. May end up being the best of our current LB.
MonroeClassmate
General User
MC
Member Since: 8/31/2010
Post Count: 2,325
person
mail
MonroeClassmate
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 8:34 AM
settings_applications edit_note
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
Agree with Paul here. May end up being the best of our current LB.
Perhaps, but I thought Moore was the best on the field yesterday from the TV viewing perspective.
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 9:13 AM
settings_applications edit_note
MonroeClassmate wrote:expand_more
Agree with Paul here. May end up being the best of our current LB.
Perhaps, but I thought Moore was the best on the field yesterday from the TV viewing perspective.
Moore has been terrific. I can't argue with you there.
Last Edited: 10/2/2016 9:14:58 AM by colobobcat66
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 10:11 AM
settings_applications edit_note
He is definitely really really good but he also almost cost Ohio the game yesterday with that targeting shot on the Miami quarterback. I have no idea how that call got overturned as he went straight down with his helmet while the QB was still on the ground. The mac office is going to be taking a long look at that one, and Chuck Martin was more than in his right to be pissed off
Pataskala
General User
P
Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,465
person
mail
Pataskala
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 10:56 AM
settings_applications edit_note
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 11:51 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
even if the targeting was questionable, it easily could have and should have been called a late hit. it was a very undisciplined play. Ohio got very VERY lucky.
Doc Bobcat
General User
DB
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,421
person
mail
Doc Bobcat
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 12:25 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Speaking of calls...it seems that Frank thought on his challenge that the pass nicked the ground before the Fiami receiver made the catch...it also seemed to me that when the call was upheld that Frank offered the ref some glasses and the other ref was laughing.
Joe McKinley
General User
Member Since: 11/15/2004
Post Count: 486
mail
Joe McKinley
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 12:33 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
even if the targeting was questionable, it easily could have and should have been called a late hit. it was a very undisciplined play. Ohio got very VERY lucky.
Totally disagree with you, DFC. The officials got the call exactly right with the review. It was a disciplined play by Brown. Watch it from start to finish, if you didn't and focus on Brown. He was forced wide by the tackle and that changed the pursuit angle a bit. The QB was spun a bit and live late in the play. He's a pretty strong kid and the defender is correct on that play to not ease up. On plays like that one there is more latitude by officials. That's why it wasn't a late hit. The QB's helmet came off and on replay it looks like that came from Basham's legal hit.From the flag throwing official's angle that lost helmet and Brown's leaping contact may have looked like targeting. Legit to throw the flag for sure. The backside camera angle showed clearly there was no targeting. Therefore, no penalty.
Last Edited: 10/2/2016 12:35:09 PM by Joe McKinley
Paul Graham
General User
Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424
mail
Paul Graham
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 12:56 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Joe McKinley wrote:expand_more
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
even if the targeting was questionable, it easily could have and should have been called a late hit. it was a very undisciplined play. Ohio got very VERY lucky.
Totally disagree with you, DFC. The officials got the call exactly right with the review. It was a disciplined play by Brown. Watch it from start to finish, if you didn't and focus on Brown. He was forced wide by the tackle and that changed the pursuit angle a bit. The QB was spun a bit and live late in the play. He's a pretty strong kid and the defender is correct on that play to not ease up. On plays like that one there is more latitude by officials. That's why it wasn't a late hit. The QB's helmet came off and on replay it looks like that came from Basham's legal hit.From the flag throwing official's angle that lost helmet and Brown's leaping contact may have looked like targeting. Legit to throw the flag for sure. The backside camera angle showed clearly there was no targeting. Therefore, no penalty.
+1
Paul Graham
General User
Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424
mail
Paul Graham
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 12:58 PM
settings_applications edit_note
BTW, I can count at least 3 (maybe 4) threads on BA debating whether or not a Blair Brown hit was targeting or deserved a 15 yard penalty. :)
Last Edited: 10/2/2016 1:00:21 PM by Paul Graham
Victory
General User
V
Member Since: 3/11/2012
Post Count: 2,519
person
mail
Victory
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 1:01 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Joe McKinley wrote:expand_more
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
even if the targeting was questionable, it easily could have and should have been called a late hit. it was a very undisciplined play. Ohio got very VERY lucky.
Totally disagree with you, DFC. The officials got the call exactly right with the review. It was a disciplined play by Brown. Watch it from start to finish, if you didn't and focus on Brown. He was forced wide by the tackle and that changed the pursuit angle a bit. The QB was spun a bit and live late in the play. He's a pretty strong kid and the defender is correct on that play to not ease up. On plays like that one there is more latitude by officials. That's why it wasn't a late hit. The QB's helmet came off and on replay it looks like that came from Basham's legal hit.From the flag throwing official's angle that lost helmet and Brown's leaping contact may have looked like targeting. Legit to throw the flag for sure. The backside camera angle showed clearly there was no targeting. Therefore, no penalty.
Since when is a Targeting call allowed to be reduced to no penalty at all? The last few years a 15 yard personal foul stood no matter what the review said. You can't review an ordinary unnecessary roughness penalty. I'm surprised that part can be taken away on review.
Joe McKinley
General User
Member Since: 11/15/2004
Post Count: 486
mail
Joe McKinley
mail
Posted: 10/2/2016 1:15 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Victory wrote:expand_more
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
even if the targeting was questionable, it easily could have and should have been called a late hit. it was a very undisciplined play. Ohio got very VERY lucky.
Totally disagree with you, DFC. The officials got the call exactly right with the review. It wwas a disciplined play by Brown. Watch it from start to finish, if you didn't and focus on Brown. He was forced wide by the tackle and that changed the pursuit angle a bit. The QB was spun a bit and live late in the play. He's a pretty strong kid and the defender is correct on that play to not ease up. On plays like that one there is more latitude by officials. That's why it wasn't a late hit. The QB's helmet came off and on replay it looks like that came from Basham's legal hit.From the flag throwing official's angle that lost helmet and Brown's leaping contact may have looked like targeting. Legit to throw the flag for sure. The backside camera angle showed clearly there was no targeting. Therefore, no penalty.
Since when is a Targeting call allowed to be reduced to no penalty at all? The last few years a 15 yard personal foul stood no matter what the review said. You can't review an ordinary unnecessary roughness penalty. I'm surprised that part can be taken away on review.
I think the rule was revised this year to allow a targeting call to be overturned on review. The officials can also now call a targeting penalty on review.

The call on Blair Brown was targeting. There was no late hit or unnecessary roughness call on him. DFC said in his view a late hit could've been called, but I agree with the officials.
Last Edited: 10/2/2016 1:15:46 PM by Joe McKinley
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
person
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 10/3/2016 10:25 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Joe McKinley wrote:expand_more
A couple TV angles showed that his helmet never hit above the QB's shoulders. He got him more in the pads. I thought it was a good reversal. I also thought Martin should've gotten flagged for his tirade afterwards.
even if the targeting was questionable, it easily could have and should have been called a late hit. it was a very undisciplined play. Ohio got very VERY lucky.
Totally disagree with you, DFC. The officials got the call exactly right with the review. It wwas a disciplined play by Brown. Watch it from start to finish, if you didn't and focus on Brown. He was forced wide by the tackle and that changed the pursuit angle a bit. The QB was spun a bit and live late in the play. He's a pretty strong kid and the defender is correct on that play to not ease up. On plays like that one there is more latitude by officials. That's why it wasn't a late hit. The QB's helmet came off and on replay it looks like that came from Basham's legal hit.From the flag throwing official's angle that lost helmet and Brown's leaping contact may have looked like targeting. Legit to throw the flag for sure. The backside camera angle showed clearly there was no targeting. Therefore, no penalty.
Since when is a Targeting call allowed to be reduced to no penalty at all? The last few years a 15 yard personal foul stood no matter what the review said. You can't review an ordinary unnecessary roughness penalty. I'm surprised that part can be taken away on review.
I think the rule was revised this year to allow a targeting call to be overturned on review. The officials can also now call a targeting penalty on review.

The call on Blair Brown was targeting. There was no late hit or unnecessary roughness call on him. DFC said in his view a late hit could've been called, but I agree with the officials.
Correct, as the rule was initially written the Targeting penalty would be reviewed to decide whether or not the player was ejected; however, even if the ejection was reversed the penalty stood. Now the call is reviewed and, if upheld, the player is ejected. Otherwise, the entire flag is waved off.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 10/3/2016 2:18 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Not really
Kinggeorge4
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Guysville, OH
Post Count: 1,084
mail
Kinggeorge4
mail
Posted: 10/3/2016 2:27 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Did they call another penalty? I only heard targeting.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,820
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 10/3/2016 2:47 PM
settings_applications edit_note
See now I'm confused. Because it sounds like Brown led with the head but didn't hit the QB in the head, so it wasn't targeting. Complete opposite happened late in the Indiana/Michigan State game. Michigan State defender led with the crown of the helmet and hit the QB square in the sternum, no where near the head, yet he was ejected. What's the rule?
Pataskala
General User
P
Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,465
person
mail
Pataskala
mail
Posted: 10/3/2016 4:18 PM
settings_applications edit_note
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
See now I'm confused. Because it sounds like Brown led with the head but didn't hit the QB in the head, so it wasn't targeting. Complete opposite happened late in the Indiana/Michigan State game. Michigan State defender led with the crown of the helmet and hit the QB square in the sternum, no where near the head, yet he was ejected. What's the rule?
According to the American Football Coaches Assn., targeting can be called if a player leads with the crown of the helmet (anything above the facemask) when tackling a player, no matter where the contact occurs. Also, any hit to the neck or head of a defenseless player is targeting. Here's the rule:

Targeting and Initiating Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3)

No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.

Targeting and Initiating Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4)

No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 2-27-14)

More info can be found here: http://www.afca.com/article/article.php?id=2342

I haven't seen the play since Saturday (ESPN shows Martin's tirade, but not the play that caused it and I haven't gone back through the entire broadcast), but as I remember it Blair didn't lead with the crown of his helmet. I don't remember it as being a late hit, either. The only call made was for targeting, so once that was overturned, the flag was picked up.
Showing Messages: 1 - 21 of 21
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)