Great attendance tonight! A game like this would make all 44,665 want to come back!

This really was a good game, but I wonder if its the best game nobody saw as Bama and LSU was on at the same time.

Proud of the Coog's, even with all the adversity they experienced, they still all most pulled it, out, they did not cave in, which they could have easily done. Coog's need to TCB next week against Louisville, send all these scalawag teams out of the "American" with losses. We don't one anyone of them getting a whiff of a major bowl invite. Make them bottom feeders in the "American" like there going to be, in their new conferences.

(11-10-2013 12:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This really was a good game, but I wonder if its the best game nobody saw as Bama and LSU was on at the same time.

Yep, and also there was Notre Dame-Pitt and Texas-West Virginia on at the same time as well, and both were exciting games too. Three of the four major OTA networks, CBS, ABC, and FOX, had college football on last night. Between flipping around i maybe caught 10% of the UCF game.

Oh, and ESPN was showing VT's upset of Miami.

I bet almost nobody saw the UCF-Houston game, which IS a shame because it did the AAC proud. From the play on the field to the enthusiasm in the stands, it had the look and feel of a big time game.

I think this makes an important point about the "exposure" angle of our TV deal: Sure, it's better to be on ESPN networks a lot of times than to not be on them, but being on them means a whole lot less when everyone else is too. Bottom line is that under the new TV deal we are going to face a lot of situations like last night, where we have an AAC game on ESPNU or somesuch but the other channels are stuffed with P5 games at the same time. Our exposure in terms of actual viewers may not be that good.

(11-10-2013 12:23 AM)knighthead1 Wrote:  UCF 4-0 7-1
Louisville 4-1 8-1
Cincinnati 4-1 7-2
Houston 4-1 7-2
Rutgers 2-2 5-3
Southern Methodist 2-2 3-5
South Florida 2-2 2-6
Memphis 0-4 2-6
Connecticut 0-4 0-8
Temple 0-5 1-8

ugh that loss to USF is KILLING me…..

(11-10-2013 08:29 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(11-10-2013 12:23 AM)knighthead1 Wrote:  UCF 4-0 7-1
Louisville 4-1 8-1
Cincinnati 4-1 7-2
Houston 4-1 7-2
Rutgers 2-2 5-3
Southern Methodist 2-2 3-5
South Florida 2-2 2-6
Memphis 0-4 2-6
Connecticut 0-4 0-8
Temple 0-5 1-8

ugh that loss to USF is KILLING me…..

Don't worry, we'll repay the favor by beating UCF for you.

lmao Ive had more fun reading these posts than watching the game.

(11-10-2013 12:39 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This really was a good game, but I wonder if its the best game nobody saw as Bama and LSU was on at the same time.

I didn't watch a second of Bama/Lsu. Watched all of this one. So somebody saw it.

(11-10-2013 12:34 AM)knighthead1 Wrote:  Great attendance tonight! A game like this would make all 44,665 want to come back!

The game experience looked awesome on TV and I can't wait until ECU joins the conference next year and we can get back to playing teams with a fanbase that show up to games. The AAC is a major step up from CUSA.

Eventhough this will bite ECU fans in the a$$ next year I am pulling for you guys to make a BCS bowl game.

Thoughts on my Coogs: I don't think we are quite there yet (WELL F'N NO SH*T SHOCKER YOU F'N LOST!! I'm talking about my thoughts prior) as far as being in the BCS. We will be though if our maturing continues.

Going on the road back to back UCF/Louisville played out perfectly for LOUISVILLE - if Houston had won.

UCF doesn't have (I know nobody is saying this..) that BCS slot lined up just yet (F'N CAPTAIN OBVIOUS THIS MORNING BALLS SHOCKER SKY IS BLUE AS WELL RIGHT?). Going on the road to SMU and playing grudge match at home to USF are no gimmie's. Neither is playing in Philly to Temple and at home to Rutgers. Which I expect them to win but still tough matches.

(11-10-2013 09:46 AM)PirateJeff Wrote:  

(11-10-2013 12:34 AM)knighthead1 Wrote:  Great attendance tonight! A game like this would make all 44,665 want to come back!

The game experience looked awesome on TV and I can't wait until ECU joins the conference next year and we can get back to playing teams with a fanbase that show up to games. The AAC is a major step up from CUSA.

It did look like a great experience. The UCF fans did a great job.

(11-10-2013 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-10-2013 09:46 AM)PirateJeff Wrote:  

(11-10-2013 12:34 AM)knighthead1 Wrote:  Great attendance tonight! A game like this would make all 44,665 want to come back!

The game experience looked awesome on TV and I can't wait until ECU joins the conference next year and we can get back to playing teams with a fanbase that show up to games. The AAC is a major step up from CUSA.

It did look like a great experience. The UCF fans did a great job.

Yeah, the bounce house was rockin for sure. Looking forward to Black Friday. Hope a good amount of Bulls fans show up. We both need this rivalry to be the marquee matchup of the conference, going forward. That White kid looks like he has good instincts, and ability. Needs to fatten up a little LOL.

(11-09-2013 10:56 PM)Brian Reading Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 10:54 PM)North Carolina Knights Wrote:  I hope Houston fans are not upset on the targeting call. That was the pure definition of the rule, your punk DB launched himself into the WR and trust me on this one, losing Perriman is much worsen to UCF than the loss of the Houston punk.

Look, he's not a "punk". If you saw the call the way that commentators and the rest of us did, you'd know that it was a stupid call. The punk was the UCF fan who threw something at him from the stands. But honestly, what are you doing coming over here after a win and talking about that for?

At least one, if not both of those commentators were UH alums, so using them to bolster an argument is a bit weak. FWIW, dozens of UCF fans pointed out the classless idiot cup thrower to the cops.

I watched the UCF-Houston game, then left on the Fresno State-Wyoming game and really there was no comparison in atmosphere and game experience... It really made the AAC feel bigtime and the MW not so much - even though the 16th ranked team in the country was playing.

(11-09-2013 11:39 PM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  

(11-09-2013 11:01 PM)North Carolina Knights Wrote:  I hope Houston fans are not upset on the targeting call. That was the pure definition of the rule

Per the NCAA football rulebook:

9.1.3. No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet.

9.1.4. No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder.

Per the rules, targeting should only be flagged when a player either (a) uses the top of his helmet or (b) initiates contact with the head or neck region of a defenseless opponent.

If you re-watch the play, the Houston defender turned the front of his body away from Perriman and initiated contact with his shoulder (rule 9.1.3. would therefore not apply). Additionally, contact was initiated in the chest region, not the head or neck. Secondary contact between Perriman's facemask and the helmet of the Houston defender did occur, but the rule explicitly states that targeting only applies to when contact is initiated (i.e. secondary contact doesn't matter).

The hit as violent and did result in an unfortunate injury, but on the flip side, it was not targeting and should not have been flagged as such by the officials. The fact that a player was hurt on the play is why the flag was thrown. You have to remember refs are reviewed on how they call games and since the NCAA has put a special emphasis on targeting penalties this year, the refs are much more likely to throw bogus flags than not. This isn't the first bonus targeting call flagged this year and it probably won't be the last as long as the refs are being instructed to throw flags for anything even remotely resembling targeting.

(11-09-2013 11:04 PM)UCFKnights Wrote:  So he threw it to be safe, but when reviewed agreed it was a targeting penalty. How again is that a bad call?

That is not actually how the penalty works. From the NCAA rulebook:

"Penalty - 15 yards. For dead-ball fouls, 15 yards from the succeeding spot. Automatic first down for fouls by Team B if not in conflict with other rules. For fouls in the first half: Disqualification for the remainder of the game. For fouls in the second half: Disqualification for the remainder of the game and the first half of the next game. If the foul occurs in the second half of the last game of the season, players with remaining eligibility shall serve the suspension during the first game of the following season. The disqualification is subject to review by Instant Replay."

In other words, the only thing the replay booth can review is the player-disqualification portion of the penalty. The point of initial contact and use of the crown of the helmet are reviewable; however, the targeting action itself is not actually reviewable. So even if the disqualification is reversed, the 15-yard penalty remains.

The refs overturned the penalty and ejection on a targeting call in a Hurricanes game earlier this year. I believe it was in their game vs the Gators.

The whole targeting penalty setup needs to be redone. You can't be found innocent of the targeting flag, then still get penalized 15 yrds. Dumb execution of a well intended rule.

(11-10-2013 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-10-2013 09:46 AM)PirateJeff Wrote:  

(11-10-2013 12:34 AM)knighthead1 Wrote:  Great attendance tonight! A game like this would make all 44,665 want to come back!

The game experience looked awesome on TV and I can't wait until ECU joins the conference next year and we can get back to playing teams with a fanbase that show up to games. The AAC is a major step up from CUSA.

It did look like a great experience. The UCF fans did a great job.

Indeed they did.