Illinois 34, USC 32 Postgame
- Status
Even though it was never in-game until yesterday, is it possible the reason Valentine hadn't seen many reps is the coaches suspected ball security?
Have to know the situation. You’re inside the 5 they will be going for the ball. 2 hands on the ball. Just like I don’t think Feagin fumbled. But in his situation again you just go down. When you are fighting for yards like that they will go for the ball
Eh feels extremely speculative to assume that.
Occam’s razor would say he’s just behind two upperclassmen who are great RBs.
Most efficient passing game for Illinois in the PFF college football era (2014).
Last edited:
He still needs to fill out and struggles in pass pro. With his build he can only take so many hits
I'm in 100% agreement. Our OL is going to look much much different next year, but if we can get competent blocking, I think Valentine will be All B10 barring injury. He is an extraordinarily gifted back. I know I'm chugging kool-aid but there are moments I see Barry Sanders in his game. His vision, decisiveness, acceleration, and shiftiness are ELITE. Kid is something special. I'd love to see him just explode against Purdue next week
not John Paddock 500 yards?
That’s the prescribed mechanic. Even so, that one seemed like two beats. (Shrug)Said the refs tend to give “a beat” when the clock hits zero before throwing the flag.
I’ve never known this to be the case, but whatta I know?
Stevegarbs
- Mokena, IL
Every official is taught this- play clock hits zero, look to see if the ball is snapped, if not, throw the flag.Said the refs tend to give “a beat” when the clock hits zero before throwing the flag.
I’ve never known this to be the case, but whatta I know?
That absolutely tracks. It's also why I'm a little frustrated by the growing national conversation that USC blew this game a la recent Nebraska vs. us winning it and with the illegal man downfield being the difference/margin in the game. I thought we were pretty much in control of the game from the opening kickoff on and that USC could do absolutely nothing to stop us aside from those 2 fumbles, 1 of which was refball.
When you lead for a grand total of 1 minute in a game despite getting some good breaks and you just can't stop the other team, that's not choking the game away or blowing it, that's getting beat.
And USC losing that game around 73% of the time sounds about right. I'd also argue it's more likely they lose that game by 2 scores than win it.
You could see on Matt lienerts (sp?) face at halftime who was the better team. Very much enjoy seeing him pouting
I’m not sure what you’re looking at there- if you want to say part of his shoulder is up again the defenders arm I won’t disagree- but his elbow, hip, whole right side of his body besides his legs are in the ground in that shot. Plus his forward momentum is stopped.
To look at it another way- if he extends the ball past the goal line right in that shot- do you think they are giving him a touchdown? Not in a million years
I think his blocking has been the reason stated by many. And that makes a lot of sense.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Also a salty Northwestern grad.
Chuck Nuggets
Dip your nuggets in my staff source sauce.
What a crazy game. Illinois did not play bad. Neither team "played bad," come to think of it. I think they're two very similar teams.
Illinois should have won by 10-14 points. One horrendous fumble call changed everything. On first reply I thought it was clearly a fumble. It turns out what I thought was the football was actually Feagin's arm. This make me wonder if the replay officials were seeing the same thing I was.
Illinois should have won by 10-14 points. One horrendous fumble call changed everything. On first reply I thought it was clearly a fumble. It turns out what I thought was the football was actually Feagin's arm. This make me wonder if the replay officials were seeing the same thing I was.
Chuck Nuggets
Dip your nuggets in my staff source sauce.
I'm not piling on here, Chief. I genuinely think you're wrong here. If that's a fumble, I'm not sure how anyone could ever be down.
That's all the defender. That's why this is tricky. It looks like it's Feagin. It's not. You have to watch the play in very slow motion. It's clearer (or, rather, clear-ish... which on replays is the bar) that there is a defender under Feagin. No part of his "downable" body hits before the ball pops out.
The beauty, or agony, of it is this: even if we disagree, that means the refs still got it right. We're on the same Illinois bandwagon and can't come to a definitive conclusion what happened. Non-biased refs certainly aren't going to make a decision on this with the video evidence provided. Thus: call is upheld.
Refs did everything right on this play as they are taught:
1. Let the play go due to the turnover
2. Go to video review to make a determination
3. Uphold the call because it's either obvious he wasn't down (my take) or it's not clear if he was down OR reverse it because there is undisputable video evidence (which clearly there is not if everyone has their own take on it).
The result sucked. Refs usually suck.
But hey, Illinios won! So... at least we have that!
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
AyoDos11
- Southern Illinois
Out of all the Illinois football games I've been to, I spent the most time standing up during this one by far. I loved the energy from the crowd, although, can we maybe play the annoying foghorn a little less 
?
There was this one USC fan in my section who was going ballistic after they scored to make it 31-25; yelling and cursing for a good two minutes while everyone stared at him with concerned looks. I'm really glad we shut him up after the ensuing drive.
? There was this one USC fan in my section who was going ballistic after they scored to make it 31-25; yelling and cursing for a good two minutes while everyone stared at him with concerned looks. I'm really glad we shut him up after the ensuing drive.
- Status