Tuesday morning buffet

A nibble here, a nibble there:


UPDATE: Beamer clarifies his remarks.


Filed under ACC Football, Big 12 Football, Don't Mess With Lane Kiffin, Georgia Football, Georgia Tech Football, It's Just Bidness, Pac-12 Football

19 responses to “Tuesday morning buffet

  1. PJ is Jim Donnan all over again if there ever was. The difference is, PJ is one NCAA rule change away from having a worthless offense.

    • Bill

      So this is the new excuse. First it was that big boy defenses were too fast for this high school offense. Second, it was that defenses would “figure it out” in year two. Now since both of those rationalizations have been proven incredibly wrong, it is that Tech blocks illegally.

      What a joke. Grow some balls. Do you think Erk would be whining about low blocks? No … he would tell his guys to shut up and put their hand in the dirt and play.

      The NCAA will never rule out blocking below the waist … get over it.

      • Dog in Fla

        Pardon me Bill…I think chop-blocking was the old excuse available for rollout whenever needed, like when we play Auburn and Tech and don’t win. The exuse du jour as everyone knows just ask Lane is the magical six flags over every team that is not Florida or Alabama.

      • Turd Ferguson

        Bill, I think everyone admires your show of manliness. Making a reference to Erk is the Georgia-football-discussion-board equivalent of revving up your F-350. We get it.

        But regardless of whether or not a former coach would whine about low blocks, there’s a reason that the NCAA takes them seriously. If it turns out that part of a team’s success depends in any way upon its players making (illegal) blocks that could potentially cause serious injury to their opponent, that’s a problem.

        • Making a reference to Erk is the Georgia-football-discussion-board equivalent of revving up your F-350.

          Weirdly poetic, in its own way…

        • Bill

          My reference to Erk was more due to CPJ being a disciple of his and less of Erk’s stint at UGA.

          I agree that illegal blocks should be taken seriously. But don’t rationalize a man’s 17 years of success by simply hinting that he teaches his players to play dirty.

  2. Hogbody Spradlin

    The Cal-Berkeley faculty complains about subsidizing the football team? That’s like one set of pigs complaining that another set got to the trough first. Tenured faculty members aren’t exactly the most productive, energetic workers in this world.

  3. Dog in Fla

    “CMR – how do you know I don’t? (laughs)”

    Bobo on sidelines so CMR can shine a light re playcalling…

  4. keith

    Actually Bill, it is already against the rules in certain areas of the field, including the area in question in that game. Read the article in the AJC in the first tidbit of the buffet before you spout off about something you don’t know anything about.

    • Bill

      Look at the replay of Nesbitt’s last TD (the one Chancellor is complaining about) … he obviously is blocked high and not low.

      Chop blocks are illegal. Blocking below the waist (as long as it is from the front) is and always will be legal

      • Dupesdawg

        Tech has been called for chop blocks inside the red zone on numerous occasions, ie their first drive against UVA this weekend, so i would say there has definitely been attention brought to that aspect.

        as far as the cut blocks down field, as bill says, the block on chancellor on the nesbitt TD was clearly up top, and granted, i’m sure there were blocks below the waist, i know i saw at least one that should have been called, but i know that chancellor was running himself out of plays, following fakes etc. for much of the game.

        VT shouldn’t blame their problems stopping Tech on illegal blocks when it was their inability to tackle and read the offense properly that was the real culprit

  5. hodgie


    you are either illiterate or you are stupid. you obviously cannot (illiterate) or did not (stupid) read the article before you posted. you are obviously literate because you are posting moronic responses on a blog. here is a copy of the rules about low blocking copied from the article. please explain to me where in this article it says blocking low and in front is and will always be legal. you are not being specific enough when you talk about low blocking.

    e. Blocking below the waist is permitted except as follows (A.R. 9-1-2-IV-XI):
    1. Offensive linemen at the snap positioned more than seven yards from the middle lineman of the
    offensive formation are prohibited from blocking below the waist toward the original position of the
    ball in or behind the neutral zone and within 10 yards beyond the neutral zone.
    2. Backs at the snap positioned completely outside the normal tackle (second player from the
    snapper) position in either direction toward a sideline, or in motion at the snap, are prohibited from blocking below the waist toward the original position of the ball in or behind the neutral zone and
    within 10 yards beyond the neutral zone (A.R. 9-1-2-XXVI).
    3. During a scrimmage down, defensive players are prohibited from blocking an eligible Team A
    receiver below the waist beyond the neutral zone unless attempting to get at the ball or runner. A
    Team A receiver remains eligible until a legal forward pass is no longer possible by rule.
    4. During a down in which there is a free kick or scrimmage kick from a scrimmage kick formation, all
    players are prohibited from blocking below the waist, except against the runner.
    5. After any change of team possession, all players are prohibited from blocking below the waist, except against the runner.
    6. A Team A player behind the neutral zone and in position to receive a backward pass shall not be
    blocked below the waist or contacted by way of a personal foul (A.R. 9-1-2-XXV).

    • Bill

      Thanks for getting personal Hodgie. I did read the entire article. And thanks for cutting and pasting the rules.

      My point was not to debate a tutorial on cut blocking. My point was this will now be the Tech success rationalization du jour. Va Tech started it and now you Dawgs will ride this as long as CPJ is on the flats … whatever helps you sleep at night.

      • hodgie


        you are having a hard time with reality. i did not say anything about tech’s success. you once again are making stuff up. am i getting personal? yes. you personally made those comments. you personally are wrong. you personally are trying to tell everyone else they are wrong whenever you are. btw, posting things like “du jour” and other frilly words will not give your comments any kind of credibility if what you are saying is not right.

        cpj is a great coach. i was never trying to take anything away from him or tech. heck, they are having a great year. however, you are wrong and not understanding what is going on.

  6. keith

    I told him to go back and read the rule but I am assuming that he was too lazy and therefore he needed to spout uninformed lack of knowledge once more. I don’t need a rule book to know that you can’t run down the field and cut the legs out from under a would be tackler.

  7. hodgie


    You actually can cut. But the rule stipulates that you can’t from the outside in. This is what the VT safety was complaining about. However, the pic in the ajc shows a high block not a cut. I hope this was not the play he was speaking of. Had the same block been made low, then it would have been illegal since the safety was being blocked by the wr. Thus, a cut block would have been illegal because it would have been from outside in.

    • CraigT

      No, the rule does not say the block can’t be outside in. The rule says it can’t be back toward the original position of the ball, and that’s only within ten yards of the line of scrimmage.

      A wide receiver can come in and block a safety low in the middle of the field as long as he doesn’t get past him and block back toward the line of scrimmage. If he blocking from the side but angled straight at the sideline or down the field then it’s within the rules.

      • hodgie


        The original position of the ball is inside of a wide receiver a WR is NOT permitted to cut ANYONE inside of him. Period. Read the rule again. I think you are confused about the original position of the ball it means something different than what you are thinking.

        • CraigT

          OK, what does “original position of the ball” mean if not “the position the ball was in before the snap”?