Next:
Utah @  UCF
Fox

Say what you want about Rising.

Welcome UCF Fans! › Forums › Utah Utes Sports › Football › Say what you want about Rising.

Viewing 3 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • 12/03/2022 at 10:03 AM #180229
      30
      Larry B
      Participant

      He’s had games this year where he’s been wildly inconsistent (probably due to injury), but he’s all heart. He proves that he loves this team and he’ll give everything he has to win. When he nearly had his head separated from his body and popped back up with a smile on his face, he gained all of my respect. I’m going to miss that.

      And BTW, that was more of a targeting call than I’ve seen from other “confirmed” calls this year.

    • 12/03/2022 at 10:17 AM #180232
      5
      ProudUte
      Participant

      I agree with everything you posted.

    • 12/03/2022 at 10:37 AM #180237
      3
      Charlie
      Participant

      It looked like the defender’s helmet contacted Rising’s facemask sending the helmet flying. How that hit sent the helmet so far without impacting his face is a wonder. I thought the facemask was part of the helmet. It was also a secondary player cleaning up an initial hit which is often not viewed well by refs.

      • 12/03/2022 at 10:54 AM #180242
        1
        EagleMountainUte
        Participant

        https://youtu.be/oq5ckGkQ5ZU

        He wasn’t defenseless because he was a runner…Which hasn’t mattered at times. I think there was one where JJ got hit and they confirmed it. 

        I like the new rule but somehow it leaves it up to subjective interpretation still. Which I don’t get. 

        I really hope the conference gets new officials. They all suck. 

      • 12/03/2022 at 11:28 AM #180253
        PlainsUte
        Participant

        Definitely a gray area, because the crown of the helmet is what contacted the facemask and knocked his helmet off, but the defender had turned his head and the hit to the body was more with the shoulder, so he technically wasn’t “leading” with the helmet.

        • 12/03/2022 at 11:37 AM #180257
          EagleMountainUte
          Participant

          Well I think it comes down to intent maybe?  Is that part of the rule?  He sure did intend on blowing up Rising. 
          I prefer Rugby technique tackling. It has lead to a lot less injuries related to CTE. The data is interesting in NZ when they have shifted away from BLOW up plays. 
          We all like the blow up boom hits. In fact we have “mayhem” from Progressive sponsor the hits. It is a cultural change though if we want to reduce CTE. Honestly more dangerous hits are the ones where they pile drive the head into the ground.  

    • 12/03/2022 at 11:29 AM #180255
      chinngiskhaan
      Participant

      the defenders helmet clearly went right into Rising’s facemask and then bounced off to the side. It’s not hard to see… Is that targeting though? Not sure the guy had any way of knowing where Risings head was going to be, he was just trying to make a hit.

      Also, I think a helmet to facemask hit is probably less dangerous than a helmet to the side of a helmet hit.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 3 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.