I love the two of you fellas! Thank you both for all the content this year. (I owe y'all beers some time) The thing that sucks about this is that we were so damn close. Went into the stadium hoping we'd compete, while knowing if things went well we would compete. At halftime I was hoping we would make it a ball game and was proud of the defense for making it a ball game. For it to get that close and us to lose the way we did, especially with the non-call was heartbreaking. I thought we would get beat, but we beat ourselves. And that never feels good. The last 53 minutes of regulation we outgained Texas 430-243 (Passing 260-190) Rushing (170). Special teams were nearly even. Texas got 10 points (Punt TD, blocked FG) and ASU got 9 (3 off of extended first drive and 2 missed FGs) If you told me before the game that special teams were a wash and our Defense would play they way they did I would have assumed we won. It feels good to have the national media on our side with the targeting call but when you start as poorly as we did and give up a 4th and 13 it's hard to feel bad for ourselves. We proved we can compete. I think we will finish 7th in the AP Poll and we should start in the top 10 next year. We have the tools to be better next year! Excited to see how they perform under the spotlight. Need to break this 1 and done Arizona sports curse and get some momentum going with one of our teams
Did Arizona State get the shaft on the non targeting call? Maybe? Maybe not? To say the refs cost them the game is a HUGE stretch. Did the refs give up a punt return touchdown? Did the refs give up a touchdown on 4th and 13 in the first overtime? Did the refs throw a game ending interception in the second overtime? Bottom line is Texas made one more play than Arizona State did. That's about all...
@aaronoverton3422 I hope Arizona State football don't adopt your "the refs screwed us" mentality. Not accepting personal responsibility will hold them back as a program, that is clearly on the rise. That's about all...
There are two variants of targeting. It was targeting in this case because it was the “defenseless receiver” version of targeting (not the “crown of the helmet” variant). If the receiver is defenseless, it is targeting if any part of the defense hits the receiver’s helmet. Bottom line is the B1G officials let the boys play football. No calls on both sides.
Guys, they are basically face mask to face mask. Taffe's head is down just a tad but that is because of the milli second this photo was snapped it was at it's lowest position. Nowhere near the crown using his head to drive into him. The ref's looked at it and called it. They called it, not Texas. You could tell Taffe kept his head up and they were face to face. This was not targeting. It got a little close, but no cigar guys. I know these are tough to stomach when it's your guy and a game is so close. But to call it the most controversial call of the entire college football season is dramatic. No targeting here.
I understand its heartbreaking to lose this game but you guys are hinging a win on a targeting call. You have no way of knowing that ASU would have scored. Maybe they do but that is why games are won by plays that players make and not penalties that the refs throw.
Because it wasn’t targeting. I notice how ASU fans are quiet about the actual targeting on Bond. Ignore the illegal man downfield and block in the back on that same play or the lineman pulling skat forward for a TD. Plus the terrible spots that helped asu.
Cut the BS you know if the shoe was on the other foot you would want the call. Of course you would never have to worry about it because the call woulf of been given. Don't bring up the Bond shoulder it's a weak ass argument
@@williammorrison898 Ok. The Ohio State team that lost to Michigan. Can OHS do three good games in a row? We will see. Most likely they don’t play as well. Texas can’t play any worse.
No question it was targeting. Compare to replay of Simmons hit that put him on the bench. Either the ref was afraid of the importance of the call or ESPN told him during the review “no targeting”. ASU advancing costs ESPN at least $100M in ad revenue. Do a search of the umpires prior targeting calls when the stakes aren’t so high. I’ll bet he called targeting on similar hits every time.
Poor babies. Whatever you wanna say to make yourself feel better. Couldn't stop Texas on 4th and 13th and in OT. Game over. Your QB threw the INT in OT. Accept it.
ASU was picked to finish last in the Big 12.Not one 5 star maybe a few 4 stars against a team with probably 7 5 stars and 30 or so 4 stars went two Overtime s. I feel pretty f#$%^@&g good. How do you feel about OSU ?
So by the definition, you mention that there are multiple facets that can be targeting, and it doesn't have to be all of them, but fail to repeat that Bond was a defenseless receiver. Clearly, if that had been called targeting on Bond, Texas retains the ball, and everything else changes.
look at the crybabies crying 😂😂 what about the missed targeting on Bond on that interception. that was more of a targeting than that hit. he didn't lower the crown of his helmet it was face mask to face mask. your guy lunged with the crown of his head down
You didn’t listen at all. Also call the targeting 😆 one missed call doesn’t mean the next missed call should not be called why do we have rules then haha
12:50 - No forcible contact to the head. The hit was to the shoulder and chest, which negates all clauses of the targeting rule. That hit would fall under the personal foul rule if anything.
@sandman9601 you can clearly see shoulderpads to the neck and head area, Especially when paused, He also launched himself in and upward motion to hit higher on him. Bond was also defenseless
@@christophersullivan4753 I see his head snap back, but that could be a reaction to the force on his chest. Honestly, I've seen that hit about 10 times now and I just don't see his head get hit. Agree to disagree I guess. But I do acknowledge that he was clearly defenseless and there probably was a launch. But all clauses of targeting require the majority of the force to hit the head area.
@ Texas will be back in the playoffs next year ASU likely will never be there again. The Manning era has officially begun. I’m psyched for the offseason.
Which they won but great season asu could of should ove but we need to keep targeting the same on all games we had a player sit out a first half and we don’t know if him sitting out cost asu the game either he could made a big play in the first half
Stop a 4th and 13 in overtime while ahead and the game is over. What about your offensive lineman grabbing Skatt and hoisting him over the goal line. 5 yard penalty. You can push the guy over the line from behind but you can’t grab him while you are in front of him and pull him over. Stop crying.
What about the targeting that wasn't called when an ASU DB injured Texas WR Isaiah Bond with a direct hit to the head while he was defenseless? ruclips.net/video/eWuhLOQGkb0/видео.htmlsi=34VKdk2bd0QOc7D5&t=102 Lets not forget, when you're defenseless, it doesn't have to be helmet-to-helmet. Both teams got away with a controversial no-call on targeting. But why is the media and all of RUclips only focusing on the no-call vs. Texas? If your argument is the refs should be fair, shouldn't the media coverage be fair and cover both no-calls, not just the one that favored Texas?
Texas fans, I have not seen so many people whining about winning like a lot of Texas fans commenting on this, it's insane. Arizona State had many ways to win this game. They played hard, they lost. I can accept the fact that ASU lost. But I have seen so many Texas fans who whine about the fact that people may question the no call. Some Texas fans "doth protest too much, methinks"?
Not at all. Stop 4th and 13 and you win. If you think Taffe as a targeting the same can be said about the hit on Bond. Seems like you all are the one crying.
@ yes. The 4th and 13 is the biggest most egregious reason why ASU lost. Great play by Texas. Texas won the game, not in dispute. That does not mean that the Targeting call was a bad non-call. For Texas fans to whine about the fact that people are questioning this call, while winning the game is crazy to me. It doesn’t take way from Texas’ win.
@@robertbrinkley9382literally, I am looking at plenty of Texas fan comments complaining and whining about the fact that people are questioning this call. I am saying nothing about anything else. That is it. Thanks.
Why are the referees exempt from explaining themselves???? I’d like to hear from the white hat AND the replay official. The “expert “ on the broadcast spelled it out… then.
@@williammorrison898at least we have the chance. Get over it. Tons of missed calls against ASU. Stop 4th and 13 and you win flat out. Stop being a baby.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I love the two of you fellas! Thank you both for all the content this year. (I owe y'all beers some time)
The thing that sucks about this is that we were so damn close. Went into the stadium hoping we'd compete, while knowing if things went well we would compete. At halftime I was hoping we would make it a ball game and was proud of the defense for making it a ball game. For it to get that close and us to lose the way we did, especially with the non-call was heartbreaking.
I thought we would get beat, but we beat ourselves. And that never feels good.
The last 53 minutes of regulation we outgained Texas 430-243 (Passing 260-190) Rushing (170). Special teams were nearly even. Texas got 10 points (Punt TD, blocked FG) and ASU got 9 (3 off of extended first drive and 2 missed FGs) If you told me before the game that special teams were a wash and our Defense would play they way they did I would have assumed we won.
It feels good to have the national media on our side with the targeting call but when you start as poorly as we did and give up a 4th and 13 it's hard to feel bad for ourselves.
We proved we can compete. I think we will finish 7th in the AP Poll and we should start in the top 10 next year. We have the tools to be better next year! Excited to see how they perform under the spotlight. Need to break this 1 and done Arizona sports curse and get some momentum going with one of our teams
Did Arizona State get the shaft on the non targeting call? Maybe? Maybe not? To say the refs cost them the game is a HUGE stretch. Did the refs give up a punt return touchdown? Did the refs give up a touchdown on 4th and 13 in the first overtime? Did the refs throw a game ending interception in the second overtime? Bottom line is Texas made one more play than Arizona State did. That's about all...
@@ShadowBanned904 yes the refs handed it to Texas .
@aaronoverton3422 I hope Arizona State football don't adopt your "the refs screwed us" mentality. Not accepting personal responsibility will hold them back as a program, that is clearly on the rise. That's about all...
There are two variants of targeting.
It was targeting in this case because it was the “defenseless receiver” version of targeting (not the “crown of the helmet” variant).
If the receiver is defenseless, it is targeting if any part of the defense hits the receiver’s helmet.
Bottom line is the B1G officials let the boys play football. No calls on both sides.
The receiver can choose not to try to catch the ball.😮
He wasnt defenseless. It was also a tipped ball.
Yet Bond wasn't defenseless?
Thanks for doing what you do guys. Heck of a season. Lot of emotions. Still gonna say that was targeting.
Two offensive linemen way down field. Penalty. Offensive lineman in front of Skatt and hoisting over the goal line. Stop crying.
Guys, they are basically face mask to face mask. Taffe's head is down just a tad but that is because of the milli second this photo was snapped it was at it's lowest position. Nowhere near the crown using his head to drive into him. The ref's looked at it and called it. They called it, not Texas. You could tell Taffe kept his head up and they were face to face. This was not targeting. It got a little close, but no cigar guys. I know these are tough to stomach when it's your guy and a game is so close. But to call it the most controversial call of the entire college football season is dramatic. No targeting here.
4th and 13 🤷🏾♂️
Yeah bad call on defense
Sam Leavitt shouldn't have targeted Mukuba in OT. 😂
Ewers shouldn’t have fumbled the game away on the goal line 😂😂😂😂😂
@bcp25 poor little sand flea is still butthurt.🤣🤣🤣
I understand its heartbreaking to lose this game but you guys are hinging a win on a targeting call. You have no way of knowing that ASU would have scored. Maybe they do but that is why games are won by plays that players make and not penalties that the refs throw.
The guy on the right is crazy. He absolutely launched himself at Bond.
L
Because it wasn’t targeting. I notice how ASU fans are quiet about the actual targeting on Bond. Ignore the illegal man downfield and block in the back on that same play or the lineman pulling skat forward for a TD. Plus the terrible spots that helped asu.
That was a shoulder hit lol it was targeting would ASU won who knows
Cut the BS you know if the shoe was on the other foot you would want the call. Of course you would never have to worry about it because the call woulf of been given. Don't bring up the Bond shoulder it's a weak ass argument
@@williammorrison8984th and 13.
@@robertbrinkley9382 Ohio St. By 3 touchdowns
@@williammorrison898 Ok. The Ohio State team that lost to Michigan. Can OHS do three good games in a row? We will see. Most likely they don’t play as well. Texas can’t play any worse.
No question it was targeting. Compare to replay of Simmons hit that put him on the bench. Either the ref was afraid of the importance of the call or ESPN told him during the review “no targeting”. ASU advancing costs ESPN at least $100M in ad revenue. Do a search of the umpires prior targeting calls when the stakes aren’t so high. I’ll bet he called targeting on similar hits every time.
Poor babies. Whatever you wanna say to make yourself feel better. Couldn't stop Texas on 4th and 13th and in OT. Game over. Your QB threw the INT in OT. Accept it.
ASU was picked to finish last in the Big 12.Not one 5 star maybe a few 4 stars against a team with probably 7 5 stars and 30 or so 4 stars went two Overtime s. I feel pretty f#$%^@&g good. How do you feel about OSU ?
Your qb fumbled the game away against Ohio state. Accept it
@@bcp25 I'll accept it. Great game. We lost.
Anybody know if the video they played on the big screen during the game at the start of the 4th quarter has been released anywhere?
Yes…The ASU 4th quarter video is on the Sun Devils Athletics official RUclips channel 😈🔱
@ Wow can’t believe I missed that lol been there for weeks haha thanks man!
So by the definition, you mention that there are multiple facets that can be targeting, and it doesn't have to be all of them, but fail to repeat that Bond was a defenseless receiver. Clearly, if that had been called targeting on Bond, Texas retains the ball, and everything else changes.
look at the crybabies crying 😂😂 what about the missed targeting on Bond on that interception. that was more of a targeting than that hit. he didn't lower the crown of his helmet it was face mask to face mask. your guy lunged with the crown of his head down
Did you actually listen? They explained the Bond one.
You didn’t listen at all. Also call the targeting 😆 one missed call doesn’t mean the next missed call should not be called why do we have rules then haha
That was clearly targeting on the hit at bond. He was a defenseless receiver who on the other end a cb left his feet & launched into him.
@@Jay-tm8vy It wasn't targeting on Bond, because it didn't meet any of the 3 criteria.
@ I understand you are a ASU fan so I understand your denial however don’t get upset when a call doesn’t go your way when we didn’t get that same call
Why was there a no call on the Quinn Ewers interception? ASU defensive back obviously targeted Isaiah Bond. No flag no call
12:50 - No forcible contact to the head. The hit was to the shoulder and chest, which negates all clauses of the targeting rule. That hit would fall under the personal foul rule if anything.
@sandman9601 you can clearly see shoulderpads to the neck and head area, Especially when paused, He also launched himself in and upward motion to hit higher on him. Bond was also defenseless
@@christophersullivan4753 I see his head snap back, but that could be a reaction to the force on his chest. Honestly, I've seen that hit about 10 times now and I just don't see his head get hit. Agree to disagree I guess. But I do acknowledge that he was clearly defenseless and there probably was a launch. But all clauses of targeting require the majority of the force to hit the head area.
L
Was it targeting when Isaiah Bond got launched at ? Or was that incident not targeting
Stop Texas in overtime and you win the game. Enjoy your offseason.
Enjoy your offseason too bosshawg
@ Texas will be back in the playoffs next year ASU likely will never be there again. The Manning era has officially begun. I’m psyched for the offseason.
Bots are swarming this video. Interesting.
Which they won but great season asu could of should ove but we need to keep targeting the same on all games we had a player sit out a first half and we don’t know if him sitting out cost asu the game either he could made a big play in the first half
It's football. That wasn't targeting at all. They've made everyone soft ASF. Bye bye.
Bye bye to Texas.
Stop a 4th and 13 in overtime while ahead and the game is over. What about your offensive lineman grabbing Skatt and hoisting him over the goal line. 5 yard penalty. You can push the guy over the line from behind but you can’t grab him while you are in front of him and pull him over. Stop crying.
Ewers fumbled the game away 😂😂😂😂😂😂. Have a nice offseason Robert
What about the targeting that wasn't called when an ASU DB injured Texas WR Isaiah Bond with a direct hit to the head while he was defenseless? ruclips.net/video/eWuhLOQGkb0/видео.htmlsi=34VKdk2bd0QOc7D5&t=102
Lets not forget, when you're defenseless, it doesn't have to be helmet-to-helmet.
Both teams got away with a controversial no-call on targeting. But why is the media and all of RUclips only focusing on the no-call vs. Texas? If your argument is the refs should be fair, shouldn't the media coverage be fair and cover both no-calls, not just the one that favored Texas?
No way I could listen to you guys cry for an hour .... Dayum ... You lost 🤘
Dayum…. You lost
God awful day to be a Texas fan am I right
So clarify. Are you mad at Texas or the refs?????????
Refs
Not mad it's a game and ASU played a hell of a game, we lost but can hold our heads high.
L
no one should want to win on a penalty.....just score more than the other team...there was no intent to target...sometimes helments just hit..!!!!!!
Again the guy on the right is an absolute troll.
Womp womp 😂😂😂😂. How did Texas choke that on the goal line 😂😂😂😂😂
There were NFL players that said it was targeting
Maybe so as you said, should’ve been flagged.
IT. WASN'T. TARGETING.
Haha Texas offense played like what bro? But who won? They made plays when it counts. ASU didnt. These guys are trying to stroke their broken heart.
Yes by rule book detfanition
Texas fans, I have not seen so many people whining about winning like a lot of Texas fans commenting on this, it's insane. Arizona State had many ways to win this game. They played hard, they lost. I can accept the fact that ASU lost. But I have seen so many Texas fans who whine about the fact that people may question the no call. Some Texas fans "doth protest too much, methinks"?
Not at all. Stop 4th and 13 and you win. If you think Taffe as a targeting the same can be said about the hit on Bond. Seems like you all are the one crying.
@ yes. The 4th and 13 is the biggest most egregious reason why ASU lost. Great play by Texas. Texas won the game, not in dispute. That does not mean that the Targeting call was a bad non-call. For Texas fans to whine about the fact that people are questioning this call, while winning the game is crazy to me. It doesn’t take way from Texas’ win.
@ There were plenty of missed calls against ASU. So to say Texas fans are only whining about this one call is disingenious.
@@robertbrinkley9382literally, I am looking at plenty of Texas fan comments complaining and whining about the fact that people are questioning this call. I am saying nothing about anything else. That is it. Thanks.
Omg that still just made me sick 🤢
Why are the referees exempt from explaining themselves???? I’d like to hear from the white hat AND the replay official. The “expert “ on the broadcast spelled it out… then.
Keep crying! Acting like the refs didn’t help ASU!
Texas lost in their own home state 😂
Stop schilling pot.
He jumped out of the way my but watch the dam reply video
Lose with dignity, come on now. You want to be at the big boy table, gotta act like it
Texas sure isn’t at the big boy table. They haven’t been since 2006 😂😂😂😂😂
Did you see the no call on bond it was hellacious. And Taft was making a real tackle.
Did you see ewers fumble the game away?
To you fans that don’t know targeting read the dam rule book Texas fans
Have. It wasn’t. Now tell me about the hit on Bond during the interception. I bet crickets.
And you can read the scoreboard. Enjoy the offseason.
Cant wait to read your next game scoreboard OSU will beat that ass.
@@williammorrison898at least we have the chance. Get over it. Tons of missed calls against ASU. Stop 4th and 13 and you win flat out. Stop being a baby.
Not being a baby just will really enjoy your team getting railed.
98% chance to win on 4th and 13th even if that play was called that penalty was called your odds were not near that great to win so quit the whining
Stop whining. It was a clean hit on Bond. Nothing like hit on ASU player.
He jumped out of the way my but watch the dam reply video