spoiler alert: i linked this
- Member for
- 6 years 32 weeks
|6 years 32 weeks ago||I thought this was an||
I thought this was an intentional hit to the helmet when I first saw it, too. I haven't been able to find a clip of the play to re-examine it though.
|6 years 32 weeks ago||1) Exactly. ND is good for||
1) Exactly. ND is good for the BT and the BT knows it. It can't afford to lose ND in the schedules. This suspension was a small consolation for Charlie's adamant complaining about the refs.
|6 years 32 weeks ago||This was Charlie's doing. He||
This was Charlie's doing. He said he sent the tape to the BT office, received a quick response from them, but preferred to keep their response private. I guess if the refs don't see it, the big ten is next in line to penalize the player, which makes sense.
EDIT: I don't know that you can really hold RR accountable for anything. I don't think any coach is actively looking for very subtle uppercuts by their players when they review the film. What RR did is what any coach would have done.
|6 years 32 weeks ago||Speed bump?||
Nah...I highly doubt Martin would be worried about the ability of these people to pay off their loans. If they were approved for the loans in the first place, then their default risk should be the same as any other approved consumer.
Of course, the media could spin this in any direction. Perhaps someone will say this is the reason why Martin let Lloyd Carr keep his job for as long as he did -- because he had a mortgage through BofAA.
|6 years 32 weeks ago||I think he's referring to the||
I think he's referring to the one with the pompoms up.