Your prediction for the Marshall game...
- Thread starter SpaceRaider
- Start date
Hoping with the opponent being Marshall we attract around 16K give or take 500. One of the more marketable CUSA teams plus the excitement of the last time they came to town. I need to screen shot this for those who accuse me of always being pessimistic. As far as predictions, I predict a 34-34 tie. With 6:43 left in regulation Johnny "Pink" Floyd suffers a power outage. With it already being dark, and the power still out, the teams agree to stall the game, call it a tentative tie, but in the event they need to finish it for bowl game implications they will resume the game at a later date.
If Marshall can't score more than 34 on Charlotte, ODU, UNT, and FAU, they ain't gonna put that up on us. The question is can we score on them? We will have to run the ball to soften the pass up. Hope we get healthier. We play much better at home. We are due.
MT 35
UM 28
MT 35
UM 28
I won't predict the score but will predict Middle Tennessee to win the game. Right now Middle Tennessee is favored by 2 and that seems about right to me. The truth is Marshall is not a very good football team. The Herd lost to Ohio University and if it had not been for two controversial personal foul calls, Marshall most likely would have lost to Kent State. I rarely ever criticize officiating but after that game I couldn't help voice my displeasure on the Kent State Report (see below).
"Quarterbacks should wear dresses"
In yesterday's double overtime loss to Marshall, there were a pair of controversial personal foul penalties that led to the ejections of two of Kent State's best defensive backs in the fourth quarter – safety Nate Holley, who recorded 15 tackles before exiting, and cornerback Najee Murray, who had three pass breakups. In the personal foul penalty involving Holley, Marshall's quarterback, Chase Linton, slid going for a first down.
Although Holley's helmet appeared to make contact with Linton's helmet, the hit was not flagrant. Nevertheless, Holley was flagged and ejected for targeting. Consequently, the infraction extended the drive, and Marshall scored a touchdown to give the Herd the lead 20-19.
On Murray's personal foul penalty, Marshall was attempting a two-point conversion when Murray broke up a pass to Yurachek with a hard tackle. Although the replay clearly showed that Murray did not hit Yurachek above the shoulder pads, he also was called for targeting and thrown out of the game. Given a second chance, Marshall again went for two, converted, and led by three at that point in the game.
If the correct call had been made, Marshall would had led by only one and not three points with 12:32 left in the game. But the difference proved significant because Kent kicked a 33-yard field goal with 4:55 to play that would have given the Flashes the lead and most likely the win considering how well Kent's defense was playing.
It's bad enough that Kent State loses a game it should have won but now the Flashes have to play their next game against Miami without two of their best defensive players for the first half due to the suspension rule.
Whether a player deserves an ejection on top of a penalty is subject to debate -- particularly when one half of a game without a top player (or two top players in Kent's case) can alter the outcome of the game and perhaps the entire course of a season given the significance of conference games.
In both cases, neither Holley nor Murray's hits were severe enough to warrant a suspension in my view. Even the TV announcer thought Murray's targeting penalty would be overruled when the officials looked at the replay but unfortunately it wasn't and that bad call was the deciding factor in who won the game.
"I think that there are some gray areas, but people do the very best they can to coach to avoid these situations and also to call it on the field," Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio said after Spartans linebacker Riley Bullough was ejected for a targeting call against an Air Force receiver on a pass play over the middle. "Some hits are not intentional," said Dantonio.
"I think it should be determined sometimes on the severity of the hit in my mind. I can tell you that a game suspension is very difficult when you only have 12 games to play guaranteed to you. That's difficult to comprehend for a player."
I agree with Dantonio. And anyone who saw the questionable plays by Holley and Murray knows neither one was severe enough to warrant suspensions. I understand the purpose of the ruling but some of these targeting calls are way off base and diminish the integrity of the game.
Perhaps Jack Lambert was right when he said, "Quarterbacks should wear dresses." That certainly seems the way football is played today.
http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-football/matchups/
"Quarterbacks should wear dresses"
In yesterday's double overtime loss to Marshall, there were a pair of controversial personal foul penalties that led to the ejections of two of Kent State's best defensive backs in the fourth quarter – safety Nate Holley, who recorded 15 tackles before exiting, and cornerback Najee Murray, who had three pass breakups. In the personal foul penalty involving Holley, Marshall's quarterback, Chase Linton, slid going for a first down.
Although Holley's helmet appeared to make contact with Linton's helmet, the hit was not flagrant. Nevertheless, Holley was flagged and ejected for targeting. Consequently, the infraction extended the drive, and Marshall scored a touchdown to give the Herd the lead 20-19.
On Murray's personal foul penalty, Marshall was attempting a two-point conversion when Murray broke up a pass to Yurachek with a hard tackle. Although the replay clearly showed that Murray did not hit Yurachek above the shoulder pads, he also was called for targeting and thrown out of the game. Given a second chance, Marshall again went for two, converted, and led by three at that point in the game.
If the correct call had been made, Marshall would had led by only one and not three points with 12:32 left in the game. But the difference proved significant because Kent kicked a 33-yard field goal with 4:55 to play that would have given the Flashes the lead and most likely the win considering how well Kent's defense was playing.
It's bad enough that Kent State loses a game it should have won but now the Flashes have to play their next game against Miami without two of their best defensive players for the first half due to the suspension rule.
Whether a player deserves an ejection on top of a penalty is subject to debate -- particularly when one half of a game without a top player (or two top players in Kent's case) can alter the outcome of the game and perhaps the entire course of a season given the significance of conference games.
In both cases, neither Holley nor Murray's hits were severe enough to warrant a suspension in my view. Even the TV announcer thought Murray's targeting penalty would be overruled when the officials looked at the replay but unfortunately it wasn't and that bad call was the deciding factor in who won the game.
"I think that there are some gray areas, but people do the very best they can to coach to avoid these situations and also to call it on the field," Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio said after Spartans linebacker Riley Bullough was ejected for a targeting call against an Air Force receiver on a pass play over the middle. "Some hits are not intentional," said Dantonio.
"I think it should be determined sometimes on the severity of the hit in my mind. I can tell you that a game suspension is very difficult when you only have 12 games to play guaranteed to you. That's difficult to comprehend for a player."
I agree with Dantonio. And anyone who saw the questionable plays by Holley and Murray knows neither one was severe enough to warrant suspensions. I understand the purpose of the ruling but some of these targeting calls are way off base and diminish the integrity of the game.
Perhaps Jack Lambert was right when he said, "Quarterbacks should wear dresses." That certainly seems the way football is played today.
http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-football/matchups/
You're attempt at being optimistic was....Well it was an attempt!
Also hoping I'm wrong, but until I see something that's different from what I've so far, against the better teams of the conference, I'm saying Marshall 44, MT 17, in front of friends, families, die hard/true blue season ticket holders, veterans here for the Salute to Veterans and a smattering of students.
It was, I am competing to be optimistic about Blue Raider Football.
No way is our defense worse than Charlotte. If we give up more than 34 points when FAU, ODU and Charlotte held them then our season is over.
Ohio, the team that beat Marshall just got waxed by Bowling Green, who WKU throttled last year. There is a definite difference in the scheduling this year. It should be a good game or I sure hope it will be.
Marshall is on a 7-game run right now since that loss.
Our guys better jump on them early or it will be as bad as WKU and LaTech. Book it.
https://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4105772/1384612849133.0.jpg
We lose by 20
40-20
Attendance: 10K
We lose by 20
40-20
Attendance: 10K
It's amazing Lynn posted what he did because his prediction is EXACTLY what I was preparing to submit as I was reading everyone else's.
MT - 17
Marshall - 14
Attendance - 6,000
Announced - 14,755
MT - 17
Marshall - 14
Attendance - 6,000
Announced - 14,755
And the ugly play calling which almost lost us the game is exactly why there will continue to be a problem in attendance. If that FG that was missed by Marshall at the end of regulation had been good I was ready to declare that squandered fourth quarter ten point lead, not the first one this season, was and deserved to be a fireable offense.
speaking of play-calling, I like the type of play-calling demonstrated by Arkansas today.
Gutsy. Exciting. To-hell-with-it-go-big-or-go-home kind of play calling.
Gutsy. Exciting. To-hell-with-it-go-big-or-go-home kind of play calling.
That's football. If it weren't for three red zone turnovers we would have curb stomped them . Enjoy the win.
From my seats it looked like 5-6K. I was talking to a friend who walked around both sides of the stadium and he agreed.
And the poor attendance is causing me aggravation during the game. My seats are on the east side on the 50. There were as many turd fans in my section, and the adjacent student section, as MT fans. This seems to happen every november
I sit on the visitor side of the 50 - 2H...I hate this section. We are moving to the home side next year. Sick of the drunks in the boxes behind me, hate it that this area get filled up with fans from the opposing team. Were all moving.
Move up to 2HH. No problems up there and the view is so much better. Come on up. It's great and comfortable.
We sat up in 2HH back in the late 90s, early 2000s - it is a great view. We shall see, but it will not be down below anymore.
Yeah, you are right beside me. I'm on the aisle. I tailgated with those drunks for years. They're harmless but they can get annoying at times.
That is a quick fix if you complain to the right people. Renting those boxes is a privilege and controlling the guests' behavior is the responsibility of the suite holder. When I had Stadium Club tickets, a locker with key was provided in a private area for "personal items" and open display of Prohibited containers was discouraged and discretion encouraged. When I have purchased tickets near or below the open air boxes, there was no discretion whatsoever.
I am guessing, since it is an ongoing issue, it is the suite holders themselves and not the guests.
