We make big plays in practice.

Did anyone point out to him whose defense those big plays are against?

P.S. Look at the bright side. At least y'all know you have a bad coach. We are still not sure.

Explain this:
https://amp.twimg.com/amplify-web-player/prod/source.html?video_url=https%3A%2F%2Fvideo.twimg.com%2Fext_tw_video%2F648556735532277760%2Fpu%2Fvid%2F720x720%2FAGaYOe33INdZbux_.mp4&content_type=video%2Fmp4&image_src=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fext_tw_video_thumb%2F648556735532277760%2Fpu%2Fimg%2FZvhcPb1QgTLhSPXW.jpg&video_owner_id=1212079375&language_code=en&media_id=648556735532277760&json_rpc=1

Looks like they were slow in acknowledging that it was a first down and stopping the clock. Of course it's never going to be instantaneous as soon as the guy hits the ground, but you would at least hope for a sense of urgency in that situation. Often if it's not an obvious first down, they may not stop it until the referee comes up and takes a look, which appears to be what happened here. But considering the game situation and urgency needed with all clock issues in the closing minute of a half, I'd say they should have been quicker on that. It definitely cost you a few seconds there.

The call of stopping of forward progress was not correct, and was a horrible call. The player clearly made it out of bounds. 

I just watched the play again. The Vol receiver is in bounds and moving forward when he is hit by the UF defender. The hit drives him backward and out of bounds. By rule, this means his forward progress was in bounds and the clock should never have been stopped. The linesman should have wound his arm and then the crew immediately resets the ball for the next down. He actually did a half-wind and marked the spot of forward progress in bounds, then killed the clock (maybe changing his mind? No idea). But Butch immediately asks him which it is. Then when the ball was re-spotted, the referee wound the clock (did the linesman re-change his mind, or maybe realized he shouldn't have stopped it? It would seem so). So the linesman actually stopping the clock was an error that caused the UT bench to be confused about whether the clock was going to restart on the ready or the snap. If the play had been officiated correctly, the clock would never have stopped, and UT would still have had to use a timeout, although it's hard to say whether that means more time would have run off or UT would have called the timeout sooner than it happened.  Either way, the poor officiating on that play did cause some distress to UT so I'm going to concede on that, even though the forward progress in bounds call was the correct call -- they still fuzzed it up.

On the fumble out of bounds, the clock should have been restarted on the snap, since it was in the last two minutes of the game. It was started on the ready, which cost UT at least 10 seconds. So they fuzzed that one up, too. 

Note that I wasn't disputing that they made mistakes -- I just asked for specifics so I could consider them. My original point about forward progress was correct, but I agree with you guys that the refs cost you a lot of time with the way they handled those two plays.

Yes he did. And if I understand the rule correctly, it should've been a penalty.

Amazingly, some on the VS are demanding an SEC front office explanation for the ball being re-spotted in the wrong place after the first kick attempt. They're blaming Tennessee for doing it (as if the center gets to place the ball himself), and also suggesting the refs were to blame. Of course they're completely ignoring the fact that the refs completely screwed up the clock on more than one occasion on that drive. I don't know whose clock management was worse in the final minute: Butch's, or the refs. Both were amazingly bad. Les Miles had to have gotten a good laugh out of that entire sequence.

What should have been a penalty? UF called the timeout before the snap, so there was no foul. It is curious why the ball was placed at the wrong spot for the re-kick, because had UT made the kick it would be a huge controversy right now. My guess is the refs simply placed the ball in the wrong spot, but it sure doesn't make that crew look good to do something that gave UT an advantage on the re-kick.

Can you specify where the refs completely screwed up the clock on more than one occasion that drive? On the last play before the FG try, the Vol player's forward progress was clearly stopped in bounds before being taken backward out of bounds and the ref correctly ruled that the clock should run after the ready for play.

Not only did you lose the OT coin toss, but did you notice the referee got confused and did not give you the end of the field your captain said he wanted to play on? Obviously it worked out, but come on, man. I saw the same mistake the previous week in another game that went to OT. The ref gets confused because for a normal coin toss the team that chooses the end of the field for the kickoff puts its back toward that end of the field. In OT, because the winner always picks defense, the loser of the toss should be facing the end of the field it wants to play offense on. Refs, like most of us, are creatures of habit.

Thanks - definitely nice to appear to know how to play the game for a change. And to kill UGA's season is as good as it gets.

nm

Hell yes it's a must win! Oh, you mean for y'all.  No. You can still have a good year with a loss to UF. You could still win out except for Bama. And if you do that, everyone in Vollywood will be ecstatic. So no, not a must win. FOR Y'ALL.

Congrats on the upcoming win - we await the final nail in WM's coffin. There's nothing we've seen so far this year to expect otherwise.

Sorry to disappoint you! 

Haven't had a chance to watch your game yet - but sounds like your team did some good things. See you in Knoxville. My daughter's getting married that day so I'm hoping for good memories all around.

Towards the end, there is a series of people saying how devastating the 2001 loss to Tennessee was. 

It's well worth watching!   

It certainly was - lost a good chance at the SEC title, a national championship, and a possible Heisman for Grossman. That was probably our best team other than the 95-96 squads -- maybe as good as those. Of course Gator fans will point to Earnest Graham being hurt as a factor, and it was. But our defense just couldn't stop you guys -- we'll never forgive Jon Hoke, LOL. UT definitely got us that year -- of course, we gave more than we got in those days. :)

My original thought on Saturday was, "Why wouldn't a school like UF have built-in contingencies for a situation like this?"  But I guess it's understandable.  After all, it's not like they're located in an area that EVER has to deal with severe weather.

Contigencies to do what, exactly? You do realize in the more than 100 years of Florida football this had never happened before? I realize you don't like UF, but I really don't get what could have been done differently.

...to take their payday and forfeit the game.  If I were Idaho's AD, I'd politely tell them to get bent.  Why would anyone forfeit to a team that recently lost to Georgia Southern?  Find a mutual bye week and play the game.  Maybe they hang 100 on us, but I'll take my chances on the field.

This is a ridiculous notion, and I have a hard time believing anyone with half a brain would actually think such a thing was ever considered. UF is paying Idaho despite the cancellation. Why in the hell would Idaho agree to forfeit, no matter the price? And even if they did agree (which they wouldn't), why would the NCAA recognize or legitimize such a move? Preposterous.

Hey, it lived up to its name last night, but they can't play the game

Wonder why they just didn't play this afternoon?

Logistically, it's not really an option to expect everyone necessary for gameday operations to be able to stay til the next day. Not just stadium operations, but also TV/radio crews, game officials, the visiting team and their fans who travelled, etc.

If the review confirmed the call on the field, the penalty should stand. It doesn't erase anything that happens between downs. If the review overturned the call on the field, it might erase the foul depending on what was overturned (giving possession to the other team, for example). But some dead-ball fouls - i.e., personal fouls, unsportsmanlike, -- would be enforced whether the previous play was overturned by review or not. The foul was committed either way. If a call is overturned you don't ignore what happens between downs, you just back up and correct the call, then re-enforce whatever fouls occurred between downs. By the way - a team can change how it wants to enforce the foul if the previous play is overturned, too. For example, if they decide a guy stepped out of bounds several yards back -- you might want to decline a false start penalty to force them into third and long instead of second and long.

nm

So Muschamp survived losses to Vandy and Georgia Southern, but a loss at UT would be considered a fireable offense?  Ouch.  That hurts, but it's probably true.

Muschamp won't survive another season like last year. He needs Ws, and if we're not good enough to beat UT, we won't beat enough of the rest to save him.

I can't fully revel in their current ineptitude until we beat them (then I'll be insufferable).  But I do hope that Muschamp sticks around Gainesville for a long, long time.

You can either insufferably revel in a victory over UF or you can have Muschamp stick around. You won't have both.

They tend to finish strong, so I don't have my hopes too high just yet-- but they have to be concerned by the rash of decommitments for sure. I'm sure the negative recruiting re: their inept coaching staff is taking a toll.

FIFY.

nm

nm

I don't think there's any doubt he fits what Muschamp is trying to do better than Driskel did. Creek's observation about the strategy is reasonable though. Doing only enough on offense to let the defense get wins for you leaves you very vulnerable to a handful of mistakes costing you a game (Miami). I think some Gator fans agree with this sentiment, and UT has definitely been there before.

But the UF defense is really, really good. I am really curious how UGA and LSU will fare against UF.

I completely agree with that. The fact we slow the game down and get fewer possessions means we have to be very efficient on offense. My original point of disagreement was that "only" scoring 24 against UK meant our QB wasn't playing well.

Yes I did. And I understand perfectly well what Florida is trying to do on offense. Muschamp's hope has to be that his D will continue to play well enough to allow that to work. We shall see. In the meantime, Murphy is a very average QB.

I never said Murphy is an All American, but so far he is playing as well as a Gator fan could hope for. Since he took over, UF has been 7 for 7 scoring in the red zone with 6 TDs. We'll see how he does against better competition, but to this point he's been great.

Did you watch the game? Murphy played great, other than a bad pick that he saved from being a pick 6 (and which the D got him the ball back shortly.) We never punted the entire game.

We had three offensive drives in the second half -- 12 plays, 7:01 that ended in the above interception -- 15 plays 7:38 that ended in a field goal -- and 6 plays 4:14 that ended the game. That is called ball possession and strangle-holding the game. 

I do realize the above was against Kentucky, but to suggest we weren't impressive because we didn't score "enough" points shows you don't understand what UF's trying to do on offense.