Ducks, Beavers.... who cares???

what's this have anything to do with blue oregon and progressive politics???

We already know we're not "elites." Whatever gave you that impression? We just don't care about primitive neanderthal rituals of agressive dominance. Grow up.

Great game! UT, crawl back into a hole...

Even if you are a UO fan, you know this game was ripped from the hands of Oklahoma. The purpose of instant replay in college football is to get EVERY play right. Clearly, the tipped ball/pass interference call was wrong, with the onside kick perhaps (and that is a streach) being inconclusive.

The Pac-10 did a horrible job administering its instant replay. Duck fans should not be gloating this win, as the Pac-10 replay crew handed it to them. It must feel like beeing a Steelers fan after the Super Bowl...knowing you were handed the game and the rightful winner was denied.

On the other hand, maybe, MAYBE you won't get screwed out of a BCS bowl game for the millionth year in a row ;)

Lil Scrappy

The plays you mentioned made up for the the missed delay of game penalty and the missed offensive pass interference penalty by Oklahoma early on. It all evens out. UT, get a life.

Hey guys.

I've got a high-def Tivo machine here at home and watched both plays in super slow motion various times. The onsides kick was very difficult to tell if the ball had gone 10 yards or not. The only really good shot of the play was from an angle and the players were 8' in the air going for the ball so you can't tell where they are from the yard lines. The announcer was jabbering about how it was a bad call but in high def on my 50" screen (which I guarantee is better than they have in the booth) I thought it was inconclusive. Hence the call was correct.

The pass interference call towards the end? That seems pretty clearly to be a tipped ball. So one bad call in favor of Oregon, but hardly a game changer. It would have simply been 2nd down and Oregon still would have been in storing position. On the other hand, Oregon lost a fumble when they were driving that was pretty clearly not a fumble. That's when Oklahoma came back for their final score. From the angle I had, it looked pretty clear than Steward was on the ground and the ground caused the fumble. Also, I believe that two major plays by OK were made after the 24 second clock had run out which should have been delay of game penalties. I think one was a touchdown. So on balance, Oregon got one bad call against them that resulted in a turnover and OU score and a bad missed delay go game penalty that also resulted in a OU score. Oklahoma got one bad call on the pass interference that cost them 15 yards and one inconclusive onsides kick. Hardly a stolen game. If all 4 calls are reversed you take two OU touchdowns off the scoreboard and one UO touchdown off the scoreboard and Oregon still wins.

You'll notice that the ESPN announcers complained about the pass interference call and the onsides kick but made no mention of any of the bad calls that went against Oregon. Typical.

Kent, clearly not a fumble from where we stood looking straight on at Stewart running. Nice analysis - you too, Josh.

L'il Scrappy, if you are a UO fan, you are too hoarse, exhausted, and happy to know anything except that this is another historic victory on a par with Michigan, and that you got to watch a spectacular game. In football, as in life (and often in politics), sometimes all that matters is the W. And whether it's fair or not, we live with it and move on - celebrating, sorrowing, or complaining, as we see fit.

Every game will have questionable calls? Sometimes it will be a ticky-tack issue and others will be an issue if the officals have had their vision checked up lately. But there where some ticky-tack calls last year that went against Oregon in Norman.

A few things.

First, did anyone besides me notice the large amount of R political ads during the games today?

Second, as for the game:

1. The call was a lot closer than you think.
2. The refs did not make Oklahoma do the following things. Kick 3 FGs from within 25 yards. Commit multiple stupid obvious penalties. Burn all their timeouts in bad situations. Give up 2 TDs in the last 2 minutes or 501 yards of total offense to OR. Kick the last FG attempt so low it could be blocked. Run without any TOs on the next to last play of the game. Kick 2 kickoffs out of bounds.
3. The refs also had more than a few bad calls earlier in the game that went the way of OU. Specifically: A passed offensive PI call on one TD. Missing the play clock running out twice, one of the plays which resulted in a TD. Giving OU the ball on the J. Stewart "fumble" which was pretty damn convincing Oregon's way. Misspotting the ball by about 10 yards after a review earlier in the game.

Oklahoma had their chances and blew it, enough said.

Kent: I had to miss the game becuase my wife's parents were in town so I spent the afternoon admiring the sea otter at the zoo. Is there any possible way to get a copy of the game? Or do you know if they'll replay it? I'm kicking myself a thousand times over because I missed this. I'm willing to trade for beer. Good, locally brewed, democratic beer.

Regarding the "tipped ball" call...yes it was tipped, but the bulk of the contact was after the ball was thrown, yet before it was tipped. Hence, it was a good call, IMHO. However, the way the referee phrased the review was something like "The video was conclusive that the ball was not tipped," which is untrue (along with "A Sooner touched the ball first").

Oregon what what!!

Thankfully, beloved collegiate football (and sports nationwide) is apolitical which makes it another great part of life that unites us all as Americans. At least for 3 hours at a whack.

But those here who are secure only if they drag politics into absolutely everything, a little primer here: Oregon votes blue and Oklahoma votes Red.

So somehow join us Ducks in saying "the reviewed play stands". Shut up and enjoy victory. For all we know the instant replay guys are blues, so what are you saying, are you questioning their (blue)judgement? For if the IR guys were reds, and they reverse the call, then Sooners win the game. And a red state beats a blue one.

Wrestle with that.

Kent: I had to miss the game becuase my wife's parents were in town so I spent the afternoon admiring the sea otter at the zoo. Is there any possible way to get a copy of the game? Or do you know if they'll replay it? I'm kicking myself a thousand times over because I missed this. I'm willing to trade for beer. Good, locally brewed, democratic beer.

Martin. I'm currently living in Texas otherwise I'd invite you over. I don't have a DVD recorder so I don't have any way to record off the Tivo except to VCR. I've never tried that and not sure how well it would work because I'd be recording a widescreen broadcast onto an old standard VCR. You may have better luck finding someone closer to home that has it recorded.

To see why OU is a great program and a class act check out the stories in the Norman Transcript. All the whining and whimpering we usually hear about officials and refusal to just accept responsibility for your own actions is absent from writers, coaches and players. I have never been a big fan of the Sooners, but I have to admire their reaction to this loss! They will be better because they accept that their actions caused the loss not the officials and that will allow them to get better! What a concept!!

http://www.normantranscript.com/sports/local_story_260010556.html?keyword=secondarystory

Kinda refreshing compared to this: Memo to the people of the fine state of Oklahoma: don't riot or do anything destructive tonight ... even though you'd be justified to feel like doing something violent. After all, this game was violently taken away from a deserving bunch of Sooners by inept officiating and even more inept replay evaluators.

Yes, it's very rare for analysis of a football game to so frontally, emotionally and nakedly talk about the officiating; this is a very rare practice, precisely because it seems like bad form on the part of the writer. An article about lousy officiating is almost never written because fans can easily interpret such an article as a sign of bias — entrenched and unprofessional — on the part of the author.

But in the wake of Saturday's game in Eugene — won by Oklahoma in every true sense, but not on the official scoreboard — normal practices have to give way to a rare approach. After all, what happened in the final minutes of this game was anything but normal.

John canzano had the best line about the game:

"If we're going to have agroup catharsis here, we need to acknowledge that Mr. Magoo must have been working that video replay booth."

The Ducks and their fans can celebrate all they want, but the national football media and their audience know the Ducks stole that one, and that's what they're saying. Watch and see how far the Ducks move up in the polls. I bet they don't climb too high, because they're win was tainted.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Delusions aren't just a chain of islands off the coast of Alaska.

That said, Dennis Dixon's awesome. And if I was Brady Leaf, I'd be filling out transfer papers.

On the offsides kick it was hard for me to tell if the ball had gone 10 yards before the duck player touched. But look at the stats the Ducks kept Adrain Peterson( the best running back in college) to only 211 yards and one touchdown, pretty good knowing that he scored 5 touchdowns in his first 2 games. Great job ducks that last drive at the end was the best drive I've seen in football in recent history. Also Bob Stoops needs to teach his team not to commit so made penalities and waste all thier timeouts.

It's amusing how many Duck fans are in denial about just how bad that call was on the onside kick.

That game was over had the proper call been made. And the callshould have been made because the ball was headed into the arms of a Sooner before the Duck deflected it beofre it travelled 10 yards.

It only proves how a blind allegience to an organization with which you feel some connection can affect your grasp of reality and how you view things.

Now you know what it's like to be a Republican, and just how those people can lolok at the world and believe fervently in things that just aren't true.

How's that for finding the politcal analogy in a football game.

(Nick, please don't spell check this post).

Also Bob Stoops needs to teach his team not to commit so made penalities and waste all thier timeouts.

You can't teach how to play in a stadium where the crowd makes so much noise. I'm surprised not to read any comments about this in any of the reports. Every wasted time out and each false start penalty (except the one where the entire Ducks line took off too early) can be directly attributed to 50,000 people yelling together. I can't think of another sport where the crowd can influence the outcome so directly, and we Ducks fans are darn good at it.

It only proves how a blind allegience to an organization with which you feel some connection can affect your grasp of reality and how you view things.

Since I was at the game and didn't see the endless replays, I think it shows that how people see things in-the-moment can be very different from how they look with hindsight (or in this case, multiple reviews). And to me, being in-the-moment is part of the game of football, and why I love it so much. Reminds me that life isn't fair, so there's no point complaining when it isn't.

Here, here, Amanda!

That's why I prefer competitive sports to politics: no lawsuits following an upset (i.e. Sore/Loserman).

"It only proves how a blind allegience to an organization with which you feel some connection can affect your grasp of reality and how you view things".

Kinda like insisting without retort since July 2003 that Rove was guilty of outing Valerie Plame.

You mean like that?

i am not a football fan, and don't even know most of the rules, but watching this slow mo' replay on you tube, it really looks to me like the ball bounced off the helmet of an oklahoma player before oregon touched it.

not sure if that matters.

i am not a football fan, and don't even know most of the rules, but watching this slow mo' replay on you tube, it really looks to me like the ball bounced off the helmet of an oklahoma player before oregon touched it.

It does look like it from that angle, but I have the game taped on my tivo and from other angles you can see that the ball doesn't come within 2' of that guys helmet. In the video you're looking at the perspective is distorted by the super tele lens. From the reverse angle it is clear that the guy's helmet doesn't come close.

In any event, I watched the thing again from all the angles they showed during the broadcast and they showed a bunch of them when they waited the endless review by the officials. My best guess is that the Oregon player had probably gone 9.5 yards but it is really quite difficult to tell because the close-up shots are from the front quarter angle and you can't tell from the perspective of looking at a player from the front who's jumping in the air where he is located on the yard lines. The side shot of the play is so wide angle that you really can't see anything. I have a crappy SD feed because for some reason ABC wasn't broadcasting this game in High Def. At least they weren't in my area.

In any event, the call on the field may have been wrong, but there wasn't indisputable video evidence to overrule it. And given how far away the line judge was who needed to watch this, it's no wonder they missed it.

Not to add fuel to the fire (I'm glad Oregon won BTW), but it appears that Oklahoma recovered the football on the kick anyway, making the 10 yard inconclusive call moot.

Not to add fuel to the fire (I'm glad Oregon won BTW), but it appears that Oklahoma recovered the football on the kick anyway, making the 10 yard inconclusive call moot.

No, the play was already blown dead which is why the OK player that supposidly recovered the ball was just walking around with it casually and not diving on it or taking off running. If he had thought the ball was still live he would have been out of there like a rocket.

For those who still want to argue the call, take a look at the video on ESPN's web site here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/gamedayFinal?page=gamedayFinal3

Play the video on the top corner of the page and then freeze it exactly when ESPN says the player touched the ball. They have a little on-screen arrow pointing at the ball to help you out. Then look at the angle of the play and tell us that with the distorted perspective you are absolutely certain the BALL has not traveled 10 yards. The Oregon player is pretty clearly at about the 9 to 9.5 yard line but it isn't his feet that are the relevant question because he is leaning and reaching forward. The question is the location of the forward tip of the ball when it is first touched. I defy you to say for certain that the nose of the ball hasn't yet crossed the 10-yard plane when it is first touched. For the ball to travel 10 yards, only the very tip of the ball has to cross the 10-yard plane.

Then when you are done looking at the video, take a look at the only still shot that I've seen of the play which is here:

http://sports-ak.espn.go.com/ncf/photos?photoId=1311056&gameId=262592483

This shot is from the reverse angle of the video. Tell us that you can be certain it was even the Oregon player who touched the ball first. And remember that because the OU player has crossed the line he is blocking out the nearside line judge from seeing the play. As you can see from this photo, the nearside line judge has absolutely no way to make the call. So it comes down to the far side line judge who is all the way across on the other side of the field. No matter what actually happened here, it was a dang hard call to make in real time and hardly a massive mistake by the refs.

Let's get several things straight:

1. Oregon football is a complete joke. Everyone on this site acts like it is a crime the national media is slanted directly toward Oklahoma and you know what?

It is.

You know why?

It's called "skins on the wall" and Oregon has none. Your half-ass football program has 0 national championships, 7 conference championships in the weakest major conference in all of division 1A and a winning percentage barely above .500. Not to mention that in 112 years of fielding a team you have managed only 18 bowl games and of course losing the majority of those for a fine record of 7-11.

Gee, I can't figure out why no one respects a program that loses to Wake Forest by 3 touchdowns in the Seattle Bowl.

1. Oklahoma football is clearly superior to every program everywhere. Contrast the above definition of lifetime mediocrity against 7 National Championships, 39 bowl games (24 W's) 39 Conference Championships (in a conference where fans go to and watch the games, not schedule outings to hug sea otters) 14 undefeated seasons, more weeks at #1 in the AP Poll than any other team, more 11 win seasons than any other team in Div 1A, more 10 win seasons than any other team in Div 1A, the most points scored all time, and the record that no team will ever get close to breaking...47 W's in a row across 4 seasons.

2. Everyone that saw "the play" and is somewhat objective to both schools agrees that the Sooners got jobbed and should have won the game. Enough said.

3. The reality is this: OU played the worst game of the Bob Stoops era (99-Present) in Oregon's backyard and they still had to cheat to win. OU can play Oregon 20 more times on any field and--barring a completely united conspiracy by all that is Pac-10--win 20 more times.

4. If I am the average team matched up against Oregon in the No-Name Bowl (where Oregon is headed this year) I am jumping with joy because I know I am playing a team that is soft, leaderless, erratic and has a defense that only plays until halftime.

I would really like to argue more about politics and gun control, or maybe hug a few trees and weep for the ozone, but the spotted owl I am grilling out for dinner is starting to burn so I have to run.

Sincerely,

Whoever Is Playing The Ducks Fan

Oklahoma is a bunch of whining, spoiled 6 year olds who have nothing better to do than cry and complain because they lost. How does it feel?? Calls have gone Oklahoma's way for years and years and thay told us we were whiners. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it isn't so hot is it? Well....live with it! I hope this sticks in your craw for decades because the little guy has now stood up in Oklahoma's little sand pond and given the Laters what thay have given us for years.

As a Husky fan I have no Dog in this fight (pun intended!) other than of course saying the Ducks Suck!

When I watched the highlights I thought the Ducks were given a gift, but that said OU still had to allow 2 tds in the last minute and have a kick blocked, so it isn't like a couple bad calls alone gave them the game.

After reading the whining by OU fans and especially the rants of the school president I have to say screw them, what a bunch of lame wankers. Sheesh you think in all the years of OU being a power they've never had some bad calls go their way?

As for the distinguished OU fan who posted above, first of all to call anyone else the weakest BCS conference is pretty ubsurd as long as the Big East exists:-) Secondly, the Pac 10 has been underrated and your pathetic Big 12 over rated for years, your top heavy but have no depth. Texas has been a legit top 5 team for a while now and you had a couple great years at OU, but top to bottom your conference is weak, you have at most 4 or 5 teams that can be considered remotely a threat to win each week and a whole bunch of weak sisters.

Lets not get nasty here, (so many sooners fans get so ignorant) but this was a perfect exampe of HORRIBLE officiating. Oklahomas #23 got the ball from the pile long before the ball was blown dead, and no oregon player ever had control of it. it is all over youtube, and almost every sports writer I can think of has covered this as a hijack by the zebras. I won't sit here and make fun of the ducks because as a sooner, I can honestly say whoever won that game, the ducks put up a fight worthy of credit. How people can say the call was correct is beyond me, but those are the breaks. I also think oklahoma will pass the ducks in the rankings within 4 or 5 games. I think it would be funny to see Oklahoma to join oregon in a bowl game at the end of the season(rematch baby. Something to be concerned about as an oregonian; Good luck getting anyone to come from out of your own devision to play you. The word is out that Pac 10 zebras coddle local teams, so again, good luck getting a schedule stronger than a highschool team. Hillary in 06

As for the distinguished OU fan who posted above, first of all to call anyone else the weakest BCS conference is pretty ubsurd as long as the Big East exists:-)

The Big East currently has two teams ranked in the top 10. #4 West Virginia and #8 Louisville. The "storied" Big-12 has a single team in the top 10, Texas at #7.

-AHEM- in the first half. If your coach didn't challenge, it's his own fault. Yes, hypocracy is pretty deep here. I do see your point, but it is of no consequence. You would think that where the instant replay was tested, they could get it right. Sounds like home cookin.

The refs handed the ducks this game, period. point blank. Just the fact that you feel the need to defend your win shows that. I don't blame the players, they played their hearts out, I blame the refs.

Well, it looks like the PAC-10 agrees the onside kick call was a mistake (see ESPN.com or cnnsi.com). The AP report dwells on that, and sounds like the pass interference call was less clear.

It was still a great game of football, by both teams. Without instant replay on the field, this would be just another instance of We Wuz Robbed, and there are always many of those, every season. And as it turns out, even with instant replay, same deal. Still less important than the calls in Florida 2000 or Ohio 2004.

Oh, definately agreed. Neither team in this game could defend against a line of shriners! But The way so many Oregon fans have tried to act as if it didn't happen sickened me. They where refusing to look at the evidence and name calling like a bunch of 4 year olds. Thanks for the smelling salts jeff, I'll now throw out the soap box. and good game Oregon. Vote Democrat in 08

You can run your mouth all you want about stats, penalties and how the game was played but that still will not change the fact that it was decided on two extremely bad calls.

The ducks have to be the worse bunch of monkies i've ever seen. You guys claim to have beat the sooners? The facts are you were Given a gift so enjoy while you can losers. The Pac 10 blows.

No hard feelings, right Cracker?

Soonerfan

We understand that Oklahoma is God's country. God gave it to man and man done gave it back. When you don't have anything else going for you Billy Bob, Bobby Bob, Billy Bill and their cousins, also their wives, get to go see a football game. By the way, Cat is spelled with a C and not a K. When you come up here hunting, you will actually have to hunt and not put the salt lick out on your lawn chair with your beer and wait.

Good luck with all your national champs we will still continue to profit with our NIKE stock.

So, the Pac-10 admits that both of the calls were blown! And the officials suspended for one game! They should be fired. So how do y'all feel now that your own conference admits that the video evidence was conclusive. IN FACT, OREGON DID NOT EVEN RECOVER THE ONSIDE KICK! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Even if it did go 10 yards, the Sooners recovered.

I never knew you could fit two feet into your mouths...pretty impressive I must say...a pretty crappy day to be a duck :(

Man fuck all you Oregon fans that is some fucking BS the pac 10 crew should be motherfucking fired I hope you lose to Stanford, Cal and every other team and goes to another crappy bowl like the meneike car care bowl fuk all you pac 10 bitches BIG 12 and Oklahoma for life

No need to candy coat it, Kooter: tell us what you really think.

YA BIG CRY BABY!

Lil Scrappy

While you are only paying attention to the last minute of the game I actually watched the entire game. The worst call of the day was a blatant non-call that changed the momentum of the game. That is when Thompson received 27 seconds to hike the ball instead of the legal 25. This resulted in a touchdown that was called back because the receiver stepped out of bounds and then the refs gave Oklahoma an additional 10 yards with the spot. If Delay is called it is now 3rd and 15 and the crowd then gets louder than ever.

By the way Oklahoma did give up 500 yards of offense and frankly should thank their lucky stars that Oregon turned the ball over 4 times otherwise this would have been an old fashioned blow-out.

Both teams received gifts from the refs you just want to point out the last minute.

Good luck next week.

Dear Sooners,

The on-side kick call did not cost the Sooners the game. What cost you the game was driving down inside the Duck 10 yard line, on multiple occasions, and comming up with field goals. When it was crunch time, your team didn't get it done. Taking a field goal instead of a TD with 3 minutes left opened things up. No defense made the on-side kick a relevant issue.

If there is a Brokeback Mountain, Part 2, I'd suggest your coach and athletic director take on the leading roles. Just imagnie them wiping each others tears, tenderly from their un-shaven cheeks.

Read this on ESPN "OU reaction transitions from indignation to insanity"

In previous years, even if there was a bad call, coaches were forbidden from badmouthing the referees. Instant replay and ongoing trial by TV are changing the sport. It should still take 60 minutes to win or lose a game. To me the refereeing is part of the mix of skill, background support, and luck that makes football like life..... but not as important.

It is one thing to miss a penalty call, but an entirely different thing to miss on instant replay, when you can slow it down several times, pause, rewind, etc. Using all these other "well, they missed their opportunity" crap is exactly that, crap. The point of instant replay in college football is to get every play right. Period. This does not include unreviewable P.I. calls. Regardless of how many opportunities OU missed, the blatant fact remains that even the replay official himself admits that he was wrong. Period. Clearly, there aren't many unbiased fans OF THE GAME OF FOOTBALL anywhere within these threads.

A missed call in the first half still leaves plenty of time to recover. Good teams recover from penalties regardless. But two of the worst calls in the history of instant replay (Professional or college)? With less than 2 minutes to play! Lets get some objectivity here. If you don't look at the replays and say "Damn, they got royally screwed!" you have no grasp of the game of football. You are just a blind fan of Nike U, too affraid to oil your feathers with reality.

Interesting to see the discussion go from a technical "This angle, then this angle" and a football specific "how the teams played down the stretch" to jingoistic conference-baiting.

As a Duck who's used to them breaking my heart over and over and over <and come="" to="" think="" of="" it,="" blazers="" fan="" used="" to="" them="" breaking="" my="" heart="" over="" and="" over="" and="" over,="" and="" timbers="" fan="" used="" to="" them="" breaking="" my="" heart="" over="" and="" over="" and="" over=""> my first reaction was pride in not having lost faith and rewarded with a light and buoyant feeling for the rest of the weekend.

The reason, Sooners fans, that we have pride in wins like this, and don't care that we don't have a wall full of national championships, is that we are a small state, population wise. We play in a conference where until the scholarship limitations the "Big Guns" used to recruit players and stack them like cordwood on the bench just to deny the rest of the conference access to talent.

The number of players available to us is simply not the same as a Midwest or SoCal or Eastern school...so big wins take on a special meaning. It's David and Goliath, it's Jack the Giant-Killer, it's Finland vs. the Soviet Union.

So for us, a Rose Bowl appearance, or BCS bowl appearance, is a victory of gumption, of sinew, of will and commitment over a stack of hurdles that just don't exist for a top-end Big 12 or SEC school.

And yes, the calls appear to have been blown. But calls were blown earlier in the game, and Oregon didn't fold. That's the story for the majority of us, I think.

It is quite amazing how high-strung you people are about a simle little football game. Throwing a fit because of a game. There are better things to worry and fret about than a game that is supposed to take you away from your anxieties for at least 3 hours. We need to learn to calm down and not be so bent out of shape over such trivial matters of sport.

Does it bother anybody else that this widely popular entry (look at all the comments) is inherantly patriarchal? You would think that an inclusive, "progressive" community would post blogs that dont push away entire groups of people (read: entire gender of people). You call it diversity of subject matter, I just call it the same old "water cooler" conversations that have been marginalizing women for decades. I'd think that our water cooler would have discussions that are a little more inclusive instead of focusing on topics that appeal traditionally to men. I know a couple of women have posted comments, but lets be realistic...

Knock it off, "feminist", there's a lot more females here than you think. And a lot more females interested in football than you give credit for. Are we insuffiently feminist if we root for a football team?

As for that, we have a casual little UO/OSU baiting going on regularly at my workplace...and the female side participates just as much as the male side.

BTW, anyone notice the sidebar this morning about the instant replay judge in the Goryonion?

I've gotta concur with those who point out that for us in small ol' Oregon, who've been Duck fans for years, and for whom a BCS placement is an occasion for enjoyment instead of a demanded entitlement, that it's time perhaps that the Sooners get a taste of what we've endured for years.

And maybe all this noise is about the money for BCS rather than football status, after all....

"feminist", you seem to be assuming that all the gender-neutral screen names are men.

I'm guessing 40% of the supporters in our end zone at Autzen are women. If you don't happen to like football, fine, but I don't see the subject matter in this thread as pushing away an entire gender. And even if a topic has "appealed traditionally to men", does it always have to stay that way? Isn't putting it out where anyone can comment, a way to invite everyone to be interested?

In fact, the "widely popular" responses show lots of people can use football as a break from working on stuff that really matters, which is part of its appeal.

There were several bad calls at critical points in that game, favoring each team about equally, by my tally. The on-side kick at the end of the game was a dramatic moment, but it had no more effect on the game's outcome than several other gaffs by the officials on the field and in the replay booth.

Oklahoma gets game-winning bad call [courtesy of my son in NJ]

First game of the season, Oklahoma beats Alabama 24-17 on missed fumble call. The difference is OU had a chance to come back to win on Saturday despite the bad onside kick call, while they were able to run out the clock against UAB.

Most interesting to me is that I don't see any whining in the press reports of the top Google hits for the OU-UAB game.

Just one more comment. I've been thinking about "feminist"'s assertion that this a male-dominated topic. After I posted the link this morning, I could almost hear my teenage son saying, "Way to go Mom, talking smack!" And I realized boys get to practice talking smack and playing hard for much of their childhood, through high-contact sports. My older son played football, which I termed "like military boot camp without the guns". His coach (drill sergeant) would yell "What do we do?" Answer (all): "HIT!" "How do we hit?" "HIT HARD!". My younger son turned the use of elbows in basketball, along with verbal needling of the opponent, into an art form. And throughout their youth, they've had running arguments between Ducks and Beavers, between high schools, between whoever happens to be playing that day.

In contrast, when I was growing up in England I played netball, which is like basketball except you can't move with the ball and you can't touch another player (needless to say, boys don't play it). And of course, we wouldn't be polite or good sports if we put another team/person down. I think that's still somewhat the case for girls now, even in high physical contact sports like soccer.

Maybe if more growing girls had more practice talking smack about sports, we'd have more adult women willing to take on the hard-hitting world of politics.

feminist:

you would have us believe that women aren't football fans?

let me know when you return to reality.

this pretty much sums up the game and the entire Pac-10.

http://quacksquad.com/

R in '08