Though he says he doesn't believe it's true, the latest article from Yahoo! Sports' Dan Wetzel throws more fuel on the "SEC wants a Bama-UF showdown" conspiracy theory fire. He says that not only should it have been an interception on the Julio-Peterson play, but that Alabama also got 5 1/2 yards on the running into the punter penalty, enabling us to pick up the first down easier. As a result, we evidently got away with another one. What say y'all?
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
Well, considering that LSWho had a grand total of 25 total yards of offense in the 4th quarter, I don't have any reason to believe that the outcome would have been any different.
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
I'll buy that when they give that safety back, or the -4yds on the punt spot. Props to LSU's punter btw. Dude has a leg.
__________________ Spread offense, zone reads, man coverage-whatever, its football. Well, the spread isn't football.- Justice Clarence Thomas
I've got 1.5 terabytes that I record Nebraska games on. I've got 150 games that I watch in my spare time. Of course, I don't ever watch losses, thats revisionist history.- Justice Clarence Thomas
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
Who was behind the conspiracy that led to all of LSU's injury timeouts?!?
__________________
“Lamar Thomas has got it, he's on his way down the sidelines... George Teague runs him down! He took the ball away!!! HE'S GOT THE BALL!!!"
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
Well... I believe the "conspiracy" is/was that SEC wanted to see an LSU/UF rematch. I seen too many missed calls on LSU along with the bogus spot, which ultimately gave them two additional points off of a safety moments later.
__________________
Sincerely,
The next Alfred Hitchcock
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
If it had been called an interception, the only thing that would have changed is that the Alabama defense would have been on the field another 3 plays and Marcell Dareus likely picks up his 3rd sack of the game.
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
Just for the record, my Chrome browser just warned me not to visit the Rivals site. The message said that the site contained elements from cobra.555.com, which contains malware...
__________________
The avatar is a pic of Liz and me - taken at Mt Sterling Gap in the Smokies - September, '09. Her French Foreign Legion cap is bug-repellent...
"Old enough (69) to know better - young enough to think I can get away with it!"
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
Just because you HAVE the ball doesn't mean you SCORE with the ball. LSU's offense in the 4th quarter was atrocious; Bama's D in the 4th quarter was smothering. But conspiracy theorists seem to be ruling the day.
There were questionable calls for both sides, but I do not believe for an instant that there were 9 points worth of bad calls either way.
Re: Dan Wetzel obviously believes there's a conspiracy
IF, and I do mean IF, there were some sort of conspiracy, how in the HELL did BAMA get on the GOOD side of it? For YEARS we've been fighting the refs...TWO times against arky, at least once against lsu but now we're actually on the receiving end? How did this happen and who put up the money for it?
TideFans logos and the TideFans.com URL & name are trademarks of BamaNation Partners, LLC.
Material published and opinions expressed herein are solely the responsibility of the authors. Opinions and/or statements (including those of administrators and moderators) do not necessarily represent the opinions, views, or beliefs of the owner of TideFans.com & BamaNation Partners, LLC or of mods/admins.
TideFans thrives on being a relatively open forum for discussing a wide variety of topics and personalities. While we may limit discussion based on content that violates Site Policies, we do not necessarily limit content based on our disagreement with said content.
Debate is much of what makes TideFans interesting and enjoyable. However, if a post violates our Site Policies, please let us know!