GT at uGA Post Game

[cpf2001]

Officials coming from either conference is a broken model now that there is so much more incremental revenue on the line for conferences.

In the olden days it was just about WHO got your top bowl spot. Now it's millions and millions more.

 

[LT 1967]

Skip Bayless comment.

 

[jojatk]

Skip Bayless comment.

Skip Bayless is a tool whose only trick is to say provocative things to stir up interest. His opinions are so stupid and basically he has no game. I always make sure NOT to reply on social media to those kinds of posts because that’s exactly what he wants.

 

[4shotB]

I think this interview with Haynes and Efford is a must watch . Especially for those still blaming the refs for the loss. See what they have to say (or not say) about that. Extremely impressive men here representing GT.

 

[Bogey]

I’ve been thinking about this for awhile now. I am not a fan of conspiracy theories. They are a refuge when life doesn’t make sense, or disappoints, or is unjust, and they give us an easy explanation. That’s not to say conspiracies don’t happen. It’s just that I believe they are extremely rare, and when they do happen, the truth always eventually comes out.

This is also not a criticism of your post. Nor am I saying you may not be correct. My explanation is not as elegant and has messy, difficult to define parameters.

Let me use this analogy. In baseball a winning pitcher who is known for his control, and who can paint the edges, always seems to get the benefit of the doubt on close ball/strike calls. Because they have a winning record the judgement of the umpire is unconsciously influenced. Now if this pitcher also happens to be on a dominant team during their dynasty years, confirmation bias is in full force. An unknown pitcher on a struggling team will never get many close calls in their favor.

It’s possible that the refs were paid in the Tech/uga game but that would be a huge scandal and, I believe, would break wide open with even minimal amateur investigation. I think it’s more subtle than that. And messy. Georgia has been a dynasty with an historic winning streak. The SEC has long been touted as the best conference. Some of the biggest monied interests are wrapped up in the fortunes of teams like uga. Their coach on the sidelines constantly works the refs. Major TV contracts and millions of viewers all have their psychological well-being directly tied to a Georgia win. Tech is not favored to win and Vegas and the betting mob say so. Georgia doesn’t lose at home. Everyone who counts seems to want them to win. The pressure on even the most professional referee is to “call it like you see ‘em” but every thing in the constellation of influencers around this game are screaming, “We see Georgia pulling out a win in this game and anything that upsets that narrative is a grievous mistake.”

Now that uga has “pulled out another victory,” the confirmation bias is perpetuated and deepened and will be that much harder to dislodge because the universe has spoken.

Thus we get screwed by the refs and it’s actually no one’s fault.

I read where it was estimated that ABC would draw $10 million more on their SEC contract if the dawgs made the playoffs and a GT win would eliminate that possibility if Texas beat them in the championship game. I can't say for sure if that is the case but I do believe the game was rigged by big money.

 

[GT05]

I think this interview with Haynes and Efford is a must watch . Especially for those still blaming the refs for the loss. See what they have to say (or not say) about that. Extremely impressive men here representing GT.

Sorry can’t yet

 

[Root4GT]

I have always felt like players in both baseball and basketball are more adept at adapting to differences in referees or umpires than FB players. In fact players and coaches understand that there will be differences from game to game in terms of things like strike zones or the amount of physical contact between players is allowed.
But for whatever reason football players don’t adapt as well to differences from game to game in the amount of holding or contact that is allowed between db’s and wr’s. I guess it’s bc of much smaller sample sizes during the game to “read” the refs. Wondering if anyone else has other thoughts on this.

You make a great point. My guess is the physical nature of football is the main reason.

 

[Bogey]

I would submit that refs can do more “damage” through non-calls than calls. Making a call is a second level action. The PI on 4th down is such a call. UGA would have lost had that flag not been tossed. It gave UGAg another chance when they had blown it.

Not calling a PF on the spearing of HK was critical. It gave UGAg a chance to win having (finally) pulled within one score.

Remember, their task is to provide opportunity, not to determine. Non-calls are preferred as they leave a smaller footprint and have a higher level of deniability.

^^^^^
This. The no call for review on King's fumble is the final tell all for me. The fact that the play was not called for a review by the replay booth is a sure sign to me the game was rigged. I would love to know who made the decision not to review it and his reason. That decision cannot be defended.
The season big prize in F1 racing is the Constructor's Championship won by the total points won by the 2 team drivers. McLaren had a chance to pretty well lock it up in today's Qatar race by a high finish by its 2 drivers, Norris and Piastri. Piastri finished 3rd and Norris would have finished 2nd if not for a controversial 30 second penalty for violating a yellow flag which should not have been active, according to the announcer, knocking him down to 10th place. A very severe and arbitrary penalty for that violation. So F1 can now go into the final race of the season in Abu Dhabi with the Constructors Championship still up for grabs between McLaren and Ferrari, while the drivers Championship has already been settled. Norris/McLaren were not allowed to be interviewed after the race. Same kind of stuff.

 

[Root4GT]

^^^^^
This. The no call for review on King's fumble is the final tell all for me. The fact that the play was not called for a review by the replay booth is a sure sign to me the game was rigged. I would love to know who made the decision not to review it and his reason. That decision cannot be defended.
The season big prize in F1 racing is the Constructor's Championship won by the total points won by the 2 team drivers. McLaren had a chance to pretty well lock it up in today's Qatar race by a high finish by its 2 drivers, Norris and Piastri. Piastri finished 3rd and Norris would have finished 2nd if not for a controversial 30 second penalty for violating a yellow flag which should not have been active, according to the announcer, knocking him down to 10th place. A very severe and arbitrary penalty for that violation. So F1 can now go into the final race of the season in Abu Dhabi with the Constructors Championship still up for grabs between McLaren and Ferrari, while the drivers Championship has already been settled. Norris/McLaren were not allowed to be interviewed after the race. Same kind of stuff.

The King fumble was reviewed and the ref said so. Booth reviews are made on all plays. If no flag is thrown post penalties are not reviewable. Turnovers, scores, in/out of bounds, receptions are always reviewed.

Some teams run the next play very quickly and avoid the time delay for review/communication to officials.

The Conference Officiating Center reviews for targeting all the time.

This is not new or novel.

 

[ThatGuy]

I am not saying there was a conscious bias or “fix” by the refs. It could simply be incompetence. But I believe unconscious bias is real. Has anyone ever watched a Duke basketball game and looked at the foul disparity? I suppose it could simply be that Duke always plays a clean game, right?

This. I've already gone on record saying I don't believe this was a giant "conspiracy," as others have alluded to or stated outright. That sort of reasoning is just a justification for emotions that are too close to the surface.

However, your post (and @Ramble1885 's earlier post) made me remember the aftermath of the infamous Jasper Sanks game in the late 90's. After that play was ruled a fumble and Georgia lost the game, the SEC investigated the officials from that game. And the SEC ruled that those refs had made a big mistake. As a result, they fined the refs. What's more, those specific refs were scheduled to officiate the SEC Championship game the following week. After the SEC decided they had made the wrong call, they were removed from the SECCG, which cost them a substantial bonus as well as reputation in the industry.

I should also point out that in non-conference games, I've never heard of the SEC proactively reviewing a non-conference game where an SEC referee made a bad call that cost the other team the game. (It may have happened, but I haven't heard of it.)

So the SEC sent a clear message after that game. As an official who works for the SEC, and who relies on the SEC to schedule you for the bigger games and growing their pay each year, you're definitely aware: if you make a controversial call that costs an SEC team an out-of-conference game, you're done. Your livelihood is on the line.

So I would not at all be surprised if an SEC referee saw something questionable, but decided to keep the flag in their pocket because it was a gray area, and the game was too close. They subconsciously know not to risk those things.

This is also why I'd like to see non-conference games officiated by a crew from outside either of the playing teams' conference. They can and will still make bad calls. But at least there's not an obvious potential conflict of interest.

 

[Bogey]

This. I've already gone on record saying I don't believe this was a giant "conspiracy," as others have alluded to or stated outright. That sort of reasoning is just a justification for emotions that are too close to the surface.

However, your post (and @Ramble1885 's earlier post) made me remember the aftermath of the infamous Jasper Sanks game in the late 90's. After that play was ruled a fumble and Georgia lost the game, the SEC investigated the officials from that game. And the SEC ruled that those refs had made a big mistake. As a result, they fined the refs. What's more, those specific refs were scheduled to officiate the SEC Championship game the following week. After the SEC decided they had made the wrong call, they were removed from the SECCG, which cost them a substantial bonus as well as reputation in the industry.

I should also point out that in non-conference games, I've never heard of the SEC proactively reviewing a non-conference game where an SEC referee made a bad call that cost the other team the game. (It may have happened, but I haven't heard of it.)

So the SEC sent a clear message after that game. As an official who works for the SEC, and who relies on the SEC to schedule you for the bigger games and growing their pay each year, you're definitely aware: if you make a controversial call that costs an SEC team an out-of-conference game, you're done. Your livelihood is on the line.

So I would not at all be surprised if an SEC referee saw something questionable, but decided to keep the flag in their pocket because it was a gray area, and the game was too close. They subconsciously know not to risk those things.

This is also why I'd like to see non-conference games officiated by a crew from outside either of the playing teams' conference. They can and will still make bad calls. But at least there's not an obvious potential conflict of interest.

You are over looking the fact that the replay booth should have called a review for obvious targeting and they didn't. Why not? Because they knew it was targeting and didn't want to have to show it to millions of fans and have to call it, essentially sealing the outcome in GT's favor. I would bet that the SEC/ABC had someone in the booth, or connected to the booth, having a final say on what is reviewed.
I understand what you are saying about on field officials and I agree.

 

[bke1984]

How do you explain the PI call on UGA in the 7th overtime?

The one where the defender literally grabbed the shoulder pad and almost pulled the player horizontal? Yeah, pretty tough not to call that one when you’re an official 4 feet away from it. That would have basically put the nail in the coffin. Instead just call it and make us execute again. So what, five calls to one is even?

 

[bke1984]

If no flag is thrown post penalties are not reviewable.

Targeting is the exception. Happens all the time.

 

[orientalnc]

This article is behind a paywall, but I think it's OK to quote a small bit of it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/12/01/college-football-playoff-projections/

In one swoop of a Friday night, Georgia Tech gained admirers across time zones for its innovation, its pluck and its fight. It became dazzling enough watching quarterback Haynes King, with his 26-for-36 for 303 yards and his 24 rushes for 110, that a viewer could start to wish a five-loss team (Georgia Tech) into the playoff on a special stipulation of contributions toward football.

When Georgia Tech did not win after the eight overtimes and second-year coach Brent Key fielded a question about whether the loss overtook the top spot on his pain list, Key said: “I think it [does], yeah. Probably my career, my life.”

King told reporters, “Right now my emotional state is I’m just kind of tired of feeling like this. Tired of always playing your heart out, doing all this, to the last play, always coming up short. I’m just tired of feeling that way right now.”

Those who love Georgia Tech might never tire of wondering about a game in which the Yellow Jackets went 90 yards in 18 plays across 10:36 for a field goal to lead 20-6 early in the fourth and 75 yards on six triumph-of-imagination plays for a touchdown to lead 27-13 with 5:37 left. They might make serial winces forever over the batch of pivotal officiating calls that rated questionable or just-plain blown. They might always know that Georgia Tech could have won the game with one play at the ends of either the third or seventh overtimes.

They might sigh.

 

[roadkill]

This is also why I'd like to see non-conference games officiated by a crew from outside either of the playing teams' conference. They can and will still make bad calls. But at least there's not an obvious potential conflict of interest.

I believe this is done now for playoff games, but I could be mistaken. The better solution is to have all refs be non-affiliated. Just do as the NFL does - have a pool of refs employed by the governing body, currently the NCAA, but eventually could be whatever name they call it when big boy football spins off into a separate organization. Another advantage, aside from eliminating the conflict of interest, is standardized training and qualifications.

 

[stinger78]

I believe this is done now for playoff games, but I could be mistaken. The better solution is to have all refs be non-affiliated. Just do as the NFL does - have a pool of refs employed by the governing body, currently the NCAA, but eventually could be whatever name they call it when big boy football spins off into a separate organization. Another advantage, aside from eliminating the conflict of interest, is standardized training and qualifications.

You mean they toss the SECheat manual? From that training manual…

SECheat Five Officiating Core Values:
1. SEC Rulez
2. When close, favor higher rated SECheat team
3. When close, favor SECheat team
4. Seek to even fouls and yards with innocuous calls
5. When in doubt, favor the Tide

 

[57jacket]

https://www.ajc.com/sports/georgia-tech/yellow-jackets-finish-regular-season-among-accs-best-in-handful-of-categories/2RQDL3YT2VFN7G7ZI7GR53LDXQ/

 

[Ramble1885]

This. I've already gone on record saying I don't believe this was a giant "conspiracy," as others have alluded to or stated outright. That sort of reasoning is just a justification for emotions that are too close to the surface.

However, your post (and @Ramble1885 's earlier post) made me remember the aftermath of the infamous Jasper Sanks game in the late 90's. After that play was ruled a fumble and Georgia lost the game, the SEC investigated the officials from that game. And the SEC ruled that those refs had made a big mistake. As a result, they fined the refs. What's more, those specific refs were scheduled to officiate the SEC Championship game the following week. After the SEC decided they had made the wrong call, they were removed from the SECCG, which cost them a substantial bonus as well as reputation in the industry.

I should also point out that in non-conference games, I've never heard of the SEC proactively reviewing a non-conference game where an SEC referee made a bad call that cost the other team the game. (It may have happened, but I haven't heard of it.)

So the SEC sent a clear message after that game. As an official who works for the SEC, and who relies on the SEC to schedule you for the bigger games and growing their pay each year, you're definitely aware: if you make a controversial call that costs an SEC team an out-of-conference game, you're done. Your livelihood is on the line.

So I would not at all be surprised if an SEC referee saw something questionable, but decided to keep the flag in their pocket because it was a gray area, and the game was too close. They subconsciously know not to risk those things.

This is also why I'd like to see non-conference games officiated by a crew from outside either of the playing teams' conference. They can and will still make bad calls. But at least there's not an obvious potential conflict of interest.

The suspension of the refs after the Sanks fumble is less of SEC being biased and more of them doing the right thing.

Let’s be real. Sanks was down, that was a terrible call. Terrible. Any conference should’ve and would’ve suspended those refs. Yes, Donnan was an idiot for not kicking the FG, but we still got very very very lucky.

Some folks see Friday’s no call on the targeting/fumble as payback for the Sanks incident. (Although in my opinion that already happened with JT’s fumble in 2014)

 

[wrmathis]

The suspension of the refs after the Sanks fumble is less of SEC being biased and more of them doing the right thing.

Let’s be real. Sanks was down, that was a terrible call. Terrible. Any conference should’ve and would’ve suspended those refs. Yes, Donnan was an idiot for not kicking the FG, but we still got very very very lucky.

Some folks see Friday’s no call on the targeting/fumble as payback for the Sanks incident. (Although in my opinion that already happened with JT’s fumble in 2014)

JT had two bs fumbles called in that game. One at the goal line and the other should have been an incomplete pass.

 

[CEB]

The suspension of the refs after the Sanks fumble is less of SEC being biased and more of them doing the right thing.

Let’s be real. Sanks was down, that was a terrible call. Terrible. Any conference should’ve and would’ve suspended those refs. Yes, Donnan was an idiot for not kicking the FG, but we still got very very very lucky.

Some folks see Friday’s no call on the targeting/fumble as payback for the Sanks incident. (Although in my opinion that already happened with JT’s fumble in 2014)

Yeah. This fits the narrative… as if we owed some sort of penance for benefitting from Donnans poor decision and Jasper Thanks.
We always get a fair shake with these guys, right? And we haven’t been on the wrong side of a questionable call in this game for 26 years.
Are we square yet? I hope so… I’m tired of getting f@&$ed!