it’s unfair to toss a guy for parts of two games over something that had no potential for injury and no intent to injure. They should read the definition of the rule and limit targeting calls to dangerous plays as the rule clearly was intended to do.
They can call unsportsmanlike conduct if they want to discourage an action that doesn’t rise to that level.

No one suggests that the kids from low performing schools are less smart. But clearly they are less prepared for college .
The argument for fairness can be reduced to absurdity simply by considering that some schools have top 10% kids who don’t read at grade level, and don’t know Geometry. Should UC be dumbed down so those kids succeed? I’m someone who has taken classes at JC, UC, and CSUs. The difference in education is primarily a difference in expectations that we’re based on students scholastic preparation.
Is society better off if we don’t have GATE programs ? Make Lowell High School admissions not competitive?
At the other extreme if the UC Medical School class has 6 kids named Nguyen should they not have been admitted because their culture and family values gave them a head start?

I thought I saw incidental helmet to helmet contact on the play they reviewed near the end of game on whether Rodrigues got a first down around the 16 yard line.
I think they need to split this rule and separate targeting which is an attempt to injure or spearing with the crown of the helmet from helmet to helmet contact. The two have little to do with each other, they’re like a Venn Diagram with a <20% overlap. They slander people with the implication there was a dangerous intent to injure when there was no such thing.

How can the average rank of our opponents be 306? We haven’t played Simon Frazier.

in the case of student admissions, it clear that the goal of additional criteria is to change the student body that would otherwise exist absent those criteria.
They didn’t like the outcome of admitting a greater share of students from well performing school districts, or private or Catholic schools, so they came up with “success in a local context” to favor students who would not otherwise gain admission. When they “look at the whole person” or “overcoming adversity” that is to give room for more subjective decisions that replace better prepared students with more “deserving”. When those tweaks prove insufficient to achieve the desired outcome they dump test scores altogether. Since grade inflation essentially makes high school straight As a mere record of participation there is no objective means to identify the best prepared students. Now UC is just CSU under a different banner and with mostly better architecture.
Similar process is underway for hiring I suspect. Adding criteria as opposed to selecting the candidates based on the most important criteria, with the goal of changing the decision to favor members of preferred groups.

It was a lot to 3 only because when Weber was about to tie it up at 10, the backup QB fell down backing up from center leading to the 92 yard fumble return for a TD
Weber is probably the better of the two teams except for the QB position. Physical as always on defense.

I haven’t followed the band controversy close enough to comment on the merits of the changes. I’ll just say that it was always a point of pride for students in general that the band was a student run organization. Too bad

while talking about ball carriers as a group, not just running backs, can’t leave out CJ Hutton. That guy is great carrying the ball. Surprised we didn’t see more of him after his first possession 20 yard run. We played a lot of two tight end, less of the three wide receivers. Can’t forget about CJ.

That’s now a pattern seen in several games where they have TT run a series, and then come back to HR.. I don’t think it necessarily indicated they changed their plans.

They put up a picture with Connor Airey as one of our key players

I don’t think we thought Dixie would score much, I think we figured we’d run to avoid turnovers and because we could and that we didn’t need to put up a lot of points. I think that worked better than anticipated.
On defense I think DrMikes characterization about bend not break is right. Make a team that hasn’t shown it can score earn it. They did better than expected because of the QB change.

Some posters don’t seem enthralled with our lack of balance in individual games, although we have shown we can be either run heavy or pass heavy against different opponents.
I personally think the Tulsa game was brilliantly managed, and the last two just seeing a mismatch and sticking to it, which is also smart. What’s the opinion here on our game plans so far?

Weber fans whining about not being a top 25 team after losing a game to a premier team when they are using backup QBs. Shows how spoiled their fans are.

What is the status of the Weber QB Bronson Barron who got injured against Dixie? I assume they think he’s their best QB.

Tulsa was within 7 of Ohio State in the fourth quarter, had over 500 yards of offense against Ohio State.
Lost 40-20

Only watched the first half but I don’t think I’ve ever seen both offenses score touchdowns every possession of the first quarter, In the second quarter EWU just kept going, I think there was only one possession in the first half where they didn’t, and with really quick drives. Awesome.

The better way is the legally mandated way, which is non discriminatory hiring.

But if the University no longer admits students by their scholastic preparation or faculty by their expertise in their subject and capability as instructors, why would you want to get that UC degree?

Wow, Eastern WA vs W IL has six touchdowns, neither team has failed to score TD on any possession.
Now 7 TDs, 28-21 end of first quarter, eastern.

That ranking site that expects us to lose to Idaho, still thinks Idaho is in the Sun Belt conference.
http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/ncaaf_Idaho_Vandals.html

They’ll slice through the Big Sky opponents like a knife through butter.