PAC 10 OFFICIALS...

[Cane from the Bend]

You are going to have to fill me in on this one.

I am completely unaware of this reference.

Though, So Cal is not what they used to be. I'm not so certain Virginia out playing the trojans makes them an ACC power.

.

.

.

[RazorHawk]

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id ... t-punished

[Cane from the Bend]

I hope this starts a trend.

Maybe a few guys have been officiating so long that their judgment isn't what it use to be.

Or, quite possibly, there is something more to this than what we are seeing.

Either way, I hope this opens up a few eyes around the country.

.

.

.

[RazorHawk]

Their suspension was due to the misinterpretation of the rules, not a missed call. The officials should know the rules, backwards and forwards and when there is a replay official, this should not happen.

Good to see the PAC 10 make a prompt decision and a public decision.

[Spence]

No

[billybud]

The ACC has a history of looking ugly early...like FSU against Jax State last year (only to push WVU around in the bowl). Or FSU in 2005 losing four games only to beat 11 win VT and take the 11 win Big Ten Champ to triple OT.

I do know that the very young FSU we just saw will not be the same team that plays at the end of the year. My favorite comeback year was when FSU opened with a 31-0 loss to Miami and then ran the table to go 11-1, beating the SEC champ in the Sugar Bowl.

[Dossenator]

The fake punt was a great play...and put Virginia well into USC territory. After they penalty, Virginia did punt and USC scored on that drive (if I remember correctly).

USC has looked terrible in 2 games now. Things will only get worse with the loss of scholarships and a crazy nut as a coach.

[Cane from the Bend]

Their suspension was due to the misinterpretation of the rules, not a missed call. The officials should know the rules, backwards and forwards and when there is a replay official, this should not happen.

Good to see the PAC 10 make a prompt decision and a public decision.

Precisely;

When instant replay is a tool to use, then it should be utilized... if it is not, when the call was clearly inaccurate, then something needs to be changed.

It is just as much as Spence has been harping since the addition of instant replay.

Either use it right, or don't use it.

Well, maybe with this sort of reprimandation, a few more inaccuracies will be second looked... and overturned appropriately.

.

.

.

[Cane from the Bend]

I am not sure I said "make them (UVA) an ACC power".

Just stated a question: "Does this mean that UVA is actually the best looking team in the ACC now?"

In a sense you kind of did...

Assuming Virginia is the current best looking team of the ACC, does essentially put them in a possition of power... so to speak.

.

.

.

( and like Spence said... No )

.

.

.

[Spence]

SC may be ranked, but that is more a result of recent history than how good they are this year. That is the case for most teams this time of year, but I don't think SC will be in the top 2 or 3 in their conference.

[Cane from the Bend]

Me...

Yes they did well; no, they do not look like the current best performing team in the ACC, now. ( the word now is what makes your statement assume they are the current power )

Taking away the inaccurate call by the refs, doesn't give Virginia a touchdown, or a fieldgoal.

The Cavaliers blew two fieldgoal attempts in that game. And failed to score on other drives in trojan territory.

They did look decent, but they did not look better than usc; who is questionably being misrepresented as a deserved ranked team, in general.

I also do not think that a potential 4th place pac-10 is likely to be end ranked... so it means little... even less because the Cavs lost the game.

As a matter of fact; as a Hurricanes fan, I am more concerned about our games against Clemson & N. Carolina than I am about Virginia... and North Carolina is playing @ our house... we will be taking the trip to Charlottesville in our game versus the Cavaliers.

If you can project ahead, and figure multiple losses for a team; then are they really as good, now, as you assess them to be?

If you think so, then you have to reconsider your overall outlook; potentially giving them a more solid win column projection.

.

.

.

( but they still are not that great )

.

.

.