There is a NCAA rule against "throwing the ball high in the air"

[TheSizzle36]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Thoughts:

1) The refs shouldn't have made that call then. There is room for discretion. I was there. The ball didn't go that high. You don't call outcome determinative celebration penalties where the kid flipped the ball over his shoulder. It's just not done. I don't care how long it took for the ball to land. This is a game played by kids, anyway (except for BYU, which has 70% RM's).

2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

3) Still, the blocked PAT was once more instance of what I felt was poor execution overall by Washington.

4) Wide open guys overthrown or dropping passes in four out of five downs on that last drive. Washington is an inept team. I'm now firmly in the fire Willingham camp. It's a bad team. I want Willinghm out.

5) When Washington really needed to make a play Locker just boot legged it. BYU seems big but slow afoot on defense. But for the bad celebration call I'd have liked to have seen Washington just go for two and let Locker run it, quarterback draw or something. I wonder if BYU could have prevented him from getting in the end zone.

6) Once again, Cali can see things no other way but his way. It's so patently obvious to him BYU would have won in OT, who cares about the unconscionable celebration call? (I can only imagine the reaction here and on CB had the call gone the other way.) Vintage Cali. (Cali, where does the LDS Church keep those $5 billion in green backs lying around?)

7) Still, I tend to agree Washington is just too inept to have won in OT. All the fans around me wanted Washington to go for two until the penalty was called.

8) I hope Washington has an extreme patsy on its schedule (I haven't checked), because otherwise it may not win a game. Last year I think it was 2-10. It is destined for 8-10 place in the Pac 10. No way it finishes higher than 8th. Willingham is done.

9) We arrived at half time. I had to shoo away a BYU fan reclinging in our seats.

10) A couple of BYU slogans I saw on shirts seemed cult-like. "Fully invested." "The Quest." What do they mean?

11) I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

[ute4ever]

Pie Jesu Domine!! Dona eis requiem.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I read somewhere else it was 2.36 seconds. Don't you need velocity to make the calculation?

No, you can solve for it.

He threw the ball 16 ft above his head. I assumed he is six feet tall, so it went a total of 22 ft above the ground.

In case you are interested, here is how I did it:

The ball is going to start with some unknown velocity (v), go up in the air in a parabolic arc and then come back to the ground. As it passes the point from which he threw it (6 ft) on the way down it will be traveling with the same velocity (v) it started with but in the opposite direction. There are two parts to the path:

part a (up and down to his head):
height = ya
time = ta

part b (from his head to the ground):
height = yb = 6
time = tb

Now we can set up some equations:

ya = v^2/(2*g)
(g= gravitational constant = 32.2 ft/sec^2)
yb = 6 = v*tb + (1/2)*g*tb^2
ta + tb = 2.36
ta = (2*v)/g

I threw these in a spreadsheet and solved for v using the Goal Seek function. Final values:

v: 31.9 ft/s
ta: 1.98 s
tb: 0.38 s
ya: 15.8 ft

Took me about ten minutes to solve. Yes, I am a geek and proud of it.

[ute4ever]

LOL Jeff, do you mind if I share that on Utefans (aka Cougarboard lite), source anonymous?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

LOL Jeff, do you mind if I share that on Utefans (aka Cougarboard lite), source anonymous?

No problem.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

Although there were a few other errors in your narrative, this one pleased me the most, as it serves as a model of most of your rips against BYU and the Church. You begin with your conclusion (in this case, "BM is an asshole"), then work back in search of supporting facts. Both of the plays were reviewed at the behest of the refs, not Bronco. I don't recall BYU being charged with a timeout with the Unga call (although who could have blamed any coach for challening a fumble that, give or take six inches, made the difference between a TD and turnover?), and neither the stadium announcer, the official box score, nor any of the Seattle papers mentioned anything about a coach's challenge. In view of this, who is the asshole?

But you were correct about it being an extremely nice day. My son and I enjoyed the game; the stadium was a fun place to watch a game. We were low on the sideline next to the endzone with an unobstructed view of Locker's celebration. I've never felt more humiliated than by his egregiously offensive display of poor sportsmanship and taunting. Actually, I thought he was a superb athlete and didn't think he did anything wrong at all. At the time, I assumed a Dawg player has said something offensive, although that would have been surprising because I didn't see any nastiness from either side throughout the game. It was an unfortunate call. But BYU outstatted UW in every offensive and defensive category, and deserved to win.

Downtown Seattle last evening was gorgeous. We had a nice meal at Etta's (?), and I returned to the Space Needle for the first time since 1962 when I was 9 years old. Didn't notice any changes, other than a major price increase. Assholes.

[ute4ever]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

I returned to the Space Needle for the first time since 1962 when I was 9 years old. Didn't notice any changes, other than a major price increase. Assholes.

Four years ago I made the mistake of going to the Space Needle with an engineer. He just wanted to walk around it drooling while muttering "of course! Triple reinforced truss!" "Wow, no diagonal elements anywhere!" "Lateral load-bearing systems, naturally!"

[PaloAltoCougar]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

Four years ago I made the mistake of going to the Space Needle with an engineer. He just wanted to walk around it drooling while muttering "of course! Triple reinforced truss!" "Wow, no diagonal elements anywhere!" "Lateral load-bearing systems, naturally!"

That might have been interesting, for about three minutes anyway. Unfortunately, engineers seem to thrive on tedium and I feel your pain. As we were ascending, it occurred to me that earthquake building standards may have evolved in the past 46 years, and I was hoping a 7.0 didn't hit while we were up there. Perhaps you could ask your friend about whether the Needle has been retrofitted, or if that's even needed. Okay, don't.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

That might have been interesting, for about three minutes anyway. Unfortunately, engineers seem to thrive on tedium and I feel your pain. As we were ascending, it occurred to me that earthquake building standards may have evolved in the past 46 years, and I was hoping a 7.0 didn't hit while we were up there. Perhaps you could ask your friend about whether the Needle has been retrofitted, or if that's even needed. Okay, don't.

Up yours. Both of you.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

The ball is going to start with some unknown velocity (v), go up in the air in a parabolic arc and then come back to the ground. As it passes the point from which he threw it (6 ft) on the way down it will be traveling with the same velocity (v) it started with but in the opposite direction. There are two parts to the path:

part a (up and down to his head):
height = ya
time = ta

part b (from his head to the ground):
height = yb = 6
time = tb

Now we can set up some equations:

ya = v^2/(2*g)
(g= gravitational constant = 32.2 ft/sec^2)
yb = 6 = v*tb + (1/2)*g*tb^2
ta + tb = 2.36
ta = (2*v)/g

I threw these in a spreadsheet and solved for v using the Goal Seek function. Final values:

v: 31.9 ft/s
ta: 1.98 s
tb: 0.38 s
ya: 15.8 ft

Took me about ten minutes to solve. Yes, I am a geek and proud of it.

hoooooboy, I officially have a new board crush.