RB Daniel "Boom" Herron (Official Thread)

[brodybuck21]

My only problem with the non-call is the continued display of inconsistent calls in the B10. I refer back to the call against the Buckeyes vs. Indiana...Ted Ginn was returning a KO for TD (or maybe a punt) and there was a penalty called on the Bucks for "hitting a defensless player". This seemed similar. I thought both plays were clean, but the rules were administered inconsistently.

+1

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

JT mentioned in his press conference that:

1. He saw the hit on film several times and it was helmet to chin
2. He included the play in the weekly set of plays that he sends to the league that he believes could have been called differently (It's something the league asks schools to do)

 

[generaladm]

I'm guessing that none of the refs had a good look at it while it was happening. It was away from the play and in traffic. Definitely a dirty hit, though. No reason he the UW player should have made contact with Boom to begin with. The intent to injure was obvious, IMO. The kid should be disciplined, either by his team or the NCAA.

 

[utgrad73]

I'm guessing that none of the refs had a good look at it while it was happening. It was away from the play and in traffic. Definitely a dirty hit, though. No reason he the UW player should have made contact with Boom to begin with. The intent to injure was obvious, IMO. The kid should be disciplined, either by his team or the NCAA.

No. 12 - the same guy that Pryor met on one his runs. The same guy that hammered Sanz, the same guy the announcers applauded at the end of the game as being the defensive player of the game. I think he may have speared Dane with his helmet. I'm going to watch it again.

 

[Buckeye Nut]

No. 12 - the same guy that Pryor met on one his runs. The same guy that hammered Sanz, the same guy the announcers applauded at the end of the game as being the defensive player of the game. I think he may have speared Dane with his helmet. I'm going to watch it again.

Spearing? That's a stretch. Dane lowered his head on impact so even if it was helmet to helmet the guy for Wisconsin wouldn't have had any time to react and alter his hit so that it wasn't helmet to helmet. Frankly I think everybody that's complaining is making a big deal over nothing with these hits and sound like they are whining.
I think Dan Hawkins said it best: "It's Division 1 football....it ain't intramurals!

 

[schwab]

No. 12 - the same guy that Pryor met on one his runs. The same guy that hammered Sanz, the same guy the announcers applauded at the end of the game as being the defensive player of the game. I think he may have speared Dane with his helmet. I'm going to watch it again.

We beat #12 once, and he gets a free trip to Columbus next year to lose again. He is a physical player, and most posters have already expressed their desire for more of those guys on our team. Why hate on him? Rather, root for Boom to be just fine, and rest assured, with a nickname like Boom, he will Pay It Forward.

EDIT: I only quoted utgrad73 to help explain who #12 is. Not calling you out buddy...

 

[Sportsbuck28]

We beat #12 once, and he gets a free trip to Columbus next year to lose again. He is a physical player, and most posters have already expressed their desire for more of those guys on our team. Why hate on him? Rather, root for Boom to be just fine, and rest assured, with a nickname like Boom, he will Pay It Forward.

EDIT: I only quoted utgrad73 to help explain who #12 is. Not calling you out buddy...

I don't think anyone's hating on him...

Just stating that he's put a big target on his back for next year.

 

[generaladm]

We beat #12 once, and he gets a free trip to Columbus next year to lose again. He is a physical player, and most posters have already expressed their desire for more of those guys on our team. Why hate on him? Rather, root for Boom to be just fine, and rest assured, with a nickname like Boom, he will Pay It Forward.

EDIT: I only quoted utgrad73 to help explain who #12 is. Not calling you out buddy...

I have no problem with players on any team playing physical, that should be their goal, but that particular player was head-hunting on the Boom hit.

 

[schwab]

I don't think anyone's hating on him...

Just stating that he's put a big target on his back for next year.

I probably used the wrong term there. No one on BP has been hating on him. On BP.

I have no problem with players on any team playing physical, that should be their goal, but that particular player was head-hunting on the Boom hit.

I myself forgot to DVR the game, and haven't seen the replay enough to know if his intent was clear. I will have to rewatch the hit I guess. To me, it looked like Boom got caught, just like the usual top 10 run down of plays of the week on ESPN. They used to call it 'You got jacked.'

Boom is a physical player himself. He will put someone else in that position down the road, and no one will think twice.

 

[generaladm]

I myself forgot to DVR the game, and haven't seen the replay enough to know if his intent was clear. I will have to rewatch the hit I guess. To me, it looked like Boom got caught, just like the usual top 10 run down of plays of the week on ESPN. They used to call it 'You got jacked.'

Boom is a physical player himself. He will put someone else in that position down the road, and no one will think twice.

The main issue is that a defender cannot "block" an eligible receiver who does not have the ball, and has not had the ball thrown to him. There was no reason for the LB to touch Boom, TP was still behind the LOS. Add to that he put the top of his helmet right on Boom's chin. I watched it several times, I have no doubt it was an attempt to injure. I think if a ref had seen it clearly, they would have at least called a penalty. There may have been reason for ejection.

 

[schwab]

The main issue is that a defender cannot "block" an eligible receiver who does not have the ball, and has not had the ball thrown to him. There was no reason for the LB to touch Boom, TP was still behind the LOS. Add to that he put the top of his helmet right on Boom's chin. I watched it several times, I have no doubt it was an attempt to injure. I think if a ref had seen it clearly, they would have at least called a penalty. There may have been reason for ejection.

I will have to defer to you. I saw it live, and sided with the no call. I have not seen it several times, so I cannot say. I do remember discussion earlier in the game thread about whether or not Boom was a blocker or a receiver at that point. I missed it if someone definitively answered, because from what I read nobody could say. I will rewatch the game as soon as time allows.

 

[generaladm]

I will have to defer to you. I saw it live, and sided with the no call. I have not seen it several times, so I cannot say. I do remember discussion earlier in the game thread about whether or not Boom was a blocker or a receiver at that point. I missed it if someone definitively answered, because from what I read nobody could say. I will rewatch the game as soon as time allows.

There have been people who saw it as an incidental play. I'm firm in my stance. It was a pass play where TP was biding his time. Boom came all the way across from left to right, IIRC. There would have been no reason for him to block, he was looking back at TP signaling he was open. I've heard people say the LB rolled off Hartline and just threw a shot at the first white jersey he saw. That's still an illegal play, because the ball was still in the QBs hands (never left). I contend that the LB deliberately lined up the head shot. It did happen fast, so there is a chance in was not intentional. Regardless, it was a dangerous play. Boom was out before he hit the ground. Do you remember when Kevin Stevens of the Pittsburgh Penguins shattered his skull hitting the ice unconscious? It was a lot like that. Boom's helmet nearly came off on the initial impact. He realistically could have broken his neck if he had fell differently. I doubt any disciplinary action will be taken. I'm just glad Boom seems to be okay.

 

[utgrad73]

Spearing? That's a stretch. Dane lowered his head on impact so even if it was helmet to helmet the guy for Wisconsin wouldn't have had any time to react and alter his hit so that it wasn't helmet to helmet. Frankly I think everybody that's complaining is making a big deal over nothing with these hits and sound like they are whining.
I think Dan Hawkins said it best: "It's Division 1 football....it ain't intramurals!

He didn't spear, but it was helmet to helmet. I watched my recording and Jay Valai had time to lower his head, the other two defenders collided with each other making a sandwich around Sanzenbacher. Valai's contact caused the fumble but not because he hit the ball. Valai had problems getting to so helmet contact is a real possiblity. The reason for the reaction from BP isn't whining my friend, it's concern for players who seem to be on the receiving end of a very aggressive defensive player. Yes it's Divison 1 football, that why we love it. Glad everyone is OK.

Probabaly not the best choice to run after the catch, he had Robo nearby to block if you would have taken it outside.

Booms hit by Valai earlier was a cheap shot. IMO

 

[schwab]

Just keep in mind not to judge the legality of the hit on whether or not Boom was able to keep playing, and whether or not the hit was dangerous. You have used 'IIRC' and 'I've heard people say...' and that cannot present a very strong argument by default. You say there would have been no reason for Boom to block on a pass play, but isn't that what the 10 other players on the field do when TP decides to pull it down and run? I'm not sure of the outcome of that play, since I need to see it again. If TP threw the ball period, then there should have been a flag. If he tucked it, Boom was a blocker.

 

[generaladm]

Just keep in mind not to judge the legality of the hit on whether or not Boom was able to keep playing, and whether or not the hit was dangerous. You have used 'IIRC' and 'I've heard people say...' and that cannot present a very strong argument by default. You say there would have been no reason for Boom to block on a pass play, but isn't that what the 10 other players on the field do when TP decides to pull it down and run? I'm not sure of the outcome of that play, since I need to see it again. If TP threw the ball period, then there should have been a flag. If he tucked it, Boom was a blocker.

TP was sacked on the play, and never made a move to suggest a run, therefore, any contact beyond hand-checking should have been considered illegal. My references to what other people have said were to say that I'm open to other people's opinions, but I am not going to change my stance. The "IIRC" was just to say I'm pretty sure, but didn't bother to watch it again to double check. I wish I had the facilities to post a clip. I think I'm correct in my assessment, although I'm not exactly sure if the defensive holding/impedement rule has changed from a few years ago. The fact that the ball never got in the air rules out pass interference. I still say it was a personal foul. I think the refs just didn't see it, or had a bad angle.