What was the deal with the goal posts at Jordan Hare? The uprights were so short that it seems like almost every field goal with any height on it would pass above the highest point of the goal. On Auburn's field goal, there was a chance that the ball would have hit the goal post. Looking at the goal posts in NFL games, they were all significantly higher than Auburn's. Is Auburn that cheap that they can't afford another 10-15 feet of pipe on each goal post?
I noticed the same thing while watching the game. In the NFL all the stadiums have to use standard heights for goal post, in college each school's posts can vary but they have to meet the requirements set out by the NCAA. So, I assume AU's posts are of legal height.
I don't know, but most college goalposts are "shorter" than what you'll find in the NFL. Why? Dunno. One reason why goalposts aren't taller must be safety-related, center of gravity-wise, as I'm sure any of our resident engineers can describe in detail as far as a size/weight ratio is concerned.
I've seen that kick 5 times now, and I don't see any way it was considered good. If the post extended into infinity, at BEST it would have hit the post. I personally think it was wide. Just a random thought.
In theory the posts do extend to infinity, and if the ball goes over the post the kick is considered good. It looked wide to me as well (I saw it on TV), but no angle is perfect for viewing a kick on TV, unless you are directly under the posts.
Guys, freaking forget it and move on. Yes the FG was questionable, and a lot of calls in the game were. Every year, the media salivates for the weekend the defending NC is beaten, and to make it worse, it's against AU in a game where we held their vaunted west coast offense to a mere 3 points for almost the whole game. Something tells me that all colleges have exactly the same height goal posts. No way AU has shorter posts or whatever. I am ready to blow off some steam against State, and enjoy AU getting destroyed by Tenn. and UGA
One of the commentators on ESPN--forgot which one specifically, though, said that the rule states that the bars extend upward infinately (Randy Cross said the same thing during the game), but his annalyst said that if the bar actually extended upward, the ball would have hit it--not go inside of it.
