The early college football season brought unexpected excitement when the Western Michigan Broncos seemed poised to defeat the favored Michigan Wolverines at Michigan Stadium. With just 38 seconds left, the Broncos led 12-7. Michigan had no timeouts remaining.
The game appeared to conclude when Bryce Underwood’s first Hail Mary failed. Both the broadcast’s game clock and the stadium scoreboard showed 0:00. However, after a review, officials added an extra second, giving Underwood another attempt. On this try, JJ Buchanan caught the pass, securing Michigan’s win and prompting fans to rush the field.
The explanation for adding the second stirred confusion, particularly outside of Michigan. The Big Ten stated the clocks were strobe-synced beforehand but used a different clock during the replay, which indicated a second remained, despite cameras showing zero seconds left.
Initially, the Broncos accepted the outcome, following communication with the Big Ten, presuming proper procedure was followed. This shift changed on Tuesday afternoon when the Mid-American Conference (MAC) announced a formal appeal to recognize Western Michigan as the game’s winner.
The MAC stated, “After further study and investigation, it is evident that replay protocol was not followed correctly. The game clock on the program feed should have been used, not the clock from the replay system. The result was an extra play being awarded.” The MAC clarified that the appeal did not challenge the time on the clock but the protocol misapplication.
The conference requested that the NCAA FBS Oversight Committee and College Football Playoff recognize Western Michigan as the actual winner, for ranking and evaluation purposes.
NCAA rules indicate that reviews must rely on video evidence from the televised production or equivalent means available to the replay official and television producer.
Despite the appeal, the chances of overturning the game’s result are slim. Even if the procedure was misapplied, overturning a game outcome, especially against a powerhouse like Michigan, is unlikely. However, the MAC’s support for its member school in this dispute is notable. A win against a top-20 opponent might have bolstered Western Michigan’s College Football Playoff ambitions.
In response, the Big Ten reiterated its confidence in the initial resolution and stated it would not comment further.
This situation highlights the challenges of achieving a satisfying outcome amidst differing interpretations and protocols. Michigan’s dramatic win, under disputed circumstances, remains unresolved for many of those involved.
Leave a Reply