Let’s play Explain the Fumble!

It was not at all clear Michigan would have recovered anyway. By the time Wallace grabbed the football, no one was playing anymore, for at least a half second, maybe more. With that many players within a few feet of the ball, it could have been anyone's ball had the whistle not been blown. The play is long dead, and Wallace's recovery looked nothing like the continuation of a football play.

I'm as much a homer as anyone, but that call was a mistake. It was a mistake to reverse the on-field decision and call it a fumble, and it was a mistake to award possession to Michigan even if that call was right.

All you've said is true, but watching and rewatching it, there's a chunk of time between whistle and nonchalant recovery, while everyone else has stopped.  Unless you wrote a rule about it specifying the tenths of seconds that can elapse, which would be absurd, one has to live these events that people won't agree with.  So, what you say is correct, one could still come to a different conclusion.

In an otherwise perfect world, what should have happened is that the officials let the play continue and then review whether it was a fumble---and probably overturn the call to incomplete pass.  My initial reaction was that it was a bullsh** call.  I haven't changed my mind.

This also points to a flaw in the system.  In cases when you let a play run even though you're kind of sure it shouldn't, then the standards of review should be 50-50, not tilted heavily to the call on the field.

I actually thumbs up your comments when they aren't long enough to need a scroll button!

This is the reason they teach football players to grab every loose ball regardless of the whistle.  

Good teams, especially defenses, always pick up loose balls.

Reminds of a "penalty try" in rugby, which may likely be the origin of the rule.  Or "clear path" in the NBA which is more recent.   

Just a weird moment in a game where the officials are attempting to tell everyone what most likely would have happened and then making it so.  

I, too, have seen this. If the play is ruled a fumble, the question becomes can the officials clearly determine which team recovered the ball? If no one picks up the ball or it is left unclaimed under a pile of players, the offense gets the ball back by default. This was a heads up play by Wallace.

Pretty sure it happened to us once 10 years ago or so. Michigan State game?

Ruled incomplete on the field, MSU player picked it up and they gave them the yardage and spotted it there.

Water and Aleve my friend!

Was that when they first started replay?  Carr was furious that they didn't review MIchigan breaking the plane of the goal line on the prior play but on the next play, they reviewed a Michigan fumble.  (I think the officials initially awarded the ball to Michigan to makeup for the blown call on the play before but then replay took it away.)  This initiated the Carr rule which is review every (potential) scoring play.

In this case 99/100. Iowa cannot score points, even if they played absolutely amazing defense, eventually they'll slip and someone scores. Their offense spends half it's energy trying not to turnover the ball and lose yards.

I'd assume he was arguing that it was an incompletion rather than a fumble. And he may have been right, I personally thought the ball moves forward just a tiny bit, so the ruling of incomplete probably should have stood. Honestly it was close enough that it was one of those that should have stood as called on the field; video evidence probably shouldn't have overturned either outcome.

Obviously it's completely irrelevant to the outcome of the game. Iowa wasn't getting points on that drive. It was, at most, the difference between Michigan covering the spread or not..

They did eventually say it. It was a bizarre sequence because they needed to get 39 more commercials in.. I'm honored that they let us see the touchdown run. But it was not called in real time. Not clearly. Just ferentz shown screaming like any of it really mattered

Doug and Jon mentioned it when they got back from commercial break on the Michigan Radio broadcast. They didn't mention it was Brian Ferentz, but the replay on tv made that obvious.

I'm always surprised that's not taught more, by coaches. If there's a loose ball, that even could be a fumble, fall on it. Even if they blow the whistle. Fall on it. I'll sometimes see loose balls just rolling to a stop on potential turnovers and lose my mind. :-)

Same with, by the way, if you pick up a ball you think might be a fumble or get what could be an interception, run to the endzone. I don't care if it's 80 yards away. Run to the endzone.

Agreed. In every sport. The standard is so simple. If you can clearly see the call was wrong — the Galarraga perfect game, for instance — change it. But I don't honestly need really really close calls overruled. We went 100+ years enjoying college football without instant replay, and just accepting referees calls. 

No need to get into Zapruder-film-level analysis on these, especially because so often what the referees conclude is "clear and convincing" remains, to the team on the wrong end of the decision, frustratingly not so. Just look at it, say "seems not an egregious mistake," and get the game moving.

Believe it or not, commercials on Fox are usually 2:30. ESPN will occasionally throw in a 3:00.