Search results

If a head of officials missed that, then that explains the issue.

There's not another QB I'd rather have leading my team and that incudes Cam Ward, Kyle McCord, and Carson Beck.

Baloney. Look, we all played tackle football at some point. Players can be taught to tackle w/o using the helmet. There will always be incidental contact. You as a coach will actually have to train them. Novel idea. We're talking now with concussion awareness and CTE, the game just needs to...

What's the diameter? It has been defined at 6" from the apex. In other words the 12" across in diameter from the apex of the helmet. The neck angle is inconsequential, the crown is defined (above) as one of The. Determining. Actions that constitute targeting. If you think it would be called too...

You've heard me before, but I think there needs to be no more than 8 teams in the P4 playoff. First, tell the G5 to have their own playoff. Second, take the top 2 teams from each P4 conference. Third, use the CCG as the first round of the CFP. Fourth, schedule the four winners as has been done...

It's not subjective, it's quite explicit. Perhaps there are subjective elements in the minds of officials, but that's all subject to review. For example, in the photo the mutt provided (and I cannot believe you would toss that trash on this site - kind of shows me where you're coming from) the...

If it’s a targeting rule then call it… whenever it occurs. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Here’s McAuley’s statement on the hit on King: “McAulay argued that the SEC showed "utter contempt" in its decision not to review for targeting.” Again, McAuley is a former NFL official and current NFL rules analyst. He has no dog in this fight. I’d trust him on this.

Here is a discussion of the rule in 2024. https://ftw.usatoday.com/2024/08/college-football-rules-what-is-targeting-ncaa Here’s the case example in point (this is exactly what happened): Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.

Seen it too many times to explain it any other way.

The targeting was textbook. The NFL rules analyst is on record, with nothing to gain, that it was targeting by the rule - striking with the crown of the helmet. Your issue here is you trust the on-field and review officials. (Or maybe you just live to be contrarian. Hmm?) Many of us do not...

IIRC, Castellanos ate us alive last year.

You may be right, but it is a counterfactual argument. We know had CBK challenged that it adds another level of light on the matter. They still may not call it, but with the critical fumble their decision is equally critical. Bear in mind that the NFL rules analyst went ballistic over the...

SMU is the rising star in the ACC. Those guys are rich and they had pay-for-play down pat in the early 80’s. Now it’s legal. Be forewarned!

It was an SECheat broadcast, “The SECheat on ABC.” You have to expect that stuff, but their homerism was nauseating.

Three things: 1. It’s not all helmet to helmet, it helmet to bottom of face mask, snapping his head backward. 2. Yes, leading with crown is targeting regardless of what you hit. 3. There is a second definition of targeting that mentions head area contact, but it’s either/or, doesn’t have to be...

JMO, but I think that changing an O is not as easy as some think. If you have one guy presenting that need, get a new guy. If you have a whole offensive unit presenting that need, change your O. The first is likely BOB, the second was TFG.