Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
'Rique's Targeting Call
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatGuy" data-source="post: 825360" data-attributes="member: 3440"><p>I have a lot of dislike for the targeting rule - especially how gray the conditions were at first (luckily, they've fixed a bit of that - but it still has its non-black-and-white aspects). At the same time, I understand why it's there - and this instance seemed pretty clear-cut to me, as much as I hated to see it.</p><p></p><p>That being said, ever since the targeting rule was implemented a few years back, the runner has often continued to do what runners have done for years and years - when a tackle is incoming, they get low. And that often means lowering their heads.</p><p></p><p>We see it with QBs and RBs the most, but also with WRs after making the catch and turning to advance the ball downfield. You try to get low (I assume "putting your head down and pushing through for extra yards" is the mindset that comes with it - although in some cases, it's just an instinctive reaction to an incoming hit).</p><p></p><p>So I agree with you wholeheartedly. Since day 1 of the targeting rule, I've been frustrated by this aspect of the game. If the rule is to avoid impact with the crown of the helmet for safety, you should bear some responsibility for moving your helmet into the path of an oncoming player and contributing to the impact.</p><p></p><p>That being said, that would introduce even more gray areas into an already muddy evaluation rule. I don't expect it to ever happen. IIWII.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatGuy, post: 825360, member: 3440"] I have a lot of dislike for the targeting rule - especially how gray the conditions were at first (luckily, they've fixed a bit of that - but it still has its non-black-and-white aspects). At the same time, I understand why it's there - and this instance seemed pretty clear-cut to me, as much as I hated to see it. That being said, ever since the targeting rule was implemented a few years back, the runner has often continued to do what runners have done for years and years - when a tackle is incoming, they get low. And that often means lowering their heads. We see it with QBs and RBs the most, but also with WRs after making the catch and turning to advance the ball downfield. You try to get low (I assume "putting your head down and pushing through for extra yards" is the mindset that comes with it - although in some cases, it's just an instinctive reaction to an incoming hit). So I agree with you wholeheartedly. Since day 1 of the targeting rule, I've been frustrated by this aspect of the game. If the rule is to avoid impact with the crown of the helmet for safety, you should bear some responsibility for moving your helmet into the path of an oncoming player and contributing to the impact. That being said, that would introduce even more gray areas into an already muddy evaluation rule. I don't expect it to ever happen. IIWII. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
'Rique's Targeting Call
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top