Targeting

[Jmonty71]

This one that cost us Gotsis for a game is where I think there needs to be two levels of targeting. He didn't launch, he didn't lead with his helmet, he just wrapped him up and took him to the ground and sadly they helmets hit.

If it would had been Bama... It would been aired on ESPN as a big hit.....

 

[Lavoisier]

Not going to comment on the first part but there are two versions. 15 yards or 15 + ejection. The ejection is determined by replay officials.

 

[Madison Grant]

Targeting isn't helmet to helmet. It can involve helmet to helmet but it doesn't have to. That type of play would be targeting if the tackler led with the crown. He could put his crown into the guys shoulder or arm or whatever and it could still be called if that was what he led with.

Edit: refs miss stuff but I don't think that makes it a bad rule. Refs miss holds and PI all the time, but those should still be enforced the best they can.

Do you lack a basic knowledge of human anatomy? You cannot lead with your shoulders unless you also lead with your head and the helmet on it. Are you supposed to run in with your back straight and arms flailing, or slide in feet first to ballcarrier? Gotsis, by your own admission is leading with the facemask and not the crown of the helmet. You can be doing everything in your power to wrap up with your arms and put your shoulder into a ballcarrier, and he makes one dart or flinch and now your helmet is making contact with his. The draconian quality of the rule has nothing to do with whether or not it is accurately called. It has to do with the fact you are potentially punishing an entire team by kicking their best defensive player out for a violation the rule admits is enforced regardless of whether the contact is incidental and unintentional or even caused by an evasive maneuver by the offensive player.

 

[melloace]

Not going to comment on the first part but there are two versions. 15 yards or 15 + ejection. The ejection is determined by replay officials.

Missing the point of my post... The review process is targeting check yes or no. I feel there needs to be an incidental level to the call. Such as the defender is down low to make a tackle and the ball carrier brings their head down even with the defender. When that happens in a split second the defender can only accept there will be forceable contact to the helmet/neck area due to position, or they can dive at the legs and 9 times out of 10 have the ball carrier continue on past them. I'm all for player safety, but it's unfair to put a defender in a position where his only chance would be to go to the ground to avoid a ball carrier with their head down to stay in the game.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

USC just tackled the UT rb. Defender had helmet to helmet contact more egregious than Gotsis sack. No flag. Inconsistent.

 

[Jmonty71]

USC just tackled the UT rb. Defender had helmet to helmet contact more egregious than Gotsis sack. No flag. Inconsistent.

Speaking of Texas.. They are hanging with USC... Kind of a shock

 

[MWBATL]

Sadly I think within 20 years football wont exist anymore because it will be sued and legislated out of existence. The only sports allowed will be Soccer,Basketball,Hockey and MMA.

You forgot touch football as the proper socially acceptable version of football that the lawyers, and society, allows to remain.

 

[Skeptic]

The capricious enforcement of the targeting penalty, not brain injury, will be the death of football.

A little hyperbolic, don't you think? Much better to call it wrong than to miss one. If they want to save football they need a rule that anytime the crown of the helmet is used, whether for a tackle or on the ball, it is an ejection. Those are dangerous weapons.

 

[AtWork]

Don't lead with the crown and you won't get tossed it seems pretty straight forward

What about running backs who plow the the line of scrimmage with intent of leading with the crown of their helmet? It's a one-sided rule and if it was about safety the ncaa would stop that type of contact altogether.

 

[UgaBlows]

That Gotsis hit is a thing of true beauty!

 

[plangineer]

Use the impact sensors in the helmet, if the hit is above a certain threshold, then call it targeting, otherwise let it be. That would remove any inconsistency / questioning with the rule.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Knee jerk reaction to some of the intentional hits on defenseless players in the past.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If anybody saw Friday's USF game, a poor kid got ejected for targeting and he hit the guy in the chest and then 2 hand shoved him down. It was really an egregious call. It was one of like 20 (LITERALLY) first half penalties. I was really worried they were going to announce it was an ACC ref crew.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

If anybody saw Friday's USF game, a poor kid got ejected for targeting and he hit the guy in the chest and then 2 hand shoved him down. It was really an egregious call. It was one of like 20 (LITERALLY) first half penalties. I was really worried they were going to announce it was an ACC ref crew.

The ejection part of the penalty is heinous. We might as well start having a penalty box situation as in hockey. Holding, you're out for ten plays, false start, you're out for ten plays, personal foul, out for a quarter.

 

[stech81]

I'm old it's football and that used to be called form tackling . But back then an offensive could not use his hands.

 

[g0lftime]

The one player not being held on the play was ejected for making the tackle.

 

[deeeznutz]

What about running backs who plow the the line of scrimmage with intent of leading with the crown of their helmet? It's a one-sided rule and if it was about safety the ncaa would stop that type of contact altogether.

I don't believe it's in the NCAA rule book, but the NFL is trying to penalize offensive players who lower their heads and initiate a helmet-to-helmet hit. That said, I think they instituted the rule 2 years ago but I don't think anyone has gotten dinged for it yet.

 

[g0lftime]

It's not consistently called. It is judgment call now and some refs call it more rigorously than others. Helmet sensors make sense if it wouldn't add a lot of extra weight. Should be possible to design.

 

[northgajacket]

I was just telling my dad this. They have adjust the rule to not immediately DQ a guy if the hit isn't egregious. Like a yellow card/red card kind of thing. Crazy to lose guys for hits like the Clemson hit or Gotsis vs unc a couple years back

That Gotsis ejection was such bs

 

[northgajacket]

I remember last season in The Holy War game, a BYU safety was ejected for targeting, then on the very next play his backup was also ejected for targeting and it pretty much changed the complexion of the game.