NCAA approves changes to targeting suspension in 1-year trial
The NCAA on Thursday approved a one-year trial rule that gives a player a break from a half-game suspension for his first targeting penalty.
Great Rule Change for Targeting
- Thread starter Drew0311
- Start date
I wish they'd put some concrete rules together on what actual targeting is. So many times I see a guy lit up, everyone agrees it should have been targeting, but nope. Then some play a kid gets ejected and everyone is wondering what the hell he did to get called for targeting.
At least they are making this change though, I never agreed with it.
At least they are making this change though, I never agreed with it.
Cyclonepride
Thought Police
Cyclonepride
Thought Police
I agree, I've seen plays where it was textbook targeting, plenty of time to adjust, crown of the helmet squarely into the head area of a helpless player and they don't get it. Then you'll see it called on incidental glancing contact when there's no way a player could have avoided it.
I want them to penalize an offensive player if he lowers his head into a defender, causing a hit to the head. I feel like that happens more often than a defender launching into someone's head.
Anything even slightly more lenient is better than how it was. Targeting was maybe the worst rule ever added to CFB.
No ref/review crew seems to have any clue on how to judge it properly anyway.
No ref/review crew seems to have any clue on how to judge it properly anyway.
ALL. THE. TIME. It's so inconsistent and rarely seems to get reffed to match the intent of the player's actions.
Right I get the rule and what it is supposed to stop. Makes sense. However, maybe a 25 yard penelty or something like that. Not immediate ejection. Also, since they kind of don't even really know what it is and every ref calls it different, it makes zero sense. Come up with an exact rule for it. To many times we see it called one way (Generally against us) and the other team does the same thing and it's not called.
It is still a terrible rule. Shouldn't result in losing anytime especially if it not egregious targeting.
I don't even need them to penalize the offensive player, just realize the offensive player gave the defender no choice and don't call anything.
It's supposed to be a penalty in the pros, and I've seen it called once since they said it was a penalty. Almost impossible to officiate, but if the defender was going to hit clean up until the offensive player lowered his head bracing for contact, I agree, no penalty should be called.
They need to next establish 2 levels of targeting... 15 yards for blatant targeting, 5 yards for non-blatant. They both happen. When a defender is going in for a tackle and everything is completely legal until the ball-carrier spins or moves in a way that puts his head in the line of contact from the defender at the last second, that should never be 15 yards.
Last edited:
It's so stupid. You can absolutely ear-hole someone going out of bounds on a totally late, dirty hit. But you'll only get a 15 yd unsportsmanlike penalty at most.
But accidentally go helmet-to-helmet? Hammer drops, 15 yd penalty, ejected, 1st half DQ next game. The proposed change is good but it's still inconsistent with other dangerous plays.
Just make targeting unsportsmanlike conduct. And 2 of any unsportsmanlike penalties by a player should result in an ejection for that game along with the penalty yardage. In extreme cases, a possible suspension for future games might be in order, like in the pros.
Cyclonepride
Thought Police
That was my thought this morning. I wouldn't even mind 15 yards for either, but any suspension should require intention. A lot of these targeting calls are split second where the defensive player goes for the tackle and the offensive player drops down, but some are clearly lining up to deliver it. That's the distinction IMO
Yep, flagrant 1 and flagrant 2. 1 is 15 yards, 2 is 15 and an ejection. They review fouls for intent and severity in bb all the time. Why can’t they do it in fb.
Regarding the flagrant 1&2 discussion, that makes sense. I'm sure officials still can botch the decision for that, too, but at least it allows variance.
This exactly. This is my biggest problem with the rule. There are many times you have a textbook tackle, and an offensive player creates the danger, and the defensive player is supposed to defy the laws of physics and Matrix around that contact.
If they actually care about safety, they need to start penalizing offensive players. Focus on penalizing controllable behaviors. Defensive players have dramatically changed for the better on how they hit and tackle vulnerable players. Offensive players are leading with the crown, ducking down, and defensive players are getting penalized when they are doing things right but the outcome is contact to the head and neck. Until they get penalized offensive players are going to keep doing these things.
Yeah there are plenty of targeting calls that by the letter of the rule is targeting. But they are not malicious. Eject people that are trying to take guys heads off. Outside of that it’s 15 yards. If someone gets two of those in a game then they’re out.
