Targeting

[digger]

I don't post on this form much but,those to call's aginst the Rebels were bullsh@t allowed 2 td's for A&M.Game not over yet mabey they can over come.

[Nitro Mag]

I don't think those calls were bs. In fact, I think both especially the second that the ejections should not have been overturned. The referees were doing their job by the rules they are told to enforce.

[rebelduckaholic]

Both those calls were bs. Neither was what you would consider head hunting targeting or whatever you want. In fact as soon as most saw the replay there should've been no question that both would've been reinstated. Lewis was pulling up. Elston was a clean hit in his center mass. The problem I have is when it is replayed and overturned is the penalty stays. If it's not enough to eject no reason to let penalty stand

[donia]

no question on boo boo gates ejection from helmet to helmet on prescott...wasn't that he just lead with his helmet like a missel, he used it as a battering ram by flexing at the waist just before contact. pretty effective "dead roach" technique, if you have a hard enough head to not see stars yourself...

to me, most of the targeting calls are bs, but i realize when i was playing hs ball we were taught (from first day of jr high on) what is now considered the "wrong" way to tackle...spearing was a call that was getting more attention, but still not called often. center mass with face mask was considered correct technique.

[digger]

The second one on the Rebels is what got me.If you saw the replay the guy was pulling up and they hit chest to chest on first contact.I aint saying Rebels would have won but those 2 call's helped put 14 points on the board,I think both were 3rd down play's that would have forced punts or fg.

[Tedl10]

The second one on the Rebels is what got me.If you saw the replay the guy was pulling up and they hit chest to chest on first contact.I aint saying Rebels would have won but those 2 call's helped put 14 points on the board,I think both were 3rd down play's that would have forced punts or fg.

A&M scored the very next play after both calls if I remember correctly. The second targeting call was bs.

[mshunter77]

All the ones I have seen were BS. All were overturned but team still got 15 yard penalty that kept drives alive. This seems to happen on third down a lot as DBs are looking to make a good hit and knock the ball out. Which is the way the game is meant to be played.

[gps4]

Fans see what they want to see........and don't see what they don't want to see.

[mfalkner]

GPS4 if that's the case, why are almost all of the calls reversed? Riddle me that... In the games I've watched, it's at least 3:1 ratio of targeting calls reversed vs ejection

[gps4]

GPS4 if that's the case, why are almost all of the calls reversed? Riddle me that... In the games I've watched, it's at least 3:1 ratio of targeting calls reversed vs ejection

because the guys in the booth have to make it out of the stadium and out of town, too.

[Po Monkey Lounger]

This rule should/ will likely be removed after this season. Just go back to assessing personal foul penalties if warranted, or ejections if warranted, under the previous rules. Instead, they are throwing flags on hits that clearly are not intentional helmet to helmet ( eg spearing), that don't even warrant a penalty, but are just good hard nosed football, and then automatically reviewing them only to see if an ejection is warranted. Ridiculous.

[digger]

I'm not talking as a fan most of the one's I'v seen (called on any team) were bs.The flag is thrown and tha call is targeting when the booth say's no then there should be no personal fowl because that's not what the flag was thrown for.I agree the rule should go but it won't mabey twek it, if overturned in the booth and no ejction then mabey a 5yd penelty and no automatic 1st down instead of 15 and automatic 1st.I undestand safety for the young men is important but I'm old school and like slobber knocking hit's,at times as a coach (if I were 1)I'd take a 15yd penelty for a hard hit just to let'm know (intimadation) what happens when you come thru here,like Jack Tatum use to do.That's part of a db's game putting fear into recievers coming across the midlle.

[deltadukman]

I dont think the zebras know just how hard it is for a 250# linemae running full speed, to just pull up. Its almost like they see a good hit, and automatically throw the flag. I have seen one or too throughout the season that I thought were solid calls, buts like they hear a hit, throw the flag, booth reviews it, no ejection, but lets just throw a personal fould for hitting the guy like you're suppoed to. Its going to be like Dancing With the Stars if its not changed. I guess "Okalahoma" is no longer a practice drill.

[RedEyed Duck]

The problem I have is when it is replayed and overturned is the penalty stays. If it's not enough to eject no reason to let penalty stand

I agree 100%, the rule is the problem. It is flawed at its very essence. I understand the guys on the field throwing the flag, as its a bang, bang play and they only see it the one time. The fact that the call can be reviewed and overturned, however the penalty still stands is well, lets just say way to go NCAA!! Folks that make rules and pass laws ought to allow someone to proof read their stuff!

[duckter]

The targeting rules are BS. However, it is at least raising awareness in hopes to prevent the catastrophic injury. Needs to be studied by the officials - and it will.

On another note, it used to drive me crazy that you couldn't watch a game, much less a quarter without someones helmet flying off. Now, it appears players have learned to get a helmet that fits, and to secure the friggin chinstraps.