Targeting Rule..too harsh - how would you change it?

[Roustabout]

After watching tons of football since this rule came into effect - I hope some changes happen. The first real stupid part of this rule (that was changed) was that when it first came on the scene, if the targeting was overruled, the penalty was still 15 yards. Thank goodness they woke up and changed that.

My thoughts- The intent of the rule is player safety. To change the way a player tackles and not lead with his head. Players know that, however a majority of targeting calls are on players where there wasn't motivation to hurt the runner, just that in real time, the runner ducks his head into the path of an oncoming tackler. So the punishment - ejection. If it happens 1 minute into the 3rd quarter, the player misses two halves of football, and in most cases - it couldn't be prevented.

They used to have a rule about a facemask penalty - incidental or intentional, the former being a 5 yard penalty and the latter being 15. I think targeting needs the same type of categorization, and if incidental - put a clock on the time the player sits, much like a penalty box in hockey. 10 minutes - 15 minutes.. I dunno. In the case of intentional, keep the rule as it stands.

Bituli against Alabama comes to mind. That was a player on the two yardline about to score that was going low. Without that hit, the player could have easily stretched it into more yardage and perhaps a touchdown. Yes, it fit the definition, but what I see is a player that's job is to tackle a guy going for the end zone. Mentally for him, it's hard to check himself and ask himself, "Gosh, am I gonna hurt this guy when I hit him?"

I hate to see a player get tossed for a hit like that. Sure, throw the flag. Roughing the passer comes to mind. A much needed rule, but they don't eject the player every time that happens.

I would bring back the 5 yard face mask.

I would also put in provisions about the offensive player changing their position leaving the defender no choice to correct posture. I’d also implement soft shoulder pads and a soft or pliable helmet. No more hard shells. Those two things are the reasons players middle launch themselves. We always practiced tackling at or below the waist to disrupt the center of gravity. The highlight seeking aspect created the middle launch.

Bituli is an idiot for leading with the crown of his helmet as that could cause him spinal injury. If the very top of your helmet is aimed at a tackler for any reason then tough ****. Penalty and ejection.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

My buddies on the Rugby team agree.

Rugby players also know how to properly tackle without trying to kill a person.

 

[bamawriter]

Rugby players also know how to properly tackle without trying to kill a person.

They also have to have their feet on the ground when they initiate contact.

 

[ptcarter]

Well another weekend has passed and yet again, I’m feeling this rule just sucks. Not saying the spirit of the rule is flawed, however the execution, or lack thereof, is. Was in Knoxville for USCe game. In my view, refs got it wrong twice, both costing Tennessee. One a call on a QB hit that wasn’t crazy. It’s getting to the point that if your helmet bumps the helmet of a guy with the ball, you get tossed. Helmets were designed to protect heads when the helmets hit at low velocities.

Pruitt was asked in the presser, what was he supposed to do different? Pruitt answered “I asked the same thing and got a 15 yard penalty”
and then the “no call”. Textbook targeting by a South Carolina defender on the sideline, way worse than the other mentioned here.

Because the penalty is so harsh, it puts way to much power in the refs hands that can change the outcome of a game. Keep the penalty, just get rid of the ejection part.

Or, as an engineer, I’d say, in this high tech world we live in, just put a 3 axis accelerometer in the helmet that triggers a red LED when it exceeds set limits. If the light doesn’t shine, the helmet contact was acceptable , if it comes on go ahead and toss the guy.

 

[Zues1]

Don't like the rule but I understand why it's in place. Personally I think the inconsistency of officiating is a bigger issue. It appears to me some of these zebras are just going through the motions to grab a check.

 

[TJVol95]

First fix the root cause. Fire the SEC refs and move them the hell out of Birmingham!!

 

[give_him 6]

I miss the days of Chuck Cecil.

 

[Remy]

The rule needs to be changed where offensive players also cannot lead with the head and/or target defensive players with it. Stop the nonsense associated with in game suspensions along with carryover to next game. No more ducking the head and hitting a pile.The rule needs to be changed to simply be part of a targeting a defenseless player rule IMO. Helmets clank in a football game get over it or move to tiddly winks.

 

[UTK]

To me they should just go along the lines of holding. You know the saying, "they could call holding every play". While maybe not every play, 95% of them you could if you were going straight by the rules. But that would be a pretty boring sport to watch then wouldn't it? So what do they do? They only call it when it's super blatant and way too obvious not to call. They use what we call "judgement and common sense".

So why not do that with targeting? Only call it if it the player clearly launches or hits late with what appears to be an intent to harm the other players. It's what targeting used to be before they started taking it so damn literally.

Use some damn common sense. Because this **** is harming college football greatly.

 

[TheDeeble]

Agree to some extent. If you look at this play though, there was "heat of the moment". Ball carrier 2 yards from the stripe, both going full bore and runner going low. Making a conscious tackling "check myself" decision was the last thing on his mind. There are physics in play - momentum, balance, leverage, and when the bulk of the runner is below shoulder or even waist level, it's hard to compensate.. not to mention the runners head was a moving target too. Unavoidable really, unless you just stop and give the guy a touchdown because you stop and think that there is a chance your heads might collide.

"Checking myself" or "physics" has nothing to do with looking at the ground and hitting with the crown of the helmet. Bituli's hit was textbook targeting and they will call that every time. His hit was a great way for a defender to have a neck injury or paralyzation. All he had to do was look at who he was hitting. Facemask contact isn't considered part of the targeting rule.

It seems to be a subjective rule for the refs and it definitely needs some work. But looking at the ground like Bituli did when you make contact around the head area will probably draw a flag every time.

 

[Roustabout]

"Checking myself" or "physics" has nothing to do with looking at the ground and hitting with the crown of the helmet. Bituli's hit was textbook targeting and they will call that every time. His hit was a great way for a defender to have a neck injury or paralyzation. All he had to do was look at who he was hitting. Facemask contact isn't considered part of the targeting rule.

It seems to be a subjective rule for the refs and it definitely needs some work. But looking at the ground like Bituli did when you make contact around the head area will probably draw a flag every time.

Unless you’re doing it to JG. One of the clearest examples I’ve seen and no flag and no booth review. That game was a clinic in targeting and how refs can screw it up.

I’d simply get rid of hard shell helmets and shoulder pads. That will end it quick.

 

[TheDeeble]

The guy that hit JG wasnt looking at the ground. His head was up. It didn't look like he hit him with the crown of his helmet. Looks like facemask to me. Head is at a different angle from Bituli's hit. You can see the entire back of his head from behind at ground level.

 

[Boca Vol]

The guy that hit JG wasnt looking at the ground. His head was up. It didn't look like he hit him with the crown of his helmet. Looks like facemask to me. Head is at a different angle from Bituli's hit. You can see the entire back of his head from behind at ground level.

View attachment 234639

Agree. That was almost textbook, IMO.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Allow them to reduce the charge if targeting was improperly called. See Maurer vs Alabama 2019

 

[SandoVOL]

There needs to be penalties on offensive players for lowering their heads, I would say 50% targeting penalties are a result of the offensive player lower his helmet while a defensive player is coming in full speed intending to tackle around his midsection.

I would not be surprised if the best players are being taught to do this for the free 15 yards and possible ejection (ie Alabama players). It really is a game changer, and if you truly cares about player safety you would be penalizing offensive guys for not caring about their own safety.