Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority  

Go Back   Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority > General Sports > College Football

Hello Guest!
Take a minute to register, It's 100% FREE! What are you waiting for?
Register Now
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-09-19, 04:11 PM
adselder09 adselder09 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 05-11-07
Posts: 14,774
adselder09 is on a distinguished road
Targeting Rule

Coaches are attempting to put together a proposal to amend the targeting rule. They believe it should be split into two categories. Basically they want a Targeting 1 and Targeting 2, similar to college basketball.

Targeting 1 - unintentional helmet-to-helmet contact
Targeting 2 - intentional, malicious helmet-to-helmet contact

Targeting 1 would still incur a 15-yard penalty, but no ejection.
Targeting 2 would be a 15-yard penalty, plus ejection and also the potential for suspensions. Repeat offenders would be subject to suspensions as well.

Feel like they'd be opening up a can of worms trying to let officials and replay determine intent, though I like the option of keeping kids in the game vs ejecting them.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 01-09-19, 04:12 PM
adselder09 adselder09 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 05-11-07
Posts: 14,774
adselder09 is on a distinguished road
Here's the ESPN link:
http://www.espn.com/college-football...two-categories
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-09-19, 04:20 PM
Arrogate Arrogate is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 12-27-16
Location: Irish Buffalo's head
Posts: 6,678
Arrogate will become famous soon enough
I would like them to look at when the offensive player lowers his head to brace for the hit.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-09-19, 05:54 PM
Max Grumbleman Max Grumbleman is offline
All Ohio
 
Join Date: 06-11-16
Posts: 557
Max Grumbleman is on a distinguished road
We have personal fouls and unnecessary roughness already, this rule is overkill and an annoyance! Get rid of it!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-09-19, 08:27 PM
adselder09 adselder09 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 05-11-07
Posts: 14,774
adselder09 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Grumbleman View Post
We have personal fouls and unnecessary roughness already, this rule is overkill and an annoyance! Get rid of it!
So in your opinion helmet-to-helmet hits should not be penalized? Or should just be given personal fouls?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-09-19, 08:30 PM
Arrogate Arrogate is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 12-27-16
Location: Irish Buffalo's head
Posts: 6,678
Arrogate will become famous soon enough
Helmet to helmet isnt new is it? I thought that had been around a while. Not sure.

I think he wants it to be a personal foul and have targeting be called as a helmet to helmet, 15 yd penalty. Pretty sure that was how it used to be called.

I don't like the whole you must sit out a whole game, which will lead to the next game. Maybe if they do it so many times they get suspended for a game. First offense is a little harsh to be suspending for part of the next game IMO. Maybe some sort of NBA technical foul rule is needed?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-09-19, 08:49 PM
kingpin2010 kingpin2010 is online now
All World
 
Join Date: 01-27-10
Location: McDonald, OH
Posts: 4,853
kingpin2010 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrogate View Post
Helmet to helmet isnt new is it? I thought that had been around a while. Not sure.

I think he wants it to be a personal foul and have targeting be called as a helmet to helmet, 15 yd penalty. Pretty sure that was how it used to be called.

I don't like the whole you must sit out a whole game, which will lead to the next game. Maybe if they do it so many times they get suspended for a game. First offense is a little harsh to be suspending for part of the next game IMO. Maybe some sort of NBA technical foul rule is needed?
It sounds like they want it to be akin to the nba flagrant foul rules. Tier 1 no ejection but 2 free throws and ball (here itís 15 yard penalty, tier 2 is that plus ejection. Iíd imagine if this comes to fruition there will be much less ejections, but probably more targeting penalties
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-09-19, 08:50 PM
adselder09 adselder09 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 05-11-07
Posts: 14,774
adselder09 is on a distinguished road
I agree, I hate the ejection rule as is now. If it's a malicious hit it should be penalized but not every helmet-to-helmet hit is malicious. I think what their proposing above isn't bad, definitely better than what they have in place now.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-10-19, 12:42 AM
cabezadecaballo cabezadecaballo is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-06-12
Location: over here
Posts: 35,813
cabezadecaballo will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by adselder09 View Post
I agree, I hate the ejection rule as is now. If it's a malicious hit it should be penalized but not every helmet-to-helmet hit is malicious. I think what their proposing above isn't bad, definitely better than what they have in place now.
Joey Bosa had to have thrown out a WTF! or two Monday night if he was watching. As bad as the one that sent him to the sidelines in his final college game.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-10-19, 09:09 AM
14Red 14Red is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 03-12-12
Posts: 4,848
14Red is on a distinguished road
I believe the rule was put into place to begin to send a message to change the WAY football is played. Remember the days when defenders lowered their head and shoulders and made themselves a missile to "dislodge" the ball from the receiver. They didn't make a play on the ball, their intent was to dislodge the ball, or harm the defenseless receiver.
Personally, I've seen a change in how defense is being played the last few seasons. You start taking away the penalty, make it weaker and you'll lose all the ground you've gained.
I think the rule should remain as is. Remember folks this is all about player safety, not being punitive to your defensive player.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-10-19, 10:21 AM
adselder09 adselder09 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 05-11-07
Posts: 14,774
adselder09 is on a distinguished road
But there are plenty of instances where a hit is unintentional but still helmet-to-helmet. The launching from DBs into defenseless WRs, sure that's targeting. Two guys meeting in the hole is not, that's football.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-10-19, 02:29 PM
14Red 14Red is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 03-12-12
Posts: 4,848
14Red is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by adselder09 View Post
But there are plenty of instances where a hit is unintentional but still helmet-to-helmet. The launching from DBs into defenseless WRs, sure that's targeting. Two guys meeting in the hole is not, that's football.
I watch some, not a ton of college football, and for the most part, I don't believe I've seen an instance where a player was unjustly ejected. I think you have to take a hard line stance now, and let a few years go by before you start tinkering with the rules. It's a change in HOW The game is played on the defensive side. A few years ago, the crackback block was made illegal and it's slowly changed how player block in that situation.
I remember the days of Butkus, Jack Tatum, Andre Waters...they TRIED to hurt people, intentionally. These guys today can make too much money to have some knucklehead trying to make a highlight hit.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-10-19, 03:35 PM
adselder09 adselder09 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 05-11-07
Posts: 14,774
adselder09 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Red View Post
I watch some, not a ton of college football, and for the most part, I don't believe I've seen an instance where a player was unjustly ejected. I think you have to take a hard line stance now, and let a few years go by before you start tinkering with the rules. It's a change in HOW The game is played on the defensive side. A few years ago, the crackback block was made illegal and it's slowly changed how player block in that situation.
I remember the days of Butkus, Jack Tatum, Andre Waters...they TRIED to hurt people, intentionally. These guys today can make too much money to have some knucklehead trying to make a highlight hit.
Targeting was put into place a "few" years ago. They have enough data to make the call one way or another.

Another poster mentioned the Joey Bosa hit in the Fiesta Bowl a couple seasons ago, the final play of his college career. There have been plenty of unjustly ejections just as there have been some hits where a player got away with it - Wash St vs USC this year.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-10-19, 03:56 PM
joesports joesports is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 06-03-07
Posts: 2,882
joesports is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Red View Post
I watch some, not a ton of college football, and for the most part, I don't believe I've seen an instance where a player was unjustly ejected. I think you have to take a hard line stance now, and let a few years go by before you start tinkering with the rules. It's a change in HOW The game is played on the defensive side. A few years ago, the crackback block was made illegal and it's slowly changed how player block in that situation.
I remember the days of Butkus, Jack Tatum, Andre Waters...they TRIED to hurt people, intentionally. These guys today can make too much money to have some knucklehead trying to make a highlight hit.
Really ??





While I believe some of the target calls are warranted, many are just as much the offensive player’s fault as the defenses ... yet you almost never see the offensive player ejected.

Also, targeting doesn’t have to be just helmet to helmet contact ... players are being ejected for leading with their shoulder to the chest ... but at the last second the offensive player ducts and is hit in the head.

I believe launching into player and making contact with helmet should be ejected ... but the other just a 15 yard penalty.

Last edited by joesports; 01-11-19 at 03:10 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-11-19, 06:25 AM
Yellow_Jacket06 Yellow_Jacket06 is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 06-03-07
Location: Sidney (Not Australia)
Posts: 31,825
Yellow_Jacket06 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Yellow_Jacket06 Send a message via Yahoo to Yellow_Jacket06
You want to keep the stupid rule? Enforce it on ball carriers for lowering their heads before contact. Bet you'd see even more calls on the offense.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-11-19, 12:33 PM
cabezadecaballo cabezadecaballo is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-06-12
Location: over here
Posts: 35,813
cabezadecaballo will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Red View Post
I believe the rule was put into place to begin to send a message to change the WAY football is played. Remember the days when defenders lowered their head and shoulders and made themselves a missile to "dislodge" the ball from the receiver. They didn't make a play on the ball, their intent was to dislodge the ball, or harm the defenseless receiver.
Personally, I've seen a change in how defense is being played the last few seasons. You start taking away the penalty, make it weaker and you'll lose all the ground you've gained.
I think the rule should remain as is. Remember folks this is all about player safety, not being punitive to your defensive player.
Methinks the rule would have been better, more effective, before replay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adselder09 View Post
But there are plenty of instances where a hit is unintentional but still helmet-to-helmet. The launching from DBs into defenseless WRs, sure that's targeting. Two guys meeting in the hole is not, that's football.
no doubt

Replay - both in officiating and fans' TV viewing - and our attitude towards it takes away this sort of discretion from game officials. We are at the least common denomintor on this one. Too bad.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Richmond Heights exits game vs Kirtland EagleFan Football 150 10-07-18 08:44 AM
Is there a rule against dreadlocks? Spread All Day Football 64 07-11-18 10:14 PM
2018-19 NFHS Rule Changes zebrastripes Boys Basketball 1 05-15-18 01:38 PM
New NCAA recruiting rule - Sept 1st of Junior Year sportsfanofyear Girls Soccer 1 04-26-18 03:11 PM
NFHS survey --- Would you support these rule changes? Campolongo Wrestling 6 02-12-18 07:19 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:51 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Registration Booster - Powered By Dirt RIF CustUmz