Targeting 1 & Targeting 2: Splitting the penalty

Seinfeld

All-American
Nov 30, 2006
11,744
8,126
113
Will have to see how this plays out, but I think that anything is better than the current rule. When you have 22 athletic monsters flying around the field on any given play, it is to be expected that helmets are going to occasionally collide. I have never liked the current rule that results in automatic ejection for it
 

Leeshouldveflanked

All-American
Nov 12, 2016
14,591
9,725
113
That was rediculus that our DB was thrown out of the Bowl Game.... then later in game the Iowa player does the same to Kylin and doesn’t even get called.
 

CochiseCowbell

Heisman
Oct 29, 2012
15,898
15,034
113
First time I've ever seen targeting when the player wasn't even tackled. I was there, & of course I haven't watched the replay.
 

JoMo MoJo

Redshirt
Dec 24, 2017
1,895
0
0
It’s a stupid solution to a ridiculous situation. The last thing you want is the refs subjective opinions to weight on the penalty. Hell, they can’t call it right most of the time anyway. But if this was instituted we would always get a targeting 2 while Bama is flawless
 
Last edited:

Willow Grove Dawg

All-American
Nov 3, 2016
8,539
6,327
113
Now we will have these morons that have been calling phantom blocks in the back when the visitor scores a TD in Tuscaloosa trying to judge intent. That will work out even better for Bama
 

MarkDallas

Sophomore
Aug 27, 2014
2,607
121
63
I'm all for it. That's more time we can watch State Farm commercials while the refs second guess each other.***
 

$altyDawg

Senior
Aug 30, 2018
1,337
616
113
I agree. The current rule just seems to be a kneejerk reaction to show something is being done without much thought going into it.
 

QuadrupleOption

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2012
1,295
1,434
93

My opinion is that targeting should never be called if the ball carrier lowers his head. A lot of calls I saw this year were called as the defender went in and the ball carrier lowered his head and initiated contact.

I think it should only be called when the offensive player is being tackled and a second defensive player comes in with helmet-to-helmet contact.
 

HumpDawgy

All-Conference
Apr 6, 2010
4,905
2,082
113
It’s a stupid solution to a ridiculous situation. The last thing you want is the refs subjective opinions to weight on the penalty. Hell, they can’t call it right most of the time anyway. But if this was instituted we would always get a targeting 2 while Bama is flawless

I agree. Putting more decision making by ignorant refs into the equation doesn't solve the issue, it makes it worse.

I say after a helmet to helmet hit, lets let the head ref show us the property tackle form on the next play.***
 

thekimmer

All-Conference
Aug 30, 2012
8,913
3,102
113
It’s a stupid solution to a ridiculous situation. The last thing you want is the refs subjective opinions to weight on the penalty. Hell, they can’t call it right most of the time anyway. But if this was instituted we would always get a targeting 2 while Bama is flawless

Oh sure right. Its preferable to keep the current situation where everybody is thrown out of the game without question.

What I would prefer is that they eliminate the mandatory suspension. That has never made sense to me.
 

philduckworth

Redshirt
Feb 20, 2015
2,228
0
0
How about no ejection on the players first offence, ejection on the 2nd offence for 1 half, 3rd offence equals 1 game. Too penal as is.
 
Maroon and White

Latest

  1. 01 Rivals Football Recruiting Mississippi State flips Colorado OL commit Li'Marcus Jones: 'They never gave up on me'
  2. 02 Maroon and White Mississippi State "right in the middle" of work on retaining QB Kamario Taylor
  3. 03 Maroon and White Football Points of Focus from Mississippi State HC Jeff Lebby in Week 11
  4. 04 Maroon and White Football Same Frustrations for Mississippi State, Jeff Lebby entering Week 11
  5. 05 Maroon and White Basketball Mississippi State vs. Jackson State: How, Where, and When to Watch Bulldog Basketball