• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Targeting suspensions

Flusker

Flusker

Recruit
2 Year Member
Has there been a decision yet? Will these guys be back for the full NW game because of Wisky avoiding us? Sorry if I missed it discussed in other threads.
 




ShortSideOption said:
Lol NCAA. But conference can appeal.
Click to expand...
Interesting ... I’m assuming the replay & review process was entirely upheld by B1G officials. Yet, appeals go to NCAA ... smh.

Not an hour or two later I saw similar plays in the Alabama - Tennessee game that were similar and overturned.

NCAA needs an adjustment on this targeting rule to allow for at least two levels of penalties — one that is inadvertent & doesn’t equate to automatic ejection.
 
KW has inserted himself where he should not have. An administrator's downfall is being a micromanager. That's why smart folks surround themselves with people that they trust.
 




set up a second TV (for sports channel surfing) in my office :Banana: & had Miss St / Alabama on also last night
(opposite OSU/Pedophile St).... Anyway - saw two legitimate helmet to helmet targeting calls on the Tide (on the same drive) not even mentioned / discussed - too busy showing replays of whether a WR possessed the ball long enough for a catch, rather than notice the rag doll helmet to helmet spearing by the safety.

Guess my point being the subjectivity of said infraction aside, enforcement is clearly not a priority for some conferences/crews.

Edit - didn't mean to sidetrack this thread - just venting about the subjectivity of this call which has such significant (often multi-game) implications. Also the overall reluctance to review and overturn (or reduce time served based on severity) or have a legitimate appeal process is beyond frustrating.
 
Last edited:
coherbie said:
set up a second TV (for sports channel surfing) in my office :Banana: & had Miss St / Alabama on also last night
(opposite OSU/Pedophile St).... Anyway - saw two legitimate helmet to helmet targeting calls on the Tide (on the same drive) not even mentioned / discussed - too busy showing replays of whether a WR possessed the ball long enough for a catch, rather than notice the rag doll helmet to helmet spearing by the safety.

Guess my point being the subjectivity of said infraction aside, enforcement is clearly not a priority for some conferences/crews.

Edit - didn't mean to sidetrack this thread - just venting about the subjectivity of this call which has such significant (often multi-game) implications. Also the overall reluctance to review and overturn (or reduce time served based on severity) or have a legitimate appeal process is beyond frustrating.
Click to expand...

Agreed...both in the Alabama game and even a couple in the OSU/PSU game that were more egregious. But clearly it is left up to each conference. For instance, in the Clemson game the DE launched and speared the QB's helmet - I think it was called Roughing the Passer...then the booth buzzed down and said to review it and they changed it to Targeting and ejected the player.

I can understand the variability of DPI and holding calls, but you don't lose playing time for those - something as "penal" (h/t Joel Klatt) should be standardized across the board. It is hard to tell intent, but only the really bad "heat seeking missile" type of hits with the crown of the helmet should likely result in ejection.
 
twokgrad said:
Agreed...both in the Alabama game and even a couple in the OSU/PSU game that were more egregious. But clearly it is left up to each conference. For instance, in the Clemson game the DE launched and speared the QB's helmet - I think it was called Roughing the Passer...then the booth buzzed down and said to review it and they changed it to Targeting and ejected the player.

I can understand the variability of DPI and holding calls, but you don't lose playing time for those - something as "penal" (h/t Joel Klatt) should be standardized across the board. It is hard to tell intent, but only the really bad "heat seeking missile" type of hits with the crown of the helmet should likely result in ejection.
Click to expand...
I watched the one in the Clemson game and it was egregious. I was shocked the refs only called roughing the passer, but the replay booth got the call right. The announcers were on the spot with the call. That's something I've noticed between our game and a few others. The announcers seem to have a clearer idea of the rule than some of the officiating crews.
 
The NCAA should also use a review this year when a game is cancelled. This isn't a normal year so why treat this disqualification penalty as normal? With reduced schedules, if a player is supposed to sit the 1st half of a game that ends up being cancelled due to COVID outbreak, why not let them back? They (and their teammates) already lost a full game.

Bureaucracy at its best...

Pretty much everything should be up for review/ discussion this year.
 



There was DOUBLE targeting tackle by 2 Texass defenders against OK state and BOTH players were clearing targeting. Surprised the OK player actually got up after hits by 2 Whorns. Of course there was nothing called. Targeting is just an easy way for some refs to change a game while tossing undeserving players out of a game.
 
#44 for Iowa about tore the head off of the Northwestern QB and they did not even look at it.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top