Started By
Message

FBS coaches support splitting targeting rule into two categories

Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:11 pm
Posted by BigBrod81
Houma
Member since Sep 2010
18971 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:11 pm
quote:

Todd Berry, the executive director of the American Football Coaches Association, said Wednesday that the FBS coaches in their annual meeting unanimously supported a model that would assign Targeting 1 or Targeting 2 to a player who makes forcible contact with the crown of his helmet. Targeting 1 fouls would result in a 15-yard penalty but no ejection or suspension. Targeting 2 fouls would result in an automatic ejection and potential suspension.

The current rule states any targeting foul results in a player being automatically ejected and, if the foul occurred in the second half of a game, suspended for the first half of the next contest. Every potential targeting rule is reviewed by replay officials, and the reply booth can initiate a targeting review if it isn't called on the field.



quote:

Berry referred to flagrant fouls in basketball, where fouls are split into Flagrant 1 and Flagrant 2, as a potential model for college football's targeting rule.

"Targeting 1 would carry a 15-yard penalty, meaning that there was no malicious intent here," Berry said. "We recognize this was not something where they're trying to hurt or maim someone else. Targeting 2 would be that of malicious intent, the one we're all trying to get rid of. And, to further that, our coaches have suggested if you have multiple Targeting 2 penalties over the course of the year, we would like to see that individual be even more severely punished than a one-game suspension. We need to eliminate those people from the game if we can't eliminate the act."



quote:

The earliest a change could happen would be the 2020 college football season.


LINK
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
116327 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:13 pm to
That's a good start, because the rule as it stands now is completely and utterly absurd.
Posted by RemouladeSawce
Uranus
Member since Sep 2008
13989 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:17 pm to
quote:

"Targeting 2 would be that of malicious intent, the one we're all trying to get rid of."
Malicious intent really isn't an issue anymore. Taylor Mays isn't out there killing people. None of the nonsense targeting calls deal with a malicious intent element. Also don't know how malicious intent is determined. 90% of nonsense targetings have turned into people trying to make a play and body parts aren't always easily controlled.

I don't know if the prescription is right but if the medicine is correct (a lone 15 yard penalty) okay by me.
This post was edited on 1/9/19 at 3:19 pm
Posted by Pedro
Geaux Hawks
Member since Jul 2008
33728 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:17 pm to
quote:

Todd Berry
Talons out
Posted by wildtigercat93
Member since Jul 2011
112370 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:17 pm to
The rule needs to incorporate fault on the offensive player and should always take into account intent.
Posted by Dr RC
The Money Pit
Member since Aug 2011
58133 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 3:28 pm to
Why cant it start for 2019? There are targeting hits and then there are TARGETING hits.

It's pretty obvious when you see one that is clearly an accident vs one where the guy went in at best like a total moron without regard to safety and at worst an attempt to knock a dude out.
This post was edited on 1/9/19 at 4:53 pm
Posted by BCMCubs
Colorado
Member since Nov 2011
22146 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 5:09 pm to
Something absolutely needs to be done
Posted by S
RIP Wayde
Member since Jan 2007
155938 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 5:12 pm to
quote:

suspension


Posted by JJ27
Member since Sep 2004
60567 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 5:15 pm to
No no no. They do not need to give the refs this authority in any way. Keep everything the same, but take away the ejection. Bare minimum take out the ejection carrying over to the next damn game.
Posted by forever lsu30
Member since Nov 2005
3954 posts
Posted on 1/9/19 at 5:30 pm to
Attention needs to be brought to the reply procedure that when a defender is going in to correctly tackle an offensive player & said offensive player's body is altered in any way by his own action or the action of another player causing him to then take a helmet to helmet hit should result in the flag being waived off.

I absolutely despise seeing a player getting flagged & even worse ejected for a clean intended hit where in the last millisecond the ball carrier slips or ducks or bends from another tackle/hit.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram