exactly what is the targeting rule designed to accomplish?

All I know is Reuben Foster will either be paralyzed or kicked out of the NFL. And by the time he's 35 he'll have the brain of a 90yr old. I don't think I've ever seen someone hit so violently with his head down repeatedly.

quote:

---

I don't think I've ever seen someone hit so violently with his head down repeatedly.

---

Would be a strong LB core for the Saints

you can hit with the helmet as long as it's not the crown and the player isn't defenseless. you can see this because when a RB is coming into the middle he is ducking and guys are flying in.

they said that willaims wasn't defenseless when he get the helmet to helmet which wasn't the crown. however, he was wrapped up completely and motionless. he couldn't move. he was being held by an Alabama tackler. the LB came in with the helmet and almost put him out of the game.

I think Williams was defenseless in this situation. the refs should've thrown the flag and reviewed it at the very least.

You cannot lead with the crown of the helmet above the neck area on any player with the ball - defenseless or not.

Bad thing is it is something that is not clearly defined so each crew will call it differently.

I thought last night there were clearly 2 targeting penalties not called.

quote:

---

they said that willaims wasn't defenseless

---

Well, it Williams was not defenseless, then no one is defenseless. That was a spearing which has always been illegal. When I saw that after the hit on Watson, I was completely convinced that Clemson would lose. However, they have a good enough team and coaching staff to beat the gumps and the refs. Bama got every break. Every single one, so the gump fans, who are conspicuous by their absence, can go pound salt.

Stpendomalley has it right. It is a difficult call to make and two helmets can hit simultaneously also where there is no call. The speed at which these things happen also makes it difficult to call. In high school, we have to determine if you lead with the helmet

It is designed to preserve the sport by protecting the athletes from Cumulative Traumatic Encephalopathy, Paralysis, Dementia, Disability, etc.

And if this is the game we’re going to hope remains with us three decades from now, we’re going to have to let it evolve. "When in question, it is a foul," the rule says. We have to err on the side of player safety, and if that requires rules even more game-changing than targeting (it surely does), then so be it.

Saban could play the game straight up and either win or lose cleanly and preserve the sport. God knows he has enough Roster strength. But he knew Watson was going to outplay Hurts. Kiffen's ouster was a bonehead move. And he knew their Pace of Play was going to wear down that Defense if he did not try to slow Clemson down. He did not play the game fairly and he GOT WHAT HE DESERVED.

Targeting doesn't just mean helmet to helmet

quote:

---

is bama exempt?

---

It's not just Bama. I am not sure even the refs have a clear understanding of what the targeting call is all bout. Every Sat. you saw debates in the TV booths and among refs over that call.

It's all bout player safety and at lease college football is trying.

The purpose of this rule is to protect QBS.

All the helpless/defenseless language is just window dressing allowing QBS to be further protected by officials

It''s a QBCentric game and few athletes have the skill set to handle the unique requiremens of the position.

It's something I've complained about for years. The refs suck.


Inconsistencies. It needs to be a full time job where these guys are doing clinics and repetition in the offseason. They need to be recertified on the rules.

Just like with any company, constant training to keep up with the changes.

Now they might already do these things, but it isn't showing.