- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I didn't get to see the Weeks targeting play. Was it legit or nit pickey?
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:18 am to TigerBait1971
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:18 am to TigerBait1971
Basically defenders aren't allowed to go low if the ball carrier also goes low. The old adage that "low man wins" is basically gone. It's physically impossible to go low and keep the crown up. It's okay if the carrier stays upright and you hit him in the waist, but when the run also goes low, then it becomes targeting. The rule is bad as written and needs to be revised to at least address this issue.
0
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:22 am to MRTigerFan
quote:
It didn't look like targeting when I saw it live but as soon as I saw the replay
I’m still irrationally angry at stadium replays. They didn’t show it once. Then you couldn’t hear the announcement from the Ref. Nobody in our section knew what was going on.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:27 am to Manswers
Agreed
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:27 am to TopWaterTiger
If they can replay for targeting then they should replay for holding!
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:27 am to LSU Patrick
quote:
They had to call it. They really need to fix the rule somehow. It is ridiculous.
When you watch the first live video, there’s absolutely nothing there.
Does the replay booth slow down every tackle in a game to search for it?
No way that’s noticed live. It looked like 3 guys gang tackling a ball carrier. Nothing looked dangerous.
Also, it used to be a defenseless receiver rule. It was rare for a ball carrier.
This post was edited on 9/14/25 at 8:30 am
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:36 am to Capo
I just saw the replay of the targeting call against Vandy when they hit Sellers. That was garbage. Maybe the worst targeting penalty ever! Whoever makes these decisions should have repercussions.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:51 am to MRTigerFan
Set aside the rule and the slow motion. This could be called on close to half the plays in the game. IMO, if a penalty wasn’t called on the field, it shouldn’t be initiated in Bham or wherever by some jack legged replay guy.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:54 am to TigerBait1971
By rule it was targeting. It wasn't deliberate but he did lower his head and make contact with the guy's facemask. It was a good call.
They really should adjust the rule to where they can let a player stay in the game for an inadvertent target. If a guy ends up targeting but it's clear it was not an intentional hit, it should just be a 15 yard penalty. The ejections should be only for the ones that are clearly intentional. But who am I to judge the football gods?
They really should adjust the rule to where they can let a player stay in the game for an inadvertent target. If a guy ends up targeting but it's clear it was not an intentional hit, it should just be a 15 yard penalty. The ejections should be only for the ones that are clearly intentional. But who am I to judge the football gods?
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:55 am to TigerBait1971
Picky BS
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:57 am to TigerBait1971
The REAL targeting was when Florida cheap shotted Nuss, with his helmet, when he was on the ground.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 8:57 am to Tarpon08
He was coming in leading with the shoulder pad but when the Fl. guy lowered his helmet barely hit the other guy's! Judgement call was WRONG
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:14 am to bstaceyau19
Does he have to sit out first half next game?
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:29 am to TigerBait1971
People are gonna have opinions about whether it was targeting or not, but the rule is stupid, no way you should get ejected over that. Give a 15 yarder, but cmon. Leave the ejections to the blatant leaving your feet, projectile helmet to helmet collisions. They gotta change that rule
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:32 am to tke_swamprat
quote:
I just saw the replay of the targeting call against Vandy when they hit Sellers
This.
Targeting has ruined college football.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:35 am to TigerBait1971
Zach Weeks is legit as well
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:37 am to TigerBait1971
It was the correct call by the letter of the law.
Actually, BK had a great response when asked about it in the post game press conference (if you can get past he’s meltdown on the first question)
Actually, BK had a great response when asked about it in the post game press conference (if you can get past he’s meltdown on the first question)
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:39 am to TigerBait1971
I think it should have to be egregious for it to warrant an ejection in which case this was wasn’t. Such trash to kick a key player out of a game over this.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:41 am to KC Tiger
quote:
He is not a RB, he is a WR
While it was the correct call, the fact that he was a WR is not relevant.
It was after the catch and he was acting as a runner and no longer “defenseless”
Again, watch BKs press conference. He had a great take on it.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:43 am to SA4LSU
quote:
Does he have to sit out first half next game
No, it happens in the first series of the game.
If it happens in the second half, you sit the first half of the next game.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:50 am to Pikes Peak Tiger
Ok makes sense, thank you Sir. I was thinking about the call on Devin White which again a little suspect. I agree with the post that says you should have a 15 yard penalty on one’s such as this and leave the ejections for the more egregious hits where there is clearly intent.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News