re: I Just Don’t Understand How They Missed The First Targeting On Burrow

I took a guy out in Jr. high football game many years ago in similar fashion. Got high fives from everyone. I was so mad at myself for nearly killing the guy I quit football. Glad the guy survived for sure. Would have haunted me to this day. There's no place in the game for that kind of cheap shot. Should have been a personal foul IMHO. I felt good at the time and my adrenaline was off the charts. However, I do give the guy for UCF credit for not "targeting" Burrow. He definitely had the opportunity and those don't come around too often when you can take out the other team's star QB. Would have probably changed the outcome of the game had Burrow been unable to return. Mixed thoughts on that play. We would be talking a lot more about it had Burrow been sidelined the rest of the game AND we lost. Probably woke Burrow up! LOL

Refs must have missed the clear laceration on Burrows chin after that dirty. UCF player and fans can frick right off.

Targeting is a stupid rule. I don't complain when its not called on either team.

I love all the "hardcore" Tiger fans coming to this thread to show their ignorance of the rules while calling anyone who saw the obvious a pussy.

This one play was a textbook example of either blatant incompetent officiating, or corruption. Could be both.

In one play, these refs missed the following:

Obvious Defensive PI
Obvious target of a defenseless player (read the rules idiots. A QB on a COP is a defenseless player. LSU had a player ejected at Auburn two years ago for the EXACT SAME THING)
Not one, but TWO obvious unsportsmanlike penalties.

IF this play is called correctly, it would have been first and goal for LSU with the score still 7-3. Why? Because PI would have been 15 yards, the unsportsmanlike would have been another, and then two taunting penalties AFTER the play. Should have been THREE 15-yard penalties marked off against them (would have been half the distance).

But nope.

It would be nice if fans would read the damn rules before coming in here to white knight for incompetent/corrupt officials.

quote:

---

Cause it wasn’t targeting. Got hit in the shoulder! Was it a crappy hit absolutely but if that would have been devin white you would be on here post a gif of the hit and how it was such a textbook hit

---

On the White replay I never saw the QB's helmet move like it was hit nor did I see it hit.

On Joes's hit one replay showed his helmet move and I saw it hit.

We saw different replays I guess.

It was easy to tell which team the ref.,s had their money on ! If u don't think Borrow was targeted u are a DUMB arse & probably did not watch the game!

quote:

---

He also launched himself. In the replay u can see he launched himself upwards into Burrow.

Which is specifically stated in the rule as a targeting violation

---

This is correct IF the contact is made to the head/neck area. That is the issue at hand, the officials apparently did not see the contact as being to the head/neck.

My problem is that while head/neck was the secondary contact, it has been called all year, particularly when the QB is in or finishing his throwing motion. Devin white hit is a perfect example.

This should be technically no different than that situation. In both scenarios, the QB is by definition defenseless, so the hit is what we are looking at for targeting.

Roughing the passer, on the other hand, has more leeway because it has the caveat that any force that is more than necessary constitutes roughing. The QB has to be in the act or finishing the act of throwing.

Regardless of how this affected LSU this season, there is an inherent lack of consistency within the 15 yard rules. They need to incorporate intent and wrecklessness into the scope of what constitutes an ejection.

The block on Burrow was exactly why this rule, and the concept of a defenseless player, was put into place. The blocker could have taken burrow out of the play simply by standing in front of him, much less giving him a hard shove that still would have sent a message. Are we trying to keep players safe? Or just direct hits to their heads safe?

quote:

---

The block on Burrow was exactly why this rule, and the concept of a defenseless player, was put into place. The blocker could have taken burrow out of the play simply by standing in front of him, much less giving him a hard shove that still would have sent a message. Are we trying to keep players safe? Or just direct hits to their heads safe?

---

This, IMO, is why the NFL is MUCH better product now than CFB.

CFB is making it clear player safety is only a concern if you play for one of the brand teams. If you play for a brand team, you are also allowed free reign to destroy your opponent.

I didn't watch Bama/OU, but there was a Bama fan that posted a GIF of Bama getting away with ANOTHER blatant target on the QB for OU. This was the effing Heisman winner, and CFB didn't care to "protect" him. Why? Well, you know the answer.

Quack Quack, MF.

Imagine Brady or Brees throwing a pick in the NFL and a player doing this to them. Not only would the refs call the flag, that player would be ejected, likely suspended a game (depending on past transgressions) and fined.

NCAA? Well, depending on what team you play for, you may be rewarded with constant replays on Sportcenter for your great illegal hit.

NCAA Football is slowly becoming WWE. That game Tuesday was getting out of hand fast with the dirty hits and smack talking. For a while there, I thought the refs wanted that in order to help drive ratings. God knows that stadium was empty.

quote:

---

he launched himself into Burrow using the crown of his helmet

---

No, if you look at the video, he led with his shoulder. It was a football play. Joe got lit up. I hate it. Not sure what the definition of "launching" is, and I don't think the refs do either.

As has been said, it's a bad rule that needs to be changed.