Started By
Message

The "targeting" call will be forgotten in short order...

Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:03 am
Posted by Lonnie Utah
Utah!
Member since Jul 2012
28920 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:03 am
When OSU runs Tx out of the building next week.
Posted by Darindawg
Member since May 2022
3084 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:06 am to
I doubt it will be forgotten by Arizona St fans. I can honestly say that was the worst call I've ever seen in all of my years of watching football...and I'm 55 years old. I've yet to see a commentator or even NFL officials who disagree.
Posted by Nasty_Canasta
Your Mom’s house
Member since Dec 2024
540 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:19 am to
The hit by Bullard on MHJr was a pretty egregious hit in the peach bowl a few years ago.
Posted by tBrand
Member since Oct 2022
1331 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:22 am to
Yeah but his team benefited from that hit, so it was just a clean football play.

Every fanbase is the same.
Posted by Aguga
Member since Aug 2021
3171 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:23 am to
quote:

I doubt it will be forgotten by Arizona St fans. I can honestly say that was the worst call I've ever seen in all of my years of watching football...and I'm 55 years old. I've yet to see a commentator or even NFL officials who disagree.


Was a good no call.
Posted by SteelerBravesDawg
Member since Sep 2020
43337 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:24 am to
quote:

I doubt it will be forgotten by Arizona St fans. I can honestly say that was the worst call I've ever seen in all of my years of watching football...and I'm 55 years old. I've yet to see a commentator or even NFL officials who disagree.

It was a good no-call.

Posted by HTX Horn
Houston
Member since Jul 2021
649 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:29 am to
quote:

I can honestly say that was the worst call I've ever seen in all of my years of watching football...and I'm 55 years old.

This sounds a little dramatic to me. I agree that by the book it should’ve been a targeting call, but I’ve seen at least a dozen calls this year alone that were malicious hits with intent to harm. The replay on this clearly demonstrates incidental helmet to helmet contact while making a play. Again I think that because of the way the rule is written that it was, technically, a “targeting” penalty. But to say it’s “the worst call in 55 years of watching football” tells me you may have a habit of dozing off during games or something.
Posted by AZHorn
Southern Arizona
Member since Aug 2021
931 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:35 am to
quote:

I can honestly say that was the worst call I've ever seen in all of my years of watching football.


What about the other targeting call they reviewed in the same game where the ASU player launched himself off the ground into the defenseless Texas receiver and hit him high in the head and neck area? That was a no call too and a more intentional hit..

Screw the ASU fans, their team got away with just as much crap in that game, let em whine...
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 10:38 am
Posted by Darindawg
Member since May 2022
3084 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:37 am to
You know better than NFL officials?
Posted by deeprig9
Unincorporated Ozora
Member since Sep 2012
70190 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:39 am to
quote:

The hit by Bullard on MHJr was a pretty egregious hit in the peach bowl a few years ago.


Led with the shoulder, hit the shoulder, the helmet contact was secondary.

Against ASU, he led with the crown of his helmet, and the contact was initiated to the helmet, on a defenseless receiver trying to reel the ball in.
Posted by Darindawg
Member since May 2022
3084 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:40 am to
I was with your wife last night and she didn't "doze off"...and uh, she said, 'for a change'. Don't shoot the messenger.

May we meet in the finals and the best team win.
Posted by Gunga Din
Oklahoma
Member since Jul 2020
2445 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:44 am to
quote:

It was a good no-call.


Since you aren't a Texas fan who naturally won't admit the truth...

Why do you think it was a "good" no call?
Posted by Aguga
Member since Aug 2021
3171 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 10:45 am to
I do, I’m an anonymous internet poster.
Posted by JacieNY
Member since Jul 2024
571 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:01 am to
What about

When you see or hear this at the start of a someone's rebuttal you know right away they don't have a good answer to the argument.
Posted by Nomadic Bengal
Member since Jul 2022
2551 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:21 am to
Interesting take after you've spent the better part of this season crying about being unfairly treated by the refs.
Posted by Dawg4Life47
Beach
Member since Sep 2013
10655 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:25 am to
Bullard hit was shoulder to shoulder

UTx hit was head to head

So…very different
Posted by AUTubaHerd
Member since Nov 2012
2065 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:43 am to
quote:

What about the other targeting call they reviewed in the same game where the ASU player launched himself off the ground into the defenseless Texas receiver and hit him high in the head and neck area? That was a no call too and a more intentional hit..


Yeah, that one was textbook for what the targeting rule was created to stop, and was a no call in ASU’s favor.

Yet everyone is self immolating over one that was a form tackle with unintentional face mask to face mask contact. The rule as written requires “forceful contact” to be targeting, which I don’t think it was.

More importantly the “rules analysts” don’t even seem to address this aspect of the rule as far as I can tell.
Posted by Capn_Bevo
Austin
Member since Jan 2019
916 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:46 am to
quote:

I was with your wife last night and she didn't "doze off"...and uh, she said, 'for a change'. Don't shoot the messenger.
Watch out folks! He's 55 and ready to frick your wife! Haha
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 11:47 am
Posted by AZHorn
Southern Arizona
Member since Aug 2021
931 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:00 pm to
quote:

What about

When you see or hear this at the start of a someone's rebuttal you know right away they don't have a good answer to the argument.


Whenever you see an OU or A&M fan post about a Texas game, you need to be skeptical as well and understand their statement will contain 50% hate and 50 % bias and BS.

I was just saying the officiating was bad both ways in that game. In my opinion, both could have been called for targeting easily, but neither play resulted in the penalty. It was tit for tat.
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 12:04 pm
Posted by SteelerBravesDawg
Member since Sep 2020
43337 posts
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:13 pm to
quote:

Why do you think it was a "good" no call?

There was no launch. He did not lead with the crown of his helmet. It was helmet-to-helmet but he led with his facemask. There wasn't any malicious intent behind his hit, it was just a football play IMO.

Page 1 2 3
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on X and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter