re: Targeting rule good or bad...

I get the distinctions you're trying to make, but you need to work on the verbiage "targetting without malice" is nonsense. Targeting is, by definition, malicious and intentional.

The college rulebook has no specified requirement of intent, so that is where things get muddy in the enforcement. I agree they should add some options for unintentional helmet to helmet tackles to be penalized as unnecessary roughness or add another unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, call it "illegal hit" or "dangerous tackle" or something. with the penalty for that being 15 yards and the player's first unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. I think football should add penalties that hold a player out for an extended period of time like hockey, but falls short of ejection.