Started By
Message
re: bad targeting flags.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:00 am to RockyTop247
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:00 am to RockyTop247
His helmet did, in fact connect with the receiver's helmet. Did it carry the weight of the hit with it, no. But it is a rule.
Flying wedge, hands to the helmet, chop blocks. All formerly legal plays changed for player safety. With the equipment the defenders have on now, they can hit players so hard that it is dangerous. If you don't like it, wait until someone dies on national television and see what happens to the sport you love so much.
Flying wedge, hands to the helmet, chop blocks. All formerly legal plays changed for player safety. With the equipment the defenders have on now, they can hit players so hard that it is dangerous. If you don't like it, wait until someone dies on national television and see what happens to the sport you love so much.
2
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:05 am to GnashRebel
I agree having to protect the players. But moseley hit the receiver in the best possible place. Going for the legs is just as bad imo
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:10 am to RockyTop247
Targeting just seems to have gotten called so much lately.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:18 am to RockyTop247
Moseley did everything he could to keep from targeting.
That hit could have been so much worse if he had actually used the crown of his helmet.
That hit could have been so much worse if he had actually used the crown of his helmet.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:23 am to Rescue22
I think the targeting foul called against Florida this past Saturday was incorrect. It appeared to be initial contact with shoulder and facemask striking the UGA helmet. But, perhaps the worst thing was Danielson's comment after the replay where he said there is no place in our game for that. This indicates that either Danielson has lost his marbles, or that there is pressure to embrace the targeting stance. I think perhaps the latter because even when he said it, it did not sound sincere like it was his thought.
Regardless, the consequences of incidental targeting are too severe. The next game attribute should be changeable by the conference. Flagrant targeting is another matter, but there are too many incidental targeting penalties that could adversely interfere with important games.
Regardless, the consequences of incidental targeting are too severe. The next game attribute should be changeable by the conference. Flagrant targeting is another matter, but there are too many incidental targeting penalties that could adversely interfere with important games.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:27 am to Supravol22
quote:Isn't hitting a "protected player" low verboten now too? Or is that just the NFL? Seattle had a call on that last night actually.
Agreed. I guess the NCAA is fine with everyone going for the knees now since hitting in the chest gets you ejected
quote:The thing that gets me, it's usually the person delivers with the crown who gets hurt. But that's not the perception being used to justify all this.
Moseley did everything he could to keep from targeting.
That hit could have been so much worse if he had actually used the crown of his helmet.
And another thing, I perceive we're seeing more and more defense players hitting (and injuring) each other in order to avoid potential calls because there is no latitude. I say perceive because I obviously have no facts or stats.
This post was edited on 11/2/15 at 9:31 am
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:28 am to GnashRebel
quote:
His helmet did, in fact connect with the receiver's helmet.
Re-watch the clip. His helmet never touched the receiver's helmet. His shoulder pad is what hit the receiver's helmet.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:28 am to geauxnavybeatbama
quote:
that targeting call on the florida player this weekend was bullshite
Agreed. He lowered his chin to turn his body but all the impact was from his hands.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:44 am to RockyTop247
Ricky Seals Jones during the A&M vs State game.
OFFENSIVE targeting!
RSJ hit the defender in the shoulder and the contact happened to carry though to the other player's helmet tangentially. Clearly no intent to "head hunt" the other guy with a helmet to helmet hit, just a good block. Ejected.
There are other bad targeting calls I've seen with other teams around the league but can't remember specifically. It's out of control.
OFFENSIVE targeting!
RSJ hit the defender in the shoulder and the contact happened to carry though to the other player's helmet tangentially. Clearly no intent to "head hunt" the other guy with a helmet to helmet hit, just a good block. Ejected.
There are other bad targeting calls I've seen with other teams around the league but can't remember specifically. It's out of control.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:47 am to RockyTop247
I hear you. I do not think that there was any intent to hit the guy in the helmet. But it was close and the NCAA and NFL are scared of what is coming their way. None of use likes to see our player tossed for something undeserving. But there is a specter of litigation and regulation hanging over the sport that they cannot ignore. They call it tight and I am sure that is what they have been ordered to do.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:52 am to Cooter Davenport
quote:
OFFENSIVE targeting!
That's bizarre. Although Jalen Hurd has posterized a few defensive players by lowering his head and crushing their fricking soul.
Posted on 11/2/15 at 9:56 am to Vols&Shaft83
quote:Well, since this box has been opened... what if a RB lowers his head to plow through a tackle and he's running forward. D player lowers his head too...
OFFENSIVE targeting!
That's bizarre. Although Jalen Hurd has posterized a few defensive players by lowering his head and crushing their fricking soul.
1. Is it targeting on the RB is D player is not running towards him?
2. Is it targeting on the RB if D player is standing flat footed but he bounces off like a puss and goes backwards?
3. What if D player is going forward, but RB knocks him on his arse like a boss?
Posted on 11/2/15 at 10:03 am to olbemw7
quote:
His helmet did, in fact connect with the receiver's helmet.
quote:
Re-watch the clip. His helmet never touched the receiver's helmet. His shoulder pad is what hit the receiver's helmet.
His shoulder pads only hit the receiver's facemask because the receiver lowered his head.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News