Started By
Message
Will mUSChamp has a fix for these excessive targeting calls ...
Posted on 9/18/18 at 12:49 pm
Posted on 9/18/18 at 12:49 pm
He says issue color-coded cards like they do in soccer ... and he's not kidding. It's gotten outta hand.
LINK: https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/south-carolina-football/will-muschamp-targeting-fix-college-football-rule-yellow-red-card/
LINK: https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/south-carolina-football/will-muschamp-targeting-fix-college-football-rule-yellow-red-card/
quote:
“You gotta lower your targets, can’t lower them too much — they call that, too. But you have to keep the crown of your helmet out of all contact,” Muschamp said. “When you are talking in terms of protecting a defenseless player — which a quarterback in the pocket is a defenseless player or a quarterback that is sliding is a defenseless player — obviously no head contact but you have to lower your targets. You have to get the head out of the contact, we talk to our players all the time.”
“Now, me and you sitting here having this conversation is a lot different when you are rushing the passer. You finally beat the 330-pounder that’s been – that you’ve been headbutting for four quarters and you got an opportunity for a sack but you have to remember to keep your head out of it. It’s very easy to be critical of a guy that doesn’t necessarily get his head out of it.
“We talk about it and we coach it as hard as we can right now. It’s no different than tackling right now. In conversation, of us just sitting here talking, it’s a really easy conversation but when you have a 220-pound running back barrelling down on you lowering his head, and you are telling a guy not to lower his head and have a little bit of crown contact — that’s why you wear a helmet. It’s difficult. It’s difficult.”
Here’s where Muschamp offered up a suggestion that’s easy to get on board with: why throw a player out if he doesn’t maliciously hit someone? In those situations, handing him a warning makes sense and if it’s down again, toss them out. If the initial hit appears malicious, an ejection would make sense immediately.
“I think they outta, like they have in soccer, yellow cards and (red) cards and all that? Well, some of these are malicious contact. Kick a guy out if it’s malicious contact,” Muschamp offered up. “But if it’s not malicious contact, if you want to give him a 15-yard penalty, that’s fine but we are going to kick a guy out of the game because he’s tackling a guy on our sideline — the guy weighs 220-pounds and he’s barrelling down? That’s what I think.”
10
Posted on 9/18/18 at 12:54 pm to scrooster
He's right. This actually makes a lot of sense.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 12:55 pm to scrooster
Makes sense
Posted on 9/18/18 at 12:59 pm to Old Sarge
Get rid of helmets and you don't have to worry about and I'm not joking
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:01 pm to scrooster
I don't disagree with him. There is no reason for a player making unintentional targeting to be ejected from the game the first time he does it. It should be how soccer deals with it or how basketball has two levels of flagrant fouls. If someone launches and spears a defenseless player with the crown of his helmet, then sure, eject him from the game. But if a player makes incidental contact with his helmet while making a football play, then he should not be ejected on his first offense. The way the rule is written is too broad and honestly not fair.
This post was edited on 9/18/18 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:04 pm to scrooster
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:07 pm to Philippines4LSU
quote:
He's right. This actually makes a lot of sense.
It really does.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:07 pm to scrooster
Pretty good idea.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:08 pm to kbrake37
quote:
Get rid of helmets and you don't have to worry about and I'm not joking
I've said the same thing honestly. What the people writing the rules also don't realize is that physics prevent players from making plays under the rules in many situations. A player can lower his body to make a form tackle between the numbers, but if they're running at 15 mph and the opponent lowers his body at the last second, helmet to helmet contact is virtually unavoidable. And honestly, in many circumstances, it is physically impossible to contort your body to make a tackle while also being in compliance with the targeting rule. It's gotten quite ridiculous. Everyone know what a dirty hit is and isn't. But now they're ejecting players for things inherent to the sport.
This post was edited on 9/18/18 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:10 pm to scrooster
Although he's right, the NCAA is too scared of concussion lawsuits to walk anything back that is safety related. We are stuck with this system because of our litigious society.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:12 pm to scrooster
He's right... and I agree with the yellow/red card/flag... some of these ejections are getting fricking ridiculous
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:12 pm to kbrake37
quote:
Get rid of helmets and you don't have to worry about and I'm not joking
Or go back to leather (or synthetic soft helmets) or some kind, without face masks.
But then you'd have to deal with broken noses and fractured orbital sockets like the old days. Busted jaws and missing teeth.
Helmets are a necessity for obvious reasons. Especially for the guys wearing glasses or contacts ... like Rick Sandidge for instance.
Bottom line is that there are better ways to do it than are being done now.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:12 pm to kbrake37
I proposed to go back to leather helmets 5 or 6 years ago
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:14 pm to kbrake37
quote:
Get rid of helmets
Just get rid of the face masks
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:16 pm to kbrake37
quote:
Get rid of helmets and you don't have to worry about and I'm not joking
Meh I think that guys have already played so much at this point with helmets that even without it on they'd be inclined to do what they do.
This really goes way back. Kids just don't know how to tackle, and they just launch themselves.
And if you look back to years pre helmets, there were a lot of deaths.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:18 pm to scrooster
I don't know much about Rugby but how are injuries in that sport?
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:19 pm to deeprig9
quote:
Although he's right, the NCAA is too scared of concussion lawsuits to walk anything back that is safety related. We are stuck with this system because of our litigious society.
You are also forgetting about lawsuits for not fixing the problem. That is why it is there. You got to either change your approach or slow down!
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:19 pm to deeprig9
quote:
Although he's right, the NCAA is too scared of concussion lawsuits to walk anything back that is safety related. We are stuck with this system because of our litigious society.
Honestly, this is what I don't even understand anymore. The NFL, to my understanding, was sued large in part because they had conducted research as to the effects of head trauma and intentionally hid that information from the players. Now that everyone who hasn't been living under a rock is fully aware of the risks involved and dangers of CTE, there should be no basis to sue if you were provided notice of all the potential dangers and decided to take that risk anyways. Let's take baseball, for instance. A pitcher throws a pitch that hits someone in the face, causing serious injury and head trauma. Player was wearing a helmet and the pitcher didn't throw at the batter intentionally. Should the pitcher be ejected for an act that wasn't intentional? Does the batter sue major league baseball? No, it's just an unfortunate reality of the sport in certain situations. Football is a violent sport. They wear pads and helmets for a reason. The people who play these sports, in the year 2018, are well aware of all the inherent health risks involved. If they still choose to partake, that's on them. I realize we live in a litigious society, but if I'm a judge and a football player sues with all the knowledge we have know about brain injuries, I'm not even entertaining awarding him damages.
I'm not saying you're wrong, because I do agree with you that the rules will never be brought backwards, but I also think the logic by the decision makers is flawed.
This post was edited on 9/18/18 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:24 pm to scrooster
In 10-15 years, people aren't going to give the issue a second thought as a new generation of players grows up with their playing style informed by the targeting rules from the start. It's going to be rough for a while longer, but the rules will have their intended effect eventually.
Posted on 9/18/18 at 1:26 pm to randomways
quote:
In 10-15 years, people aren't going to give the issue a second thought as a new generation of players grows up with their playing style informed by the targeting rules from the start. It's going to be rough for a while longer, but the rules will have their intended effect eventually.
In 10-15 years, I think more kids will be playing soccer and baseball. Youth participation in football has already declined a lot recently. I expect that trend to continue.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News