4 Players Ejected From Ole Miss - Louisville In The 1st Half For Targetting

Spot on. 

The frequency of targeting calls is becoming a major problem

cept for that Ohio St DB.

Agree it’s disruptive, but with pending litigation around CTE that the NCAA is more worried about than they were NIL, I wouldn’t expect it to change any time soon.

I've always thought targeting penalties should be accumulative through the season. One targeting can be an accident. Another targeting can be a momentary lapse in judgement. More than that, there's a problem. So let me propose targeting penalties, cumulative through the season.

First penalty, 15 yards. Second, 15 yards + out for two halves. Third, 15 yards + out for two games. Fourth, disqualified for remainder of season.

I have my extraordinary doubts anyone would get four targeting penalties in a season.

I'd be good with your second proposal. Agreed that targeting calls are problematic, because they're increasingly happening in situations which are out of control of the defender (e.g., QB slides).

But what I'd hate to see is targeting (like, actual targeting) become a *resource* for teams. Remember how MSU DBs used to interfere on every play, and dare the refs to call PI on every play? If targeting is only a 15 yard penalty, I don't think it's a stretch to say that certain teams would gladly take the *chance* of a 15 yard penalty in exchange for knocking the opposing QB out of the game. And then the backup. And then the 3rd string.

Remember how Minnesota used to headhunt? Then Purdue caught on. Depending on the linebacker, Wisconsin could get a little targety. Under Dantonio, it was a given that some 'roid raging defender would be actively trying to hurt opposing players.

Those are violent hits to the head. Yes, absolutely they should be ejected for one little game when they carelessly risk permanent injury to another “kid.”

There is some hugely flawed logic with the idea that many targeting calls in one game on the same team means the rule is broken and needs to be revised.  That is a “blinders on” view, when the obvious truth of having many targeting calls in one game on the same team is that the coaches are not doing a good enough job of coaching these kids to avoid the bad hits.  This is Kiffin by the way. 

I agree withyour point but in this case, the guy was coming from the side, not straight on.

QBs are slowing up before stepping OB to draw the late hit. Thanks, basketball. 

The QB slide is a large problem with targeting. It should be a penalty on the offensive player.

The slide is putting the players head into the defenders only real strike zone.

Take out the QB slide and it gets the head out of the defenders wrap up area and possibly makes QBs think a little more about taking off running.

I think they need to give officials some discretion on targeting calls since they’re not black and white, but at the same time I don’t want to give officials more say in how a game goes 

Right now you have coaches reacting to the penalties with outrage, as if it's just bad luck. It's not bad luck. You're either deliberately teaching them to lead with the head, or at least rewarding them if they do. I was dismayed to see all the Ohio State teams celebrating with glee when their defensive player avoided the targeting call, instead of recognizing that he had gotten away with what amounted to a deliberate attempt to injure another player. 

...and I'm tired of TV announcers minimizing this. The consequences of this kind of hit are potentially devastating. Laughing about it or suggesting that they should "let the kids play" are outrageous. They should at the very least have the decency to lead into their comments by acknowledging that they don't really care about the health or well-being of these young men at all, until they're actually injured, at which point they're willing to pretend to be shocked and sad.

Indeed.

The question is not how many were called in the first half.

It's "how many were then called in the second half?"

I didn't see anything wrong with any of those targeting calls. They were all obviously hits to the head and for the most part did not even remotely need to happen. If I'm playing a game, a game, a game and somebody hits me in the head and causes lifelong disability I'm probably not going to be very happy about it. There should be some level of respect for each other as humans to not hit each other in the head like that.

This is basically where I am. In a legal sense, the defender should be held to strict liability to avoid the dangerous blows to the head. Yes, there are situations where defenders are in a tough spot because the offensive player slides late or puts their own head into a dangerous position, but tacklers need to be taught to take less risk of head to head contact as they dive into tackles.Even if that means giving up yardage on some plays. Also, I would like to see targeting called on offensive players, particularly RB, more often when they go head down into contact.

All that being said, I would be fine with targeting as a common 15-yard personal foul, with ejection upon accumulation of fouls, like with other unsportsmanlike conduct penalties. I think referees are hesitant to call it now in the marginal cases because they know how distorting it is to eject players for one play. I think if you balance the penalty, there may be better enforcement and fewer dangerous plays overall. 

What about offensive players?  A running back that lowers his head and shoulders to get that one last yard?  Or the receiver that lunges forward reaching for the goal line?  Are they immune from self-inflicted injury?
I recall an interview of Anthony Thomas, they were talking about his Rose Bowl TD.  Thomas says, honestly, I don't remember it.  I remember lowering my head to bull my way ahead but I got my bell rung and that's all I remember.

Until offensive players are penalized in the same manner as defensive players, then it isn't about safety, it's about virtue signalling.

Complaining to the B1G about getting fucked by refs in a game against OSU is like walking through a car wash and complaining you got wet.

Wait this wasnt targeting? What in the holy buck fucked refs is going on. They arent even trying anymore. 

I personally don't believe this is targeting. He wasn't a defenseless runner. It was a bang bang play. I believe it needs some tweaking and some consideration should be given to the defensive player, when the offensive player drops their head before impact. If you are in a defensive position and a RB comes at you, and drops their head, you better get lower or you will get trucked. 

This play was literally the definition of targeting yet wasn’t called. Funny seeing OSU fans saying this wasn't targeting but saying the controversial targeting call where Justin Fields spun into a tackler leading with his shoulder against Clemson was targeting

This is not targeting. First, the defender hits the receiver in the shoulder, not the head. Second, the defender does not lower his head, although he hits with his head, it's with his facemask, not the crown of his helmet, following the time-worn technique of seeing what you hit. Third, the defender doesn't launch himself. This is just a hard hit. I think the targeting penalty has forced many defenders to change their approach. You rarely see a defender hit a ball carrier directly in the head anymore, usually that happens when one or both lower their heads. It seems that targeting calls are now often made if the ball carrier's head snaps back, even if the hit is to the shoulder area and not the actual head, itself, especially if it involves the QB. I would bet money that on many of the targeting calls, another part of the ball carrier's body is receiving more damage than his head. It's still football, after all. There are going to be violent hits. That's why we all love it. 

He lead with the crown of his helmet.... that's targeting whether it was helmet to helmet or not.