(12-28-2016 05:27 PM)Dawg80 Wrote:  I didn't like that call on Bradford. Not just because it was on us. But, like so many personal fouls called many times the tackler had already committed, lunged, shifted his weight forward such that no way he can change direction in mid-air! Now, I KNOW some will say Bradford coulda/shoulda lifted his head, and/or caused his head to go to the side and led with his shoulder into the Navy's QB midsection. Okay....fine. Valid arguments.

But, here's the worst part of it. Now he, and others who have also been tagged with targeting during the bowls, will have to sit out the 1st half of the season opener. That is BS! Graduating seniors, or those going out early into the NFL draft, would not be punished so. ALL penalties and the results of such penalties need to be equal. I mean, think about it, some senior in the 4th qtr of his absolute last game could NAIL someone and the NCAA could not touch him, other than the ejection for that game. Why should there be unequal treatment of players?

I suppose a senior, headed for an all-star game like the Senior Bowl, could be held out of the 1st half of that game.

Do you agree with my and HD's assessment that he did not initiate contact with the crown?

(12-28-2016 06:54 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(12-28-2016 05:27 PM)Dawg80 Wrote:  I didn't like that call on Bradford. Not just because it was on us. But, like so many personal fouls called many times the tackler had already committed, lunged, shifted his weight forward such that no way he can change direction in mid-air! Now, I KNOW some will say Bradford coulda/shoulda lifted his head, and/or caused his head to go to the side and led with his shoulder into the Navy's QB midsection. Okay....fine. Valid arguments.

But, here's the worst part of it. Now he, and others who have also been tagged with targeting during the bowls, will have to sit out the 1st half of the season opener. That is BS! Graduating seniors, or those going out early into the NFL draft, would not be punished so. ALL penalties and the results of such penalties need to be equal. I mean, think about it, some senior in the 4th qtr of his absolute last game could NAIL someone and the NCAA could not touch him, other than the ejection for that game. Why should there be unequal treatment of players?

I suppose a senior, headed for an all-star game like the Senior Bowl, could be held out of the 1st half of that game.

Do you agree with my and HD's assessment that he did not initiate contact with the crown?

I have watched and rewatched that play and here's what I see: Bradford lowered his head and led with the crown of his helmet, but, before he actually made contact, Abey leaned back and as a result of that a space opened up causing Bradford's crown to miss and instead the part of the helmet at the top of the facemask is what actually made the contact. Is hitting with the facemask targeting? I don't know because I think the whole rule is stupid and I haven't troubled myself learning the fine print of it. I don't think it was a late hit or roughing the passer. I thought the whole play was clean, just part of football.

But, looking at it objectively, Bradford clearly lowered his head, I guess (guess because I don't know what he was thinking) with the intent of leading with the crown of his helmet. He missed with the crown, but is "intent" enough to warrant targeting? The answer is NO. Because there have been countless cases of a defensive player launching, leading with their helmet, but whiffing and the refs didn't flag it and say, "Oh, you tried to target him!!" No contact = no penalty.

My verdict: bogus call.

The initial contact didn't quite appear to be targeting, but he certainly lowered his head to drive the crown into his ribs after initial contact (unless Bradford was going for a front flip dismount). The key to the rule being enforced there is the last sentence in the rule "When in question, it is a foul." In this rule it is guilty unless proven innocent, and it was close enough that they had to call it.

The plays that I hate are when a defensive player commits to a tackling vector and the offensive player starts going to the ground in anticipation and lowers his head into the path of the oncoming tackler. Probably half the targeting calls I see on DB's are that type of play where you can tell they were aiming for the midsection, but they end up hitting the receiver in the head because the receiver quits running and starts dropping to the ground.

Targeting! just now in the TCU-UGA game. The TCU defender sacks the UGA QB from behind and led with the crown of his helmet smack into his back. The perfect example of leading with the helmet. Not only was nothing called, they didn't even discuss the possibility. Much more flagrant occurrence of leading with the crown of the helmet than Bradford's.

As I say, it's a stupid rule.

(12-30-2016 10:40 AM)zharkins Wrote:  Probably half the targeting calls I see on DB's are that type of play where you can tell they were aiming for the midsection, but they end up hitting the receiver in the head because the receiver quits running and starts dropping to the ground.

It's the American football version of a soccer flop.

Speaking of flops... They should have someone double check those before enforcing penalty. Dead-time flops dont deserve yardage awards.

Michigan DB clearly led with his helmet and hit the helmet of an FSU ball carrier. Wasn't even close. Could be clearly seen as it was in the open field. FSU player was being tackled and as he was being pulled down another Mich. DB came flying in and they hit helmets. Nothing called.

This stupid targeting is like holding. You can call it just about every play. Or, choose to ignore it whenever the refs don't feel like calling it.

(12-31-2016 08:25 AM)Dawg80 Wrote:  This stupid targeting is like holding. You can call it just about every play. Or, choose to ignore it whenever the refs don't feel like calling it.

But much worse. Holding doesn't include a ejection and suspension for at least the remainder of the game or first half of the next game (which could be for a conference championship, bowl game,...).

The problem is with the ridiculously wide range of "interpretation". Almost any hit by a defender can be "interpreted" as targeting.

What gets me is that it's usually an accident, and often caused by the offensive player ducking at the last second after the defender has already committed.

When a player a game is ejected, something needs to change.

What about offensive players who lower their head and lead with the crown of the helmet in an attempt to run over a defensive player? I've never seen that called.

(12-31-2016 11:34 AM)PirateJim Wrote:  What about offensive players who lower their head and lead with the crown of the helmet in an attempt to run over a defensive player? I've never seen that called.

Sure it gets called- as "targeting" against the defender. The whole "player safety" movement has gone too far.