(09-21-2017 04:16 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote: It was a weak hit. He clearly pulled back and didn't lay into the guy. I don't disagree with the call because by the letter of the law-it was helmet to helmet. I just think the rule and punishment is dumb. You got a guy hustling and running to the ball late in the game and it was a bang bang play and Ragland was still going forward and his pad level was being changed by another tackler. You expect him to stop for a moment, consider if Ragland's knee has hit the ground, contemplate if he is defenseless, or ponder if his forward progress has stopped? Ain't gonna happen.
Might as well make it 2 hand touch if this is the **** they are gonna call.
That was my point earlier about 2 hand touch - which I believe was taken literally by another poster.
Again, these types of plays are bang-bang and you can't measure intent and that's an issue because the rule is designed to prevent this.
(09-21-2017 09:33 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: I thought it was clearly targeting. Ragland was already tackled and Young popped him in the head. To me that is a no brainer.
Agreed. I don't have any problems with the call.
mc
You guys get it. This was clear as day targeting, and remember thinking he would be out of the game as soon as the flags were thrown. As someone who loves old school football, I enjoy seeing young going for a big hit to make the QB think twice about running, but in today's game this is an ejection every time.
Ragland was going down, tucking the football, and there was no need for any extra content. He was being dragged down behind the line of scrimmage. There was no extending of the ball as some have suggested.