(10-17-2019 09:31 AM)JMUSteeler Wrote:  Ironically the targeting call on Brown we didn't get is also probably technically correct. Watch on the replay, the Nova safety is clearly head hunting there and he seemed to launch himself. But because Brown was completing his 2nd step after the catch he technically established himself as a runner, I guess. The rule as applied in these 2 cases seems to be exactly backwards, but POSSIBLY applied correctly based on subjective standards.

You cannot launch yourself at the head or neck no matter if the player is defenseless or not. The hit on brown should have been targeting

(10-17-2019 11:15 AM)Potomac Wrote:  So targeting is also known as tackling? They’re slowly ruining the game.

In another decade they'll be strapping on a couple flags to their hips.

I hear and respect everyone's opinions on the targeting call. I think it's fair to say you could "argue" it either way. That being said, for me any rule with ambiguity in it like the targeting call (or the new PI rule in the NFL, see last weekend) is as simple as the eye test. I just can't watch that play with Amos and think to myself "that looked dangerous".

(10-17-2019 12:02 PM)JMU_Newbill Wrote:  I hear and respect everyone's opinions on the targeting call. I think it's fair to say you could "argue" it either way. That being said, for me any rule with ambiguity in it like the targeting call (or the new PI rule in the NFL, see last weekend) is as simple as the eye test. I just can't watch that play with Amos and think to myself "that looked dangerous".

Agree. Conversely I did have that reaction on the call that wasn't called on Brown.

(10-17-2019 12:03 PM)DirtyDukes Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 12:02 PM)JMU_Newbill Wrote:  I hear and respect everyone's opinions on the targeting call. I think it's fair to say you could "argue" it either way. That being said, for me any rule with ambiguity in it like the targeting call (or the new PI rule in the NFL, see last weekend) is as simple as the eye test. I just can't watch that play with Amos and think to myself "that looked dangerous".

Agree. Conversely I did have that reaction on the call that wasn't called on Brown.

Agree. The difference was the tackle on Brown the guy lead with an elbow/forearm shiver type block tackle, while Amos did more of a shove tackle that slid up the receivers pads.

(10-17-2019 01:36 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 04:43 PM)Purple Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 11:00 PM)FBS Dave Wrote:  

(10-14-2019 10:50 AM)doubleduke2016 Wrote:  

(10-12-2019 10:31 PM)Potomac Wrote:  a lot of recruits in attendance, after that game and atmosphere should not be a ? where they want to play football

I was going through twitter yesterday and saw a recruit who posted about being there I was bored so I clicked on his feed to see where else he had been. He had photos of him at some very HS looking stadiums saying "thanks for the invite..." then he had the tweet of Bridgeforth that was packed with 25k fans and I thought "it's not even fair what we have going for us" in a good way. But if you are a recruit being looked at by a Colgate, Elon, Richmond, etc. and you show up to a half empty 5k stadium and then show up to 25k strong and streamers flying and canons blasting...how do we ever lose a recruit to anything in the FCS? #brandisstrong

The brand will never be strong at FCS. You can outspend everyone at this level and regularly be a top 5 program, but don’t confuse the on field success with strong branding.

FCS is by definition small time.

Yep. I had a conversation with a Troy alum a few days ago. He knew all about FCS and we talked about App State (undefeated and nationally ranked at #24 right now) and how smart App was to make the move from FCS to FBS (Troy has been FBS since 2001). He asked what JMU's enrollment is and was shocked, remarking that Troy had an enrollment of 5,500 to 6,000 and yet because of JMU's FCS affiliation, it is us who is considered the "small school." Hard to argue with that.

Troy has a total enrollment of about 17,000. Did the guy graduate a 1/2 century ago?
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tro...rsity-1047

Horsesh!t. He was talking Troy proper students, not satellite campuses and, most importantly, not online students, which there are thousands of.

Liberty shows an enrollment of 110,000. Do you think they all live in the dorms in Lynchburg?

(10-17-2019 04:08 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 01:36 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 04:43 PM)Purple Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 11:00 PM)FBS Dave Wrote:  

(10-14-2019 10:50 AM)doubleduke2016 Wrote:  I was going through twitter yesterday and saw a recruit who posted about being there I was bored so I clicked on his feed to see where else he had been. He had photos of him at some very HS looking stadiums saying "thanks for the invite..." then he had the tweet of Bridgeforth that was packed with 25k fans and I thought "it's not even fair what we have going for us" in a good way. But if you are a recruit being looked at by a Colgate, Elon, Richmond, etc. and you show up to a half empty 5k stadium and then show up to 25k strong and streamers flying and canons blasting...how do we ever lose a recruit to anything in the FCS? #brandisstrong

The brand will never be strong at FCS. You can outspend everyone at this level and regularly be a top 5 program, but don’t confuse the on field success with strong branding.

FCS is by definition small time.

Yep. I had a conversation with a Troy alum a few days ago. He knew all about FCS and we talked about App State (undefeated and nationally ranked at #24 right now) and how smart App was to make the move from FCS to FBS (Troy has been FBS since 2001). He asked what JMU's enrollment is and was shocked, remarking that Troy had an enrollment of 5,500 to 6,000 and yet because of JMU's FCS affiliation, it is us who is considered the "small school." Hard to argue with that.

Troy has a total enrollment of about 17,000. Did the guy graduate a 1/2 century ago?
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tro...rsity-1047

According to Wikipedia, Troy’s main campus has an enrollment of 7,911 as of 2016. They merged their accreditation with the satellite campuses in 2005, prior to that they operated independently, a bit like UVA College at Wise or ODU (originally a W&M satellite). Their official student base (18,086) includes 3 satellites and online enrollment. Easy to see how a graduate from the 2000 era might feel they have 5-6,000 since the main campus is only around 8,000 today.

(10-17-2019 04:08 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 01:36 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 04:43 PM)Purple Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 11:00 PM)FBS Dave Wrote:  

(10-14-2019 10:50 AM)doubleduke2016 Wrote:  I was going through twitter yesterday and saw a recruit who posted about being there I was bored so I clicked on his feed to see where else he had been. He had photos of him at some very HS looking stadiums saying "thanks for the invite..." then he had the tweet of Bridgeforth that was packed with 25k fans and I thought "it's not even fair what we have going for us" in a good way. But if you are a recruit being looked at by a Colgate, Elon, Richmond, etc. and you show up to a half empty 5k stadium and then show up to 25k strong and streamers flying and canons blasting...how do we ever lose a recruit to anything in the FCS? #brandisstrong

The brand will never be strong at FCS. You can outspend everyone at this level and regularly be a top 5 program, but don’t confuse the on field success with strong branding.

FCS is by definition small time.

Yep. I had a conversation with a Troy alum a few days ago. He knew all about FCS and we talked about App State (undefeated and nationally ranked at #24 right now) and how smart App was to make the move from FCS to FBS (Troy has been FBS since 2001). He asked what JMU's enrollment is and was shocked, remarking that Troy had an enrollment of 5,500 to 6,000 and yet because of JMU's FCS affiliation, it is us who is considered the "small school." Hard to argue with that.

Troy has a total enrollment of about 17,000. Did the guy graduate a 1/2 century ago?
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tro...rsity-1047

According to Wikipedia, Troy’s main campus has an enrollment of 7,911 as of 2016. They merged their accreditation with the satellite campuses in 2005, prior to that they operated independently, a bit like UVA College at Wise or ODU (originally a W&M satellite). Their official student base (18,086) includes 3 satellites and online enrollment. Easy to see how a graduate from the 2000 era might feel they have 5-6,000 since the main campus is only around 8,000 today.

The 18k must be physical enrollment. Below link says almost 30k total enrollment.
http://alhslf.org/troy-university/

(10-17-2019 10:15 PM)Purple Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 01:36 AM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(10-16-2019 04:43 PM)Purple Wrote:  

(10-15-2019 11:00 PM)FBS Dave Wrote:  

(10-14-2019 10:50 AM)doubleduke2016 Wrote:  I was going through twitter yesterday and saw a recruit who posted about being there I was bored so I clicked on his feed to see where else he had been. He had photos of him at some very HS looking stadiums saying "thanks for the invite..." then he had the tweet of Bridgeforth that was packed with 25k fans and I thought "it's not even fair what we have going for us" in a good way. But if you are a recruit being looked at by a Colgate, Elon, Richmond, etc. and you show up to a half empty 5k stadium and then show up to 25k strong and streamers flying and canons blasting...how do we ever lose a recruit to anything in the FCS? #brandisstrong

The brand will never be strong at FCS. You can outspend everyone at this level and regularly be a top 5 program, but don’t confuse the on field success with strong branding.

FCS is by definition small time.

Yep. I had a conversation with a Troy alum a few days ago. He knew all about FCS and we talked about App State (undefeated and nationally ranked at #24 right now) and how smart App was to make the move from FCS to FBS (Troy has been FBS since 2001). He asked what JMU's enrollment is and was shocked, remarking that Troy had an enrollment of 5,500 to 6,000 and yet because of JMU's FCS affiliation, it is us who is considered the "small school." Hard to argue with that.

Troy has a total enrollment of about 17,000. Did the guy graduate a 1/2 century ago?
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tro...rsity-1047

Horsesh!t. He was talking Troy proper students, not satellite campuses and, most importantly, not online students, which there are thousands of.

Liberty shows an enrollment of 110,000. Do you think they all live in the dorms in Lynchburg?

Ok. His figures were still low on their main campus physical enrollment.

(10-17-2019 11:39 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 09:31 AM)JMUSteeler Wrote:  Ironically the targeting call on Brown we didn't get is also probably technically correct. Watch on the replay, the Nova safety is clearly head hunting there and he seemed to launch himself. But because Brown was completing his 2nd step after the catch he technically established himself as a runner, I guess. The rule as applied in these 2 cases seems to be exactly backwards, but POSSIBLY applied correctly based on subjective standards.

You cannot launch yourself at the head or neck no matter if the player is defenseless or not. The hit on brown should have been targeting

I agree, I thought so watching live and on replay. That's why this rule shouldn't be a thing, it's subjective and ambiguous neither of which is conducive to applying a rule. Brown's mom was very upset about it after the game, apparently there was some concern about a concussion.

(10-18-2019 05:45 AM)JMUSteeler Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 11:39 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 09:31 AM)JMUSteeler Wrote:  Ironically the targeting call on Brown we didn't get is also probably technically correct. Watch on the replay, the Nova safety is clearly head hunting there and he seemed to launch himself. But because Brown was completing his 2nd step after the catch he technically established himself as a runner, I guess. The rule as applied in these 2 cases seems to be exactly backwards, but POSSIBLY applied correctly based on subjective standards.

You cannot launch yourself at the head or neck no matter if the player is defenseless or not. The hit on brown should have been targeting

I agree, I thought so watching live and on replay. That's why this rule shouldn't be a thing, it's subjective and ambiguous neither of which is conducive to applying a rule. Brown's mom was very upset about it after the game, apparently there was some concern about a concussion.

The real issue here is that the rules aren't being applied consistently, and in the spirit they were written, to protect players from serious injury.

This is the type of thing that should be sent into CAA hq for review. I'm not sure what they will do, but there should be a process to "grade" officials, and replace those that repeatedly do a poor job.

(10-18-2019 05:52 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(10-18-2019 05:45 AM)JMUSteeler Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 11:39 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 09:31 AM)JMUSteeler Wrote:  Ironically the targeting call on Brown we didn't get is also probably technically correct. Watch on the replay, the Nova safety is clearly head hunting there and he seemed to launch himself. But because Brown was completing his 2nd step after the catch he technically established himself as a runner, I guess. The rule as applied in these 2 cases seems to be exactly backwards, but POSSIBLY applied correctly based on subjective standards.

You cannot launch yourself at the head or neck no matter if the player is defenseless or not. The hit on brown should have been targeting

I agree, I thought so watching live and on replay. That's why this rule shouldn't be a thing, it's subjective and ambiguous neither of which is conducive to applying a rule. Brown's mom was very upset about it after the game, apparently there was some concern about a concussion.

The real issue here is that the rules aren't being applied consistently, and in the spirit they were written, to protect players from serious injury.

This is the type of thing that should be sent into CAA hq for review. I'm not sure what they will do, but there should be a process to "grade" officials, and replace those that repeatedly do a poor job.

Agree 100%. I think folks and the refs get far too caught up in the language of the rule which leads to the ambiguity and inconsistent enforcement.

IMO the rule is in place to eliminate 'dirty, flagrant, cheap shots' in order to protect the players NOT any hit that looks somewhat violent. It is football there is going to be contact and violent hits, period. The DBs get put in awkward positions most of the time by no fault of their own. With the speed of these athletes they have already committed to clean, hard hit and then the WR adjust to the ball. Many times at that point the hit is inevitable.

If it is a cheap, dirty hit those can be seen a mile away and easily penalized. I think far too much effort is being extended to split hairs on this targeting rule.

It was revealed today that Justin Covington's injury during their W&M game two weeks ago was season ending. He tore his ACL.

The CAA can't catch a break with some key injuries this season.

Man that bites. Always hate to see anyone get hurt like that. Hope he recovers OK.

Brian