(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); I will try to find some good footage of the College Football (US) Penalty targeting when I can, but I wanted to start this thread now.

Targeting in college football is basically when a player (either offence or defense) is accused of leading a tackle or block with their helmet instead of their shoulder pads and making helmet to helmet contact. The rule just took effect this season (2013-2014). The rule is a great idea, penalize those who purposely try to injure an opponent. The punishment is a 15 yard foul and the player on which it is called on is ejected from the game. The ejection of the player is reviewable, the 15 yards however is not.

Recently I have seen targeting being called more and more. The reason for it is because Refs are being told to look for it. The problem is, EVERY football player, offence or defense, is told that when you are going to make contact with someone, Drop your pad level and hit them. Now this makes sense, the lower you hit them, the harder it is for them to stay up. When BOTH players are dropping their pad level and are ready to make contact, sometimes helmet to helmet contact is inevitable. Now I definitely do not condone targeting or helmet to helmet contact but the fact that as soon as two player's heads collide, the defensive player (who is attempting to make a tackle) is called for targeting. People need to realize that when you are coaching kids to drop their shoulders down and hit somebody, THAT ALSO DROPS THEIR HEAD. So as long as you coach them to drop their pads, helmet to helmet is sometimes inevitable.

The reason I am ranting is because the past three weeks, meaning the past three games, I have seen a Notre Dame defender accused of targeting. The first two weeks it was overruled and the players were not ejected. This week, Notre Dame defender Stephon Tuitt was ejected from the game against the Pittsburg Panthers for targeting.

Here is a GIF of the contact and a short, poor quality video from youtube I found. I will look for a better quality video tomorrow when game footage is up.

You must login or register to view this content.
You must login or register to view this content. watch?v=UH2AYm8hMMY (Limit of two videos, if you want to see this one, go to youtube and copy and past that last bit ^^ into the URL)

This is a good video of what targeting REALLY is, when a person does it on purpose. This was called on an offensive player as well. A wide receiver or tight end if I'm not mistaken.


And one more video of it. This is a CLEAR example


(I put this in bold to make sure you didn't miss my last point) There is one CLEAR way to tell targeting. In a big hit shoulder to shoulder, which at many times can look like targeting, the other player may be slow to get up or just get up right away. In Targeting, *the player that was hit, stays down* Did I make that last point clear enough?

So whats your opinion, was the Tuitt call targeting? My answer, no.

"Targeting" sometimes can not be preventable. Yes, some purposefully tackle with their head but sometimes it happens when you are just in the moment.

There is a quite a bit of talk about removing the new rule or at least modifying it because since it has taken effect, I see it almost every game. It's just something that can't always be prevented.

You both bring up a good point. Sometimes it is inevitable. It seems to me that with one consequence of the penalty being the player is ejected, that they are implying the player did it on purpose, or at least could have prevented it and chose not to. With so many players being wrongfully accused, and I'm sure reviewing game footage would show that, I feel as though the rule is in desperate need of review.

I know this is a bit off-topic, but I LOL'd. You must login or register to view this content.

I really hope they eliminate this rule next year. Most of the times I have seen it called it gets overturned, so the team then gets a free 15 yards because of the refs being confused or just missing the call. Just yesterday the team that played Cincinnati could have possibly lost the game on a targeting call.