Home› Hardcore Husky Board

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register
Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Targeting

chuckchuck Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 11,074 Swaye's Wigwam
in Hardcore Husky Board
Enough.

I've tried to stay patient since Hills is responsible for the language of that rule. He's trying hard and breathes football and deserves the benefit of time to establish his program. I'm done though. Put that thing to bed.
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Which game? I didn't see whatever it was.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • chuckchuck Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 11,074 Swaye's Wigwam
    Stanford. Close call but I'm not arguing the call. It's just the rule that sucks. Needs some tweaking.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,758
    chuck said:

    Stanford. Close call but I'm not arguing the call. It's just the rule that sucks. Needs to be fired at halftime.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    chuck said:

    Stanford. Close call but I'm not arguing the call. It's just the rule that sucks. Needs some tweaking.

    I totally agree. I love what the NCAA was trying to accomplish with the rule, but it needs some serious rework.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • section8section8 Member Posts: 1,581
    For starters, the review should be to determine if there was targeting, not trying to establish that its not. Also, it only ever gets called (that I've seen) against LB & DB while totally ignoring the head to head contact at the line. RB's drop their heads all the time against linemen and never anything called.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaccoonHarryRaccoonHarry Member Posts: 2,161
    chuck said:

    Stanford. Close call but I'm not arguing the call. It's just the rule that sucks. Needs some tweaking.

    Stanford DB hits the Notre Dame WR in the shoulder pad with his helmet and gets called for targeting. Replay keeps him in the game but the penalty stands. What crap. Agree the replay should be to determine whether the penalty should be enforced. Surely, the rule will be reviewed in the off season and changed. Won't it?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TierbsHsotBoobsTierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    section8 said:

    For starters, the review should be to determine if there was targeting, not trying to establish that its not. Also, it only ever gets called (that I've seen) against LB & DB while totally ignoring the head to head contact at the line. RB's drop their heads all the time against linemen and never anything called.

    They want to eliminate the hits, which is why "guilty until proven innocent". They should absolutely revoke the 15 yards too if it is not targeting.

    You're totally right about the RBs.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.