Targeting?

[Snaggletiger]

One of the best linebackers in the country, Devin White of LSU, will sit the first half against The Fighting Two'ers next week for a targeting penalty he was flagged for. LSU grad and political strategist, James Carville, wrote a piece claiming collusion between Bama and the SEC front office. LSU fans have gone berzzzerk over the call as well. Frick em'!!!  They wouldn't even be in the position they're in had they not been the beneficiaries of several blown calls against us.  

Two things.  Do you think there's anything to the claim the refs favor the Tahd to keep that goose pooping out those golden eggs?  Maybe.  But I don't think they need any help this year.  Second, with regard to targeting, you can look at this video and make an argument either way.  However, how many years has the latest version of the rule been in place?  I heard so many Cajuns yesterday claim he didn't lead with the crown of the helmet. Who cares?  Here's the bottom line.  Whether the blow is made with the crown of the helmet, the face mask, your shoulder or a forearm....if you hit a QB, receiver, ball carrier etc. above the neck, it WILL be called!  This play was just plain stupid by White.  He had every opportunity to go lower but he chose to go helmet to helmet.  I don't care if it was technically a "clean" hit.  That's the way the game is officiated now.  Just don't do it.

 

[wesfau2]

Looks to me like White got his hands up and between him and Fitzgerald.  The minimal contact with the helmets didn't warrant the call (and Fitz even looked like he was arguing against it), but you know the refs are on the lookout so you have to know they'll err on the conservative side of the call.

[Godfather]

bama gonna kill them anyway so the point is moot.

[Snaggletiger]

Looks to me like White got his hands up and between him and Fitzgerald.  The minimal contact with the helmets didn't warrant the call (and Fitz even looked like he was arguing against it), but you know the refs are on the lookout so you have to know they'll err on the conservative side of the call.

Yeah, I can see the argument either way.  I heard several people make an argument I can get on board with. Go to the NBA flagrant foul rule.  You have a Flagrant 1 and Flagrant 2 with one having worse consequences than the other.  IMO, White's hit should have been a 15 yard penalty at worst with no suspension. An automatic half game suspension is way too harsh for some of these hits.

In the NFL, every time Vontaz Burfict hits somebody, he should be ejected.

[Snaggletiger]

bama gonna kill them anyway so the point is moot.

I think they will too, but I'm still taking a bit of a wait and see approach.  It's been said all season that Bama won't face a really good defense until LSU and that's the troof.  Well, here it is.  The problem though, is LSU's offense is only slightly above Auburn shitty.  No way they can score enough to hang.

[Godfather]

Yeah, I can see the argument either way.  I heard several people make an argument I can get on board with. Go to the NBA flagrant foul rule.  You have a Flagrant 1 and Flagrant 2 with one having worse consequences than the other.  IMO, White's hit should have been a 15 yard penalty at worst with no suspension. An automatic half game suspension is way too harsh for some of these hits.

In the NFL, every time Vontaz Burfict hits somebody, he should be ejected.

The problem is not the half-game suspension, he should be out for that game, it's the half-game suspension for the next game. 

On one hand, I get what the league is trying to do they are trying to make sure that a player later in his life remembers how to get home from the store.  So the consequence for these types of penalties is a strict one. 

The problem I have with it, is it really working?  

From my understanding these hits are still occurring at the same rate, so what does the penalty even achieve?  

My idea...no helmets!

[Godfather]

I think they will too, but I'm still taking a bit of a wait and see approach.  It's been said all season that Bama won't face a really good defense until LSU and that's the troof.  Well, here it is.  The problem though, is LSU's offense is only slightly above Auburn shitty.  No way they can score enough to hang.

If you can hold them to around 36 points you can beat them.  Problem: You have to be able to score 37 and on their defense.

[Snaggletiger]

If you can hold them to around 36 points you can beat them.  Problem: You have to be able to score 37 and on their defense.

I was told there would be no math.

[bgreene]

bama gonna kill them anyway so the point is moot.

He's watching with them with those eyes....

[RWS]

The targeting rule is becoming very frustrating.  You see 2-3 called a game that end up getting overturned, and you also see 2-3 a game that never even get called.  Typically, I agree with the no-calls because it is just football and only would have been targeting because of the broad brush they use to apply the rule.  Why doesn't targeting get called on offensive players?  They usually lower their heads first.  As a defender, that prompts you to lower your head.  I get where they're coming from in terms of safety, but I think it gets out of hand.  

As for the LSU LB, sure, what he did meets the definition of targeting.  But I don't agree that something like that should be part of the definition.  

[GH2001]

The targeting rule is becoming very frustrating.  You see 2-3 called a game that end up getting overturned, and you also see 2-3 a game that never even get called.  Typically, I agree with the no-calls because it is just football and only would have been targeting because of the broad brush they use to apply the rule.  Why doesn't targeting get called on offensive players?  They usually lower their heads first.  As a defender, that prompts you to lower your head.  I get where they're coming from in terms of safety, but I think it gets out of hand. 

As for the LSU LB, sure, what he did meets the definition of targeting.  But I don't agree that something like that should be part of the definition. 

Meeting the definition of it didn’t stop them from letting your guy back in. In fairness same to the auburn dB early in the game Sat. 

Problem is we can all look at it and see 4 diff things. And then there is malice and intent. There is still too much left to be subjective in targeting. 

[Saniflush]

You know what would stop all this shit?  Helmets that aren't as good.  Bring back the leather ones.

[CCTAU]

You know what would stop all this shit?  Helmets that aren't as good.  Bring back the leather ones.

Its been said that this option would eliminate most questionable hits.

But there is always that ONE guy!

[Saniflush]

Its been said that this option would eliminate most questionable hits.

But there is always that ONE guy!

A leather helmet on Takeo Spikes is still a bad day for anyone except him.

[Buzz Killington]

James Carville hates the call.

https://www.nola.com/lsu/2018/10/james-carville-alleges-devin-whites-targeting-ejection-proves-collusion-between-sec-alabama.html

[Kaos]

No targeting against LSU.  That was bogus.  Whether it's a conspiracy or something else, I don't know, but it wasn't targeting by any stretch of the imagination.  Most of those calls take a reasonable amount of time to review.  Before Fitzchumphold even got up off the ground, the ref was like "the previous play is under....wait, nope, the review over. Targeting has been confirmed, number whatever from LSU is out for the first half of the Alabama game." 

Alabama players target on more than half the plays.  Never seen anything like the crap they get away with. Whether that's a conspiracy or not, I don't know, but it's become obvious to pretty much anyone not wearing crimpson (or black and white).  

The targeting call that was reversed on AU against Ole Miss should have stood.  I don't know why it was reversed, there didn't seem to be a valid reason to do so.  

[Snaggletiger]

No targeting against LSU.  That was bogus.  Whether it's a conspiracy or something else, I don't know, but it wasn't targeting by any stretch of the imagination.  Most of those calls take a reasonable amount of time to review.  Before Fitzchumphold even got up off the ground, the ref was like "the previous play is under....wait, nope, the review over. Targeting has been confirmed, number whatever from LSU is out for the first half of the Alabama game."

Alabama players target on more than half the plays.  Never seen anything like the crap they get away with. Whether that's a conspiracy or not, I don't know, but it's become obvious to pretty much anyone not wearing crimpson (or black and white). 

The targeting call that was reversed on AU against Ole Miss should have stood.  I don't know why it was reversed, there didn't seem to be a valid reason to do so. 

As soon as that happened I said, "He gone".

[Snaggletiger]

Paaawwwl, I done watched that Raykwan Davis video a hunnert times an he ain't never hit that Mizzouri player yet.  Whatchu thank, Paaawwwl.

[CCTAU]

The targeting call that was reversed on AU against Ole Miss should have stood.  I don't know why it was reversed, there didn't seem to be a valid reason to do so. 

When i saw initial contact on the shoulder pad, I thought we had a chance.

The rule is to protect a defenseless opponent. The shoulder pads are about as protected as you get.

I still could not believe they let Tutt stay though.

[GH2001]

As soon as that happened I said, "He gone".

What I told you at that time it happened - stan and rod were in complete shock.