BTN network defending targeting call for OSU

[LionJim]

No, it means it can always be called. And it's not my definition - look at the rule. Includes the words 'not limited to,' - so, that means the scope can be expanded for each play. I know you all hate OSU, but it's a bad call and a dumb rule. Later.

C’mon, I was rooting for OSU. You can’t say that we think it was targeting because we hate the Buckeyes. I didn’t see anyone agreeing with the fumble touchdown being called back.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

Adjust how? Stop running? I don't know how you adjust while running full speed trying to make a tackle. Remember, it's not just that they helmets hit - it's that he *led* with his helmet. How the F do you tackle any other way?

Check out some footage of our current PSU Radio Analyst. He was one of the best tacklers in NFL history.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Huh? That's clearly NOT targeting (the gif you posted) by the way the penalty is written in the rule books.

There's no launch to force contact in the head or neck area.

There's no crouch or upward thrust to hit the head or neck area.

There's no leading with the helmet to force contact with the head or neck area.

And there's no lowering of the head to hit with the crown of the helmet (the helmet-to-helmet aspect of the rule).

I'm seriously confused why you posted this.


Now, if your argument is that the rule as written sucks, that's fine -- and I think there's validity to your argument. Should Wade's hit have been targeting? In my world, not necessarily. But as written in the rule books, it was clearly targeting (see the #4 criteria above).

Define this:

"takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball."

 

[RGWhirly]

I think some of you subject yourself to BTN just so you can bitch about the coverage, which is always slanted to two schools.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

C’mon, I was rooting for OSU. You can’t say that we think it was targeting because we hate the Buckeyes. I didn’t see anyone agreeing with the fumble touchdown being called back.

Lots of people disagree with the call - not just Buckeye fans. Neary everyone here loves it.
All good.

 

[HazletonLion]

So, you tackle upright while leading with your shoulder? Okay. Is this targeting? Should be according to the definition.

That's a text book tackle, head up, shoulder into mid section, that's why they have shoulder pads for tackling. The above graphic shows that the tackler could have raised his head and hit the qb's head with his helmet and get a target call.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Absolutely. He led with the crown of his helmet. Had he not done so, Lawrence “crouching down” wouldn’t have made a difference. The idea that it’s not possible to tackle someone without using the “crown of the helmet” is embarrassingly wrong.

I remember having to do a 50-yard wheelbarrow walk at practice for repeatedly lowering my head to tackle. It’s never been OK to tackle like that.

 

[PS4814]

Oh jeez - that's the weakest retort on this board and has been since it was overused three years ago. Answer the question.

Fine, the nfl is not the ncaa, they each have their own rules on targeting, and using an example from a different league makes no sense when trying to support your argument. I’m not sure why you’re choosing this whole thing as your hill to die on but you’re not going to change your position so I wish ya luck arguing with others who care enough to continue doing so.

 

[PSUMATT85]

It's a textbook tackle and BS call. Enjoy.

20 years ago. So was the hit on Darryl Stingley at the time.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Richard Sherman, the San Francisco 49ers’ Pro Bowl cornerback, called the new rule a “disaster” and mocked the notion that every tackle could be made without helmet contact.

“There are going to be times when players tackle with their shoulder, as they should, but the fact is your head comes before your shoulder,” Sherman said. “If there was a way somebody could pull their head back and only lead with their shoulder, I’m sure they would — but your body doesn’t work that way.”

Complete bullshit - on the play Wade INTENTIONALLY DROPPED HIS HEAD right before contact in a BLATANT act to SPEAR and use his helmet as a weapon to inflict damage on his opponent. Complete and utter nonsense that Wade had no choice but to drop his head and intentionally lead with the crown of his helmet (i.e., blatantly spear Lawrence).

 

[Thomas1945]

I really enjoy it when threads such as this become fact filled emotionless rational exchanges.

So, you tackle upright while leading with your shoulder? Okay. Is this targeting? Should be according to the definition.

Not to change the subject because I really don’t want to engage in this love feast. But I wonder if this particular tackle was called roughing the passer. The NFL has gone to ridiculous lengths regarding the protection of QB’s.

 

[LionJim]

Lots of people disagree with the call - not just Buckeye fans. Neary everyone here loves it.
All good.

Nine times out of ten, it seems, when targeting is called there’s some gray area that makes you wonder if it’s the right call. Comes with the territory, I guess. Am I convinced that it was the right call? No. Was it a reasonable call? Hell, yes.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

I really enjoy it when threads such as this become fact filled emotionless rational exchanges.

Not to change the subject because I really don’t want to engage in this love feast. But I wonder if this particular tackle was called roughing the passer. The NFL has gone to ridiculous lengths regarding the protection of QB’s.

LOL. If Parsons made that hit and was called this board would hemorrhage. Enjoy Thomas!

 

[Pardlion]

Whatever. Osu guy called for targeting? Great! I approve. My only concern is . . . Any chance his suspension carries over to next year?

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Whatever. Osu guy called for targeting? Great! I approve. My only concern is . . . Any chance his suspension carries over to next year?

Ha ha - an honest take. My guess is yes?

 

[Harrisburg Dave]

Coach Paterno said that one way to correct the spearing issue would be to get rid of face masks. They have lots of tackling contact in rugby and they wear little in the way of headgear and you don’t have this nonsense about using the helmet as a weapon.

 

[sss]

Lots of people disagree with the call - not just Buckeye fans. Neary everyone here loves it.
All good.

It doesn't matter what we think of the rule, or whether we like or hate OSU. It clearly is the exact definition of targeting. Leading with the crown of your helmet. The gif you show is hitting with your sholuders. Clearly you see the difference. This tackle is called 99% of the time, whether anyone agrees with it or not. And it is designed to protect the players. You asked how to avoid it and the answer is simple. See what you hit. You must have heard this from your coaches a few thousand times while playing. Had he hit him with his facemask, no penalty. There is no need to debate the rule on the BTN, it has been in place for years. It is only debated now because their favorite team lost again in the big game.

 

[olelion]

Geez, take it down a notch.

Careful you don't release the anti shizolian

 

[Thomas1945]

Coach Paterno said that one way to correct the spearing issue would be to get rid of face masks. They have lots of tackling contact in rugby and they wear little in the way of headgear and you don’t have this nonsense about using the helmet as a weapon.

Just more lack of Historical perspective on your part. It’s a well known fact that Joe was a paid stooge for the dental industry.

 

[seminnylion]

How do you tackle then? With your chest? Biology suggests your head goes first. Not sure how you tackle while making sure your head is behind everything else.

Lol

 

[Harrisburg Dave]

Just more lack of Historical perspective on your part. It’s a well known fact that Joe was a paid stooge for the dental industry.

That explains the home in Avalon.

 

[Mufasa94]

Looking at the video in midnighter’s post, looks like number 73 has at least a hands to the face, if not face mask on mr. young. Would not offsetting penalties apply and there should have been third and long with backup QB coming in?

 

[N&B4PSU]

And it's a dumb rule. How do you tackle without leading with your head? How do you prevent another player from moving his body so that his head hits yours? Maybe a penalty, but not an ejection. Until they change how the game is played, more than half of these calls are not the fault of the tackler. It's because the player being tackled puts himself in a position to have his head hit. Lawrence lowers his head as Wade approaches.

View embedded media

It was the correct call by definition, so he has to go.

That said, while I appreciate they are trying to protect players, I hate the rule. Saying that a player going full tilt and worried about getting to the guy with the ball has to do mental calculations about angle.. about whether and where the QB is going to decide to slide (or fake slide and see ya dooby... how often do we see a qb look like he's going to step oob, defender backs off so as not to pet PF for hitting precious oob...then qb keeps running)... or adjust his angle from a distance because the guy with the ball might drop his head... all a crock to me.

Tackle is tackle. Let 'em play. Big boy rules.

Or put flags on them and maybe a dress, too.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

It doesn't matter what we think of the rule, or whether we like or hate OSU. It clearly is the exact definition of targeting. Leading with the crown of your helmet. The gif you show is hitting with your sholuders. Clearly you see the difference. This tackle is called 99% of the time, whether anyone agrees with it or not. And it is designed to protect the players. You asked how to avoid it and the answer is simple. See what you hit. You must have heard this from your coaches a few thousand times while playing. Had he hit him with his facemask, no penalty. There is no need to debate the rule on the BTN, it has been in place for years. It is only debated now because their favorite team lost again in the big game.

Rule is leading with helmet - which is what happens in the gif I attached even though he ‘hits’ with his shoulders. You can’t lead with your shoulders without leading with your head - it’s simple biology. Point is the rule is too broad and could be all inclusive depending on the ref.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

It doesn't matter what we think of the rule, or whether we like or hate OSU. It clearly is the exact definition of targeting. Leading with the crown of your helmet. The gif you show is hitting with your sholuders. Clearly you see the difference. This tackle is called 99% of the time, whether anyone agrees with it or not. And it is designed to protect the players. You asked how to avoid it and the answer is simple. See what you hit. You must have heard this from your coaches a few thousand times while playing. Had he hit him with his facemask, no penalty. There is no need to debate the rule on the BTN, it has been in place for years. It is only debated now because their favorite team lost again in the big game.

Not just the last few years SPEARING (intentionally using your helmet as a weapon by leading with the crown of the helmet) is, and always has been, an illegal Personal Foul Penalty. Spearing was merely incorporated into the Targetting Rule, but Spearing has always been illegal and considered dirty play. The hit was a blatant Spear and HAS ALWAYS been an Illegal, dirty, Personal Foul, cheap-shot hit.

 

[Nittany_93]

Is this targeting?

 

[cjrugger]

Adjust how? Stop running? I don't know how you adjust while running full speed trying to make a tackle. Remember, it's not just that they helmets hit - it's that he *led* with his helmet. How the F do you tackle any other way?

Lower your target, which should have been lower to begin with

never in history has ‘the offensive player moved’ been an excuse for targeting. Don’t understand why this play would be any different

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Is this targeting?

View embedded media

Clearly led with the crown of his bald dome. Totally.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Lower your target, which should have been lower to begin with

never in history has ‘the offensive player moved’ been an excuse for targeting. Don’t understand why this play would be any different

Someone pointed out Lawrence is 6’6”. Wade is five inches shorter, lowers his head, and *still* manages to hit Lawrence above the shoulders. It may be the rule - but it’s stupid.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

This could be called targeting by definition. On either player.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Rule is leading with helmet - which is what happens in the gif I attached even though he ‘hits’ with his shoulders. You can’t lead with your shoulders without leading with your head - it’s simple biology. Point is the rule is too broad and could be all inclusive depending on the ref.

Dead wrong as per usual duhO$U boy... point of contact in the GIF was with the shoulder, not his head - let alone specifically with the crown of his helmet (as was clearly done by Wade last night and was blatant Spearing which has ALWAYS been illegal contrary to your continued made-up, counterfactual bullshit). You couldn't be any more factually wrong, but here you are saying the GIF you posted and Wade's hit are the same in terms of using the crown-of-the-helmet to intentionally make first contact. Wade clearly and blatantly Speared Lawerence... in the GIF you posted, first contact is made with shoulder (not the head at all, let alone the crown), but here you are arguing they're near identical - go figure, LMFAO. Sad really that this board has to put up with fraud posing-PSU fans like you and your ridiculous antics.

 

[NittanyIllinois]

Someone pointed out Lawrence is 6’6”. Wade is five inches shorter, lowers his head, and *still* manages to hit Lawrence above the shoulders. It may be the rule - but it’s stupid.

Okay, so you're acknowledging then that this is the rule?

I guess i've lost track of what the argument is. That the rule is dumb, or that Wade's hit was a violation of the rule as written?

I agree with the former. The latter was obvious.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Dead wrong as per usual duhO$U boy... point of contact in the GIF was with the shoulder, not his head - let alone specifically with the crown of his helmet (as was clearly done by Wade last night and was blatant Spearing which has ALWAYS been illegal contrary to your continued made-up, counterfactual bullshit). You couldn't be any more factually wrong, but here you are saying the GIF you posted and Wade's hit are the same in terms of using the crown-of-the-helmet to intentionally make first contact. Wade clearly and blatantly Speared Lawerence... in the GIF you posted, first contact is made with shoulder (not the head at all), but here you are arguing there near identical - go figure, LMFAO. Sad really that this board has to put up with fraud posing-PSU fans like you and your ridiculous antics.

Someone is hiding his pill under his tongue. Back on your meds nutball.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Okay, so you're acknowledging then that this is the rule?

I guess i've lost track of what the argument is. That the rule is dumb, or that Wade's hit was a violation of the rule as written?

I agree with the former. The latter was obvious.

My point is the rule is too arbitrary and broad - nearly any collision could be called targeting. As to whether this was - I don’t think so, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is revving up idgits like Bushwood.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

This could be called targeting by definition. On either player.

View embedded media

More of your utter bullshit nonsense - Friermuth's head is straight up-&-down when players collide and they meet chest-to-chest... then Friermuth stiff-arms him to the ground using his free right arm. There is not one single thing in this play that even remotely fits any of the Targetting Criteria, but here you are with your nonsensical bullshit claims - pathetic raised to the power of 10, but par for the course for you and your poser-fan antics.

 

[katchthis]

BTN could just as well stand for B(Both OSU and UM) Television Network or BigTwoNetwork.

 

[KCLion]

My point is the rule is too arbitrary and broad - nearly any collision could be called targeting. As to whether this was - I don’t think so, but it doesn’t matter. What matters is revving up idgits like Bushwood.

I think that there is a difference between a “runner” and a QB in the pocket or a defenseless receiver as to whether targeting is called. It’s arbitrary and should be reviewed before next season, but by the rule, last night was targeting.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

More of your utter bullshit nonsense - Friermuth's head is straight up-&-down when players collide and they meet chest-to-chest... then Friermuth stiff-arms him to the ground using his free right arm. There is not one single thing in this play that even remotely fits any of the Targetting Criteria, but here you are with your nonsensical bullshit claims - pathetic raised to the power of 10, but par for the course for you and your poser-fan antics.

You sound like Charlie Brown’s mom. Wonk, wonk, wonk...

 

[Chris92]

So, you tackle upright while leading with your shoulder? Okay. Is this targeting? Should be according to the definition.

I was at a D2 game this year and a similar hit(as above) was called roughing the passer. After being booed, the ref clarified by saying "hitting the QB below the waist." The rule is the knee, but hey, he almost got it right.

 

[Secret Asian Man]

Nine times out of ten, it seems, when targeting is called there’s some gray area that makes you wonder if it’s the right call. Comes with the territory, I guess. Am I convinced that it was the right call? No. Was it a reasonable call? Hell, yes.

Right, he came in with the crown of his head after a five yard head start. You have to have your head up and lead with your shoulder