Ohio State targeting foul overturned

[zebrastripes]

https://x.com/tjmcaulay/status/1984698136200134844?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1984698136200134844%7Ctwgr%5Ee90eefb02eb882a6730e9c2d8c5ba7d7527b9eb6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fstory%2Fsports%2Fcollege%2F2025%2F11%2F01%2Fcaleb-downs-targeting-ohio-state-penn-state-football-mike-pereira-terry-mcaulay%2F87040099007%2F

So on Shaw’s video last week we have a defender running at full speed to get to the quarterback with a slightly forward posture, and because of this posture the defender is tagged with a targeting foul that is upheld – a call Shaw supported.

Yet this week we have an example of a hit that supposedly the rule is designed to eliminate. It meets all three criteria for 9-1-4 – defenseless player, forcible contact to the head/neck area, and an indicator (launch). But apparently replay can’t confirm all aspects?

I’m just dumbfounded about how this rule is being adjudicated across CFO this season. And I don’t agree with Terry McAulay on everything, but on this he is right.

[bama_stripes]

If only there were a two-tier TGT penalty....

[zebrastripes]

If only there were a two-tier TGT penalty....

I like the idea of an F1/F2 model, but I fear that officials will be pressured to err on the side of F1 and not DQ players for egregious hits that need to be eliminated from the game.

[ump_ben]

If only there were a two-tier TGT penalty....

Are you suggesting the OSU hit would have been a lower tier hit?  If so I'm curious how you'd split it up. 

[ElvisLives]

We need to leave it as it is, AND absolutely DQ players. That's the only way behavior will change. When they know there is a great risk of DQ, they'll start avoiding the heads of opponents, and not use their helmets as a tool to inflict pain. Leave 'em an opening, and they'll break the door down, and claim the door was open.