In partnership with CBSSports.com
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
This isn't going over very well online at the moment. Can you imagine the NCAA tossing a guy like Matt Elam out of a game for 'targeting' a receiver? Ridiculous.
Among the other rule changes I find bizarre is making it illegal to spike the ball if there are less than three seconds left on the clock.
The Football Rules Committee is recommending a rules change to eject players who target the head or neck area of another player.
Staff reporter. Twitter: www.twitter.com/Goldkamp247 | Facebook: www.facebook.com/swamp247
Somebody needs to step in, this is getting outta hand
If this happens, football is officially dead.
WHAT THE CRAP
Can the big time conferences just say the hell with the NCAA already?
I don't quite understand why people say this. Isn't the NCAA made up of people from the big conferences? Maybe I'm misinformed.
wow the no spikes under 3 seconds might be the dumbest thing I've heard. what purpose would that serve? I don't think they should toss a player for targeting but maybe do it for 1 play or at most the rest of series not the game.
Not a clue. Here's the wording of the proposed rule change.
-- To establish three seconds as the minimum amount of time required to be on the game clock in order to spike the ball to stop the clock. If one or two seconds remain on the clock, there is only time for the offense to run one more play.
Maybe that is correct. I honestly don't know. Regardless this is out of control.
I can only imagine the chaos when the clock is running and a team runs up to spike it and end up snapping at 2 seconds and refs calling the game over.
Wow. NCAA really is cutting the excitement out of the game
I can already see Muschamp tearing off into a ref if this was to happen.
I guess if the game is already over he can't get ejected for targeting.
The spiking rule kind of makes sense to me. A couple of times this year and last year, a team has tried to spike the ball with < 3 seconds remaining and the clock runs out and the game just ends. It's kind of ambiguous how much time it takes to spike the ball, and seems to be a judgement call by the refs on how much time really ran from the snapping of the ball to the spiking of the ball. So maybe they are trying to get rid of that ambiguity so teams know that if there is less than 3 seconds on the clock, don't even try spiking it because you won't get a play off. That's my guess anyway.
I think this has already happened this year. It definitely happened in the rose bowl last year with Russell Wilson. So I feel the ncaa is trying to make it clear when you have time to spike, or if you should just try a play.
That makes some sense. Just think it'll cause even more uproar if a team spikes it and the clock operator stops the clock at two seconds. What then? The game's over?
I think the ncaa is ridiculous and the people on the rules committee are idiots.
This post was edited by jamielawrence 17 months ago
Gunga galunga...gunga -- gunga galunga
WHAT THE SHIT
Yeah, but like I said earlier, that already happened in the Oregon/Wisc rose bowl last year. Now, a team explicitly knows they shouldn't risk spiking the ball with only 2 secs to go. If they do it anyway, it's their own fault and the same result would have happened without the rule.
So would Major Wright have been tossed on the first series of the 2008 national championship game?
Essentially what Jonas is saying is that this rule is similar to the NBA rule that you can't catch and shoot with less than .3 on the game clock, any attempts to do so like with the NBA rule will result in an automatic runoff essentially ending regulation.
This post was edited by USMC_Gator 17 months ago
Beatings will continue until morale improves
Exact same question popped in my mind. What a crock.
This is a shvtty rule. Muschamp might kill somebody if one of his safeties gets thrown out of a game for laying the wood.
"Who was your source? Church mice in here....." - Coach Muschamp
So let's first be clear about what targeting is. This penalty requires...
1- targeting (that implies intent)
2- to hit a defenseless player (and a defenseless player includes things like receivers at the time they are making the catch, quarterbacks after the throw, and players no longer actively participating in a play)
3- above the shoulders
I am not a big fan of this rule to begin with, and an ejection policy puts it way over the line. The rule is way too subjective, and the calls are not consistent.
Imagine this scenario. A defensive player is blitzing the quarterback. When the QB throws the ball, the defensive player jumps up in the air and tries to bat the ball. As he comes down, his arms follow through, and he strikes the QB's helmet. Under the rule, that's not a penalty, because there is no intent, but we've seen that scenario result in 15-yards all the time, and now it will get guys thrown out of games.
Billy the Kid, age 48,
5 SEC Championships,
2 National Championships...
Exactly. We already see this abuse each weekend in personal foul calls alone.
Defensive players target ball carriers, and blockers target would-be tacklers. They have intent to hit because they play football.
The problem arises when they are moving so fast that the hit becomes helmet to helmet with the intent only to make contact, not necessarily H2H contact. And then, viola, you have a yellow flag and now potentially someone thrown out of a game.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports