College Football FBS/FCS discussion thread

[IndyBison]

The OSU defender did lead with his helmet. However Lawrence ducked and turned. That is why the hit was high.

It appears defenders need to lower their target even lower. Hit Lawrence at the knees. Maybe end his pro career before it starts. Them college will have NFL rules about hitting QBs low.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The targeting hit had nothing to do with where Lawrence was hit. It was entirely due to the fact the defender hit him with the crown of the helmet. Lower your head and lead with the crown you run the risk of targeting.

That being said I personally didn't think it was a forcible and punishing hit but it's friendly l definitely supportable. Both calls could have gone either way. No matter what they called there would be people saying they were horrible calls. It's a no win situation for the officials.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[NorthernBison]

The targeting hit had nothing to do with where Lawrence was hit. It was entirely due to the fact the defender hit him with the crown of the helmet. Lower your head and lead with the crown you run the risk of targeting.

That being said I personally didn't think it was a forcible and punishing hit but it's friendly l definitely supportable. Both calls could have gone either way. No matter what they called there would be people saying they were horrible calls. It's a no win situation for the officials.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

That’s pretty much what I said. The defender lead with his helmet. Letter of the rule says targeting. The acting job by Lawrence didn’t hurt either. And, yeah, he did act. Only missed one play.

Personally, I’d have preferred seeing him destroy Lawrence’s knee with a brutal low kill shot. But, that might have something to do with what I think of Clemson, Lawrence, Dabo, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EC8CH]

The targeting hit had nothing to do with where Lawrence was hit. It was entirely due to the fact the defender hit him with the crown of the helmet. Lower your head and lead with the crown you run the risk of targeting.

That being said I personally didn't think it was a forcible and punishing hit but it's friendly l definitely supportable. Both calls could have gone either way. No matter what they called there would be people saying they were horrible calls. It's a no win situation for the officials.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Sure on the targeting call but over ruling that fumble was a horrible call.

[IndyBison]

Sure on the targeting call but over ruling that fumble was a horrible call.

Not horrible at all. Without replay that is most likely ruled incomplete as it was a bang bang play with the ball coming out very quickly. Slow motion makes it look more like a catch but it's not obvious either way. Neither call would be horrible but I guarantee if the catch/fumble stood there would be just as many people screaming it was a horrible call.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[IndyBison]

That’s pretty much what I said. The defender lead with his helmet. Letter of the rule says targeting. The acting job by Lawrence didn’t hurt either. And, yeah, he did act. Only missed one play.

Personally, I’d have preferred seeing him destroy Lawrence’s knee with a brutal low kill shot. But, that might have something to do with what I think of Clemson, Lawrence, Dabo, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You said the fact Lawrence lowered and turned is why he was hit high. The actions of Lawrence had no impact on this call. A player initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet is a foul whether he hits him high, in the chest, in the hip, or the knee. That targeting foul protects the hitter more than the hittee. Hitting with the crown can compress your neck or result in a concussion for the hitter. The other targeting foul has to do with hitting a defenseless player high. That wasn't applicable here.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Professor Chaos]

You said the fact Lawrence lowered and turned is why he was hit high. The actions of Lawrence had no impact on this call. A player initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet is a foul whether he hits him high, in the chest, in the hip, or the knee. That targeting foul protects the hitter more than the hittee. Hitting with the crown can compress your neck or result in a concussion for the hitter. The other targeting foul has to do with hitting a defenseless player high. That wasn't applicable here.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Couldn't they have called Chase Young for targeting also for raking Lawrence across the neck as he was going down? By definition Lawrence was a "defenseless player" in that scenario since his forward progress was stopped and he was already in the process of being taken down by another Ohio St defender when Young raked him across the neck with his forearm. Targeting is defined as "making forcible contact to the head or neck of a defenseless player".

Like I said earlier I'm glad they didn't call a penalty on Young there but for all the hand-wringing from Ohio St fans about Wade getting tossed for targeting it could've been even worse had the replay official really wanted to go to the letter-of-the-law in regards to targeting on that play. I don't think I've ever seen two players tossed for targeting on the same play but if it happened in a play and game of that magnitude I'd imagine that's all anyone would be talking about today and into the offseason when it comes to rule changes.

[westnodak93bison]

That’s pretty much what I said. The defender lead with his helmet. Letter of the rule says targeting. The acting job by Lawrence didn’t hurt either. And, yeah, he did act. Only missed one play.

Personally, I’d have preferred seeing him destroy Lawrence’s knee with a brutal low kill shot. But, that might have something to do with what I think of Clemson, Lawrence, Dabo, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's wrong with Clemson?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[NorthernBison]

You said the fact Lawrence lowered and turned is why he was hit high. The actions of Lawrence had no impact on this call. A player initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet is a foul whether he hits him high, in the chest, in the hip, or the knee. That targeting foul protects the hitter more than the hittee. Hitting with the crown can compress your neck or result in a concussion for the hitter. The other targeting foul has to do with hitting a defenseless player high. That wasn't applicable here.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

True. But get serious, the crown of the helmet to the chest happens a lot without targeting getting called.

QB takes any shot high and lays on the ground gets way more attention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ByeSonBusiness]

That’s pretty much what I said. The defender lead with his helmet. Letter of the rule says targeting. The acting job by Lawrence didn’t hurt either. And, yeah, he did act. Only missed one play.

Personally, I’d have preferred seeing him destroy Lawrence’s knee with a brutal low kill shot. But, that might have something to do with what I think of Clemson, Lawrence, Dabo, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lmao what the fuck is wrong with you? Rooting for a 19/20 year old kid to get his knee destroyed because you don't like where he goes to school?

Jesus H. bud, maybe take a step back and reevaluate.

[EC8CH]

Not horrible at all. Without replay that is most likely ruled incomplete as it was a bang bang play with the ball coming out very quickly. Slow motion makes it look more like a catch but it's not obvious either way. Neither call would be horrible but I guarantee if the catch/fumble stood there would be just as many people screaming it was a horrible call.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

It wasn't ruled incomplete. It was ruled a fumble in real time.