2018 OT Tourney (1st Round) - Targeting vs. Play Clock Modifications

[ELA]

SYSTEMIC CHANGES

End of TV monopoly

Recruiting coverage

Early NFL Draft entry

SYSTEM RULE CHANGES

Academic ineligibility

CFP

Conference championship games

GAME RULE CHANGES

OT

Narrower hashmarks

Tearaway jerseys banned

GAME PLAY CHANGES

Wishbone

SEC integration

Read option

[ELA]

I feel bad for the players who played when we knew so little, and those who played when the powers that be buried the info they were starting to get about the dangers of concussions deserve whatever they have coming to them now.  And while player safety is important, we know now how dangerous concussions are, that there seems like an assumed risk.  And while I think some obvious targeting penalties are appropriate, it seems to me like over half are good football plays where pad level changed or a helmet inadvertently came up, and suddenly a kid is ejected?  I hate it.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I voted for targeting, if for no other reason that it's an attempt to protect players, and that a lot of the clock modifications they've made are to speed up the game and reduce number of plays run. I don't quite understand why if we love this game so much we're trying to make it shorter...

However, I think targeting is lipstick on a pig. The issue isn't concussions, it's CTE. And that's not going away from targeting penalties, or IMHO from anything else. 

[OrangeAfroMan]

The targeting rules have been a failure - not that having a targeting call isn't a good thing, it is.  But the implementation and the punishments have been bizarre.  Suspending a player for half of the next game?  No.  Flagging it when a QB slides down at the last split-second?  No.  

As with all judgment calls, it's been all over the place.  Instead of erring on the side of penalizing it no matter what, we need to understand that sometimes a play will result in the act of what the targeting penalty describes, but should not be penalized.