Should the NFL follow the NCAA in regards to targeting calls?

[soxhop411]

We all know that the NFL is "concerned" about player safety. Yet the past few seasons have shown otherwise. This is especially prevalent in regards to helmet to helmet hits (targeting). Many seem to go uncalled and fines seem to do very little to curb it.

Does anyone else think they should follow the NCAA's lead in how they deal with targeting calls?

Here is a link to a more recent article on possible changes to the NCAA rule

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/14759963/ncaa-committee-proposes-rule-changing-video-review-parameters-targeting-fouls

Replay officials are likely to have more power when it comes to calling targeting penalties in college football next season.

The NCAA football rules committee proposed giving replay officials more authority to overturn incorrect targeting fouls and to call targeting penalties when they are missed on the field. The committee also agreed to allow conferences to experiment with NFL-style centralized video replay review systems in 2016.

The rules committee completed four days of meetings in Orlando, Florida, on Thursday and announced several proposals that could be implemented next season if approved by the playing rules oversight panel on March 8.

 

[Bosoxen]

That article is from February. And the proposed rules change to the college game has already been implemented.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

The helmet to helmet hits went completely uncalled last night. Newton was hit multiple times helmet-to-helmet and on at least two occasions the player clearly launched. The league/refs need to do better.

 

[ifmanis5]

The helmet to helmet hits went completely uncalled last night. Newton was hit multiple times helmet-to-helmet and on at least two occasions the player clearly launched. The league/refs need to do better.

Agreed. Also this has been going on since forever and rarely gets called. See, any Ravens game from the last 15 years. The NFL talks a PR game on this subject but rarely ever backs it up with actual change.

 

[Doug Beerabelli]

Player should be kicked out, IMO. Perhaps even do like soccer red card, and player also misses next game.

NFL likes these hits, because the fans like these hits, but I think the tide is turning on that (we'll see). The rules are such that the penalty for launching etc is well worth it, and if it causes a key player on the other side to go through the concussion protocol (and miss game time or get pulled from game as a result), it's mission accomplished by the defensive player, it's worth 15 yards and any fine the NFL imposes level post game. And we know the sterling reputation of the NFL offices when if comes to being fair and even handed in handing out discipline.

Yes, it's hard to determine intent in many cases, but if they are worried about player safety, there will be some tough decisions that end up seemingly unfair to the player doing the hitting. The hits by Miller, Marshall and the last one would not fall into that "close call" category. Imagine how that game changes if those three guys are kicked out of the game, on the spot.

 

[johnmd20]

The tide is definitely turning. Marshall's hit in particular was egregious and a clear launch at the head while leaving his feet and I didn't like it any way whatsoever. It didn't add anything to the game and it could have easily caused Cam to be taken out.

What fan is rooting for that?

edit - it is really NFL typical to go on and on about player safety and in the first game of the year allow multiple launching plays to occur against the league MVP without penalty. NFL, it's Cam-Tastic.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

Player should be kicked out, IMO. Perhaps even do like soccer red card, and player also misses next game.

NFL likes these hits, because the fans like these hits, but I think the tide is turning on that (we'll see). The rules are such that the penalty for launching etc is well worth it, and if it causes a key player on the other side to go through the concussion protocol (and miss game time or get pulled from game as a result), it's mission accomplished by the defensive player, it's worth 15 yards and any fine the NFL imposes level post game. And we know the sterling reputation of the NFL offices when if comes to being fair and even handed in handing out discipline.

Yes, it's hard to determine intent in many cases, but if they are worried about player safety, there will be some tough decisions that end up seemingly unfair to the player doing the hitting. The hits by Miller, Marshall and the last one would not fall into that "close call" category. Imagine how that game changes if those three guys are kicked out of the game, on the spot.

This is roughly what has been dancing around in my head since last night. Eject and suspend the player, full stop. Force the players to stop doing it or force the teams to stop carrying roster spots for headhunters. Throw in the loss of draft picks penalty against repeat offenders that is now levied against teams for subverting the concussion protocol.

Unfortunately that all seems very unlikely in the near future from a league that is proactive about nothing that doesn't line its pockets, and half the players will not be inclined to agree to anything of the sort.

And now that I've argued for giving Roger even more leeway to take away draft picks, it's time to start constructing my own funeral pyre.

 

[Bosoxen]

I think the ejection and suspension should be subject to review during and after the game. So, to answer the question in the OP: Yes, they should use the NCAA system for blows to the head.

 

[cornwalls@6]

Yes. I like the college rule very much. Last nights hits on Newton were egregious, and would have deserved much stiffer penalties than 15 yards and a fine to be named later. But, there are collisions in football that are incidental to the speed of the game, timing of bodies arriving at the same point, etc. I like having the option to overturn those upon replay review. Also, tying into RBYB's post, just a horrendous job by the officials last night missing the ones they did. I would think maybe failure to properly enforce rules on helmet to helmet collisions should be given heavy weight in the criteria for evaluating crews and handing out playoff and super bowl assignments.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Agreed. Missing calls that endanger the health of other player's, particularly helmet to helmet launches, horse collar tackles and egregious chop blocks should weigh heavily in the evaluation of referees.

 

[DJnVa]

Has the NFL said nothing about this yet?

They were quick to issue a statement saying everything was kosher with Cam not going into the concussion protocol, but in this situation it's clear they fucked up, and it's silence.

 

[bankshot1]

I can understand missing one call, but as all eyes are on the QB, how do three seemingly obvious helmet to helmets/launching attacks on Newton get missed/not flagged?

Did the NFL send out a memo to the refs" let the boys play", the public wants hard hits?

I expect given the general public uproar over last night, fines will get levied against the Bronco offenders, and we might get a weak-ass CYA statement from the NFL, that calls were missed and the concussion protocol MIA, and the over-reaction this Sunday with inadvertent hand to the head will get flagged.

 

[doc]

I am a bit surprised that the offenses are not issuing a little vigilante justice, like standing one of these guys up while another player takes out his knees. I know it's not the way it's supposed to be done, but if my meal ticket player was getting repeated shots to the head with no calls I would start to hurt the bastards doing it.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I can understand missing one call, but as all eyes are on the QB, how do three seemingly obvious helmet to helmets/launching attacks on Newton get missed/not flagged?

Did the NFL send out a memo to the refs" let the boys play", the public wants hard hits?

I expect given the general public uproar over last night, fines will get levied against the Bronco offenders, and we might get a weak-ass CYA statement from the NFL, that calls were missed and the concussion protocol MIA, and the over-reaction this Sunday with inadvertent hand to the head will get flagged.

I would hope that you are right, but I am sadly skeptical that we will see anything.

 

[edmunddantes]

Maybe Roger shoving Blandino up against the office door if he doesn't do something?

Nah... Blandino is too much of a NFL stooge to need to be bullied that way.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Maybe Roger shoving Blandino up against the office door if he doesn't do something?

Nah... Blandino is too much of a NFL stooge to need to be bullied that way.

I think that one is being taken out of context a bit. The refs ROYALLY screwed up that situation when it happened and not only did they create a public safety concern, but they also screwed the network and sponsors out of at least one commercial break (that is something that Goodell has to concern himself with). I could see a normally reasonable human being getting tremendously pissed off if the person who created that shit banana didn't take accountability.

 

[bankshot1]

And more or less on schedule NFL admits (mostly) to what we all saw. But according to Blandino they only missed 1 call.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/sports/football/nfl-says-officials-missed-head-hit-on-panthers-cam-newton.html

"The N.F.L. has determined that a penalty should have been called against aDenver Broncos linebacker after his helmet-to-helmet hit against Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton in the third quarter of Thursday night’s opening game of the football season.

Dean Blandino, the league’s chief of officiating, said in a statement that officials on the field erred in not penalizing the linebacker, Brandon Marshall, for roughing the passer."

Fine to follow? Probably.

Over-reaction on Sunday? Definitely.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

To be honest, I have no problem with them over-refereeing helmet to helmet.

 

[bankshot1]

Nor do I, if its HtH, call it. But the inadvertent and harmless hand brushing helmet that draws 15 yards on Sunday extending a Cards drive will piss me off.

 

[ilol@u]

No. Last thing the NFL needs is more arbitrary rules. Since we all know referees see things differently, I'm fine with the NFL reviewing the tape post-game and suspending/fining players after the fact. Giving the power to officials to eject/suspend players for their definition of intentional helmet hits during the game is asking for trouble.

 

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Nor do I, if its HtH, call it. But the inadvertent and harmless hand brushing helmet that draws 15 yards on Sunday extending a Cards drive will piss me off.

I hear what you are saying, but i guess, since the helmet to helmet rules came into effect, I have seen so much more NOT called than called. Someone mentioned it here, but Newton got hit with a forearm in the helmet last night that was brutal, and no flag. I would much rather they had a season of over enforcement to try and get players to structurally change their habits, than be overly cautious. And this is coming from a guy who thought last night's game was horrible because of the slow pace.

 

[pappymojo]

Nor do I, if its HtH, call it. But the inadvertent and harmless hand brushing helmet that draws 15 yards on Sunday extending a Cards drive will piss me off.

Why should that penalty not have been called? Because the defender didn't mean to put his hand in the receivers face, because it didn't hurt the receiver, or because it extended a drive?

Me, I think it should have been called because it was a clear violation of the rules regardless of whether the defender meant to do it, whether anyone got hurt or whether an enforcement of the penalty extends an offensive drive that was otherwise sputtering.

 

[bankshot1]

Purposely hitting a QB in the head with force is a penalty and should be called. I used the words "inadvertent" and "harmless", as in a hand making modest contact with limited impact. I was also talking about a future event, and not the hit last night (should have been called) . The comment about extending the "Cards drive" was clearly tongue in cheek. but I should have used a smiley face.

The larger unsaid point is there should be some consistency in what we see and what is called. Most everyone who watched the game last night thought at least 3 roughing the passer calls/HtH should have been called. The NFL said only 1 was a penalty. There's a problem with that. My stated concern is that the NFL will over-react on Sunday to the criticisms and call ticky-tack shit to over compensate.

Being lax and then being overly strict is not good for the game.

 

[pappymojo]

Sorry. I thought you were complaining about the penalty on the Broncos that extended the Panthers drive. I think I was watching TV while reading and totally missed your point.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Why should that penalty not have been called? Because the defender didn't mean to put his hand in the receivers face, because it didn't hurt the receiver, or because it extended a drive?

Me, I think it should have been called because it was a clear violation of the rules regardless of whether the defender meant to do it, whether anyone got hurt or whether an enforcement of the penalty extends an offensive drive that was otherwise sputtering.

Yeah I agree on this, he tried to press at the line got beat and went straight to the facemask. If that isn't hands to the face then the rule shouldn't be in the rulebook. I hate the idea that you should not call a blatant penalty because it gives a first down on 4th and long. Punish that guy for being so fucking stupid that he's lunging on 4th and 22 like a moron.