Killing Floor said:

---

Because it's Texas?

---

That's targeting if it's Baylor that does it. It's targeting because it's targeting.

OFC they do….but that's what the reviews are for…they're there to get it right. Just because it doesn't go your way doesn't make your position right…we watch the game and it's not our profession or how we make a living. These guys train, study, attend continuing education etc. The review ensures it's right.

Golden Helmet said:

---

OFC they do….but that's what the reviews are for…they're there to get it right. Just because it doesn't go your way doesn't make your position right…we watch the game and it's not our profession or how we make a living. These guys train, study, attend continuing education etc. The review ensures it's right.

---

But in this case, it was wrong.

I shake my head at people who think people in power are incorruptible.

Many people disagree and some agree with you.

The most important opinion was made on game day resulting in the no call.

bear2be2 said:

---

And this view shows where first contact with his shoulder pad was made to the receiver's chest/shoulder. He was lucky the player's head cleared because that could have been a devastating play and would have been an obvious targeting call if it hadn't. But I think the different angles show they got this one right.

Defender raises arm, preparing to knock out high point catch.
Defender hits forearm across Bond's neck (follow black elbow band).
Defender extends through neck & lower facemask, snapping neck back.
Initial contact is arm bar to lower neck/jersey hole, sliding up into facemask. pic.twitter.com/irxMDI6VGR

— Snarkisian (@Snarkisian) January 3, 2025

---

Dang, that looks like targeting more than the tape I was referring to. He launched into the upper body of a totally defenseless player.

That said, it's targeting if the ref says it is.

In an ASU game earlier in the year an ASU player almost decapitated a defenseless QB and the ASU coach was ranting that is wasn't targeting.

The call has become too subjective.

And fans of one team will see these hits in a different light that folks who don't care who wins.

They were certainly both brutal hits.

Forest Bueller III said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

And this view shows where first contact with his shoulder pad was made to the receiver's chest/shoulder. He was lucky the player's head cleared because that could have been a devastating play and would have been an obvious targeting call if it hadn't. But I think the different angles show they got this one right.

Defender raises arm, preparing to knock out high point catch.
Defender hits forearm across Bond's neck (follow black elbow band).
Defender extends through neck & lower facemask, snapping neck back.
Initial contact is arm bar to lower neck/jersey hole, sliding up into facemask. pic.twitter.com/irxMDI6VGR

— Snarkisian (@Snarkisian) January 3, 2025

---

Dang, that looks like targeting more than the tape I was referring to. He launched into the upper body of a totally defenseless player.

That said, it's targeting if the ref says it is.

In an ASU game earlier in the year an ASU player almost decapitated a defenseless QB and the ASU coach was ranting that is wasn't targeting.

The call has become too subjective.

And fans of one team will see these hits in a different light that folks who don't care who wins.

They were certainly both brutal hits.

---

That hit would have been an easy targeting call if there was forcible contact to the head or neck area of the receiver. No one disputes that he launched. The issue is where the contact was made. And that clip shows the shoulder to shoulder contact.

Exactly

Which is why they got it 100% correct.

Golden Helmet said:

---

OFC they do….but that's what the reviews are for…they're there to get it right. Just because it doesn't go your way doesn't make your position right…we watch the game and it's not our profession or how we make a living. These guys train, study, attend continuing education etc. The review ensures it's right.

---

Wow, you are cute.

Targeting is always a hard call. Sometimes helmets collide when players can't just use The Matrix skills and stop time to make an adjustment. It's a fast game, and I think in most cases targeting is unintentional and just a matter of not being able to defy the laws of physics, or human instincts to lower ones head before colliding with another object. They don't play the game in slow motion.

I don't think that particular non-call was a terrible call, but one that is questionable. The entire concept and ability for players to adhere is questionable. Sometimes it is blatant and intentional, and that certainly should be eliminated.