“A disqualification is a very severe penalty.”

It turns out people are concerned it’s hard to determine whether a targeting penalty is warranted.

A players receiving a second targeting penalty in a season resulting in a suspension is a rule change unlikely to pass, according to the chair of the NCAA Football Oversight Committee. West Virginia athletic director Shane Lyons told CBS Sports that the nature of the targeting penalty itself makes more discussion imperative.

Such suspensions were proposed by the NCAA Football Rules Committee earlier this month. Their passage will be considered in April by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel (PROP).

“I would say all of [the rules changes] — with the exception of the dismissal — will probably be approved,” Lyons said. “That one probably needs a bit more discussion.”

For a player hit with a second targeting penalty, the rules committee proposed an immediate suspension for the remainder of that game and the next game. That proposal is one of the more contentious this year. Critics have said it is unfair to suspend a player for an act that is so difficult to define.

“They went through some video and we all had to vote whether it was targeting,” Lyons said. “Out of 10 slides, it was probably three of the 10 we were 100 percent consensus. The other seven, you’re waffling one way or another.”

Gosh, who could have known?


Filed under The NCAA

4 responses to ““A disqualification is a very severe penalty.”

  1. At the high school level, targeting is a 15 yard penalty with no DQ. I saw it called a couple of times last year (maybe the official has leeway to DQ for flagrant hits). I don’t see why the colleges can’t go to a one time 15 yard penalty with a 2nd in the same game be a DQ.

    If the panel could only agree 3 of 10 times, something’s wrong with the rule.


  2. Uglydawg

    I don’t think DQ is the answer. After the first (probably iffy) offense, the player will be functioning like a basketball player with four fouls. It hurts the kid and the team and playing half-speed causes injuries.
    They aren’t going to listen to us..esp. me…but it should be a 15 yard penalty for the first and suspension for the remainder of that game ONLY for the second.. If that seems lenient, please consider that I am a fan of an SEC team that is very suspicious of “The Review Officials in Birmingham”.
    Seriously, why should next week’s opponent be given that advantage?
    Keep the punishment in the game the targeting was called. Otherwise it’s going to be on officials minds…(Let’s see next week Georgia has Florida..or next week is the Iron Bowl…) it WILL influence their decision one way or the other. (If I’m wrong, hallelujah!) But the accusations will fly, warranted or not. This is what the SEC has bought itself with it’s past ineptness and bias. They have a credibility problem. I don’t want them to have any more ways of screwing up. This isn’t “fool me twice”. We passed twice a long time ago.
    If this is going to be an NCAA implemented rule, let the NCAA provide unbiased review officials. That wouldn’t be the SEC.



    Adopt the Rugby method. No helmuts.


  4. Ray Avret

    The rule needs to be more consistent not if a UGA player makes a less obvious hit gets disqualified while the Tide players hit is flagrant and not a single flag is thrown …… You can replace the two teams names with your teams of choice, it happens across the board, The rule needs to be made and firm no matter what team or player or game is involved