Bama Game Thread: Official Postgame Thread - Bama vs. USF...

[CB4]

This was one of the more egregious examples of the over-litigation of targeting that I have seen. There was NO WAY Jefferson could have done anything differently to avoid that hit. Nothing.

Three things really bother me about targeting as it stands in terms of definition. First, wasn’t the REAL reason for implementation to remove egregious, malicious and dangerous hits from the game? Elimination of the idiotic spearing by one player on a defenseless player? But intent is never considered. I’ve seen in recent years ”cheap crap” where the intent to injure was clear but targeting wasn’t called. Then I’ve seen plays where it was simply two players playing the game, bodies collide and someone gets pitched out of game because cause of “well it falls within the definition“.
Second, to me it seems the onus to avoid the hit almost always falls of the defender. What the heck is a defender suppose to do if they “breakdown“ to tackle through the ball carrier and suddenly the offensive guy drops their pad level so the defender Is no longer driving through the chest but up toward the head and neck? Such was the case with Jefferson last night.
Finally, there is NO consistency in how it is apply. As I posted last night. I use to THINK I didn‘t know what constitutes targeting. Now I KNOW I don‘t know what constitutes targeting.

 

[colbysullivan]

There were at least 7 completed passes between 4 and 20 yards. Four between 12 and 20. And several called back because of penalty. They were not all deep.

Sigh, you just can’t see the forest for the trees. ALL the long passes were incomplete when there were other throws available. That’s all that matters.

 

[jthomas666]

Sigh, you just can’t see the forest for the trees. ALL the long passes were incomplete when there were other throws available. That’s all that matters TO ME.

fixed it

 

[GrayTide]

In spite of pulling away in the last 7 minutes of the game, that overall performance will not beat UGA, Tennessee, LSU, and possibly Missouri. Of course it was only game two, but our OL and QB play was absolutely horrible. Talent and depth wise those teams will not get worn down like USF did in the 4th quarter. I try to temper my expectations knowing a complete change of coaches, implementation of a new system makes a transition year difficult. Unless we develop a QB and OL we could wind up 8-4. I have seen enough of Milroe to know that his performance is either feast or famine. I was disappointed that Simpson or Lonergan did not get any playing time.

 

[Con]

This was one of the more egregious examples of the over-litigation of targeting that I have seen. There was NO WAY Jefferson could have done anything differently to avoid that hit. Nothing.

Exactly, the speed of the game has to be considered sometimes.

 

[colbysullivan]

fixed it

His inability to make the right decision consistently is not MY problem. It’s going to get us beaten multiple times this year.

 

[colbysullivan]

In spite of pulling away in the last 7 minutes of the game, that overall performance will not beat UGA, Tennessee, LSU, and possibly Missouri. Of course it was only game two, but our OL and QB play was absolutely horrible. Talent and depth wise those teams will not get worn down like USF did in the 4th quarter. I try to temper my expectations knowing a complete change of coaches, implementation of a new system makes a transition year difficult. Unless we develop a QB and OL we could wind up 8-4. I have seen enough of Milroe to know that his performance is either feast or famine. I was disappointed that Simpson or Lonergan did not get any playing time.

Careful…

 

[jthomas666]

His inability to make the right decision consistently is not MY problem.

Your recent posts suggest otherwise

 

[colbysullivan]

Your recent posts suggest otherwise

You misunderstand. Milroe’s lack of consistent decision making is well documented. I didn’t just make it up.

 

[81usaf92]

You misunderstand. Milroe’s lack of consistent decision making is well documented. I didn’t just make it up.

Look I’m not a member of the Milroe hype club, and people constantly try to call me a milroe hater, but maybe you should give it a rest for atleast today because I don’t really think this is a game where Milroe was really that horrible. I have my “has this guy improved that much” moments in the game but the offensive line from the land of misfit toys was clearly the bigger problem last night.

Let’s just get through Wisconsin and Georgia before we really start making definitive assessments of what our team is because by then we will know for sure.

 

[colbysullivan]

Look I’m not a member of the Milroe hype club, and people constantly try to call me a milroe hater, but maybe you should give it a rest for atleast today because I don’t really think this is a game where Milroe was really that horrible. I have my “has this guy improved that much” moments in the game but the offensive line from the land of misfit toys was clearly the bigger problem last night.

Let’s just get through Wisconsin and Georgia before we really start making definitive assessments of what our team is because by then we will know for sure.

People keep quoting me so I’m responding. I would love nothing more than to never talk about Milroe again, but he has bamboozled two coaching staffs now.

 

[UAH]

I hear you. And I don't doubt UT in Knoxville will be one of the toughest (if not THE toughest) games on the schedule.

But never put in any stock in NC State. They are perennially "almost there." It never pans out. At least not in my lifetime.

No doubt that describes NC State very well.

 

[westide]

I'm not sure if many remember, but I'm not sure many of you could've survived the "Wishbone Years" with us sometimes fumbling the ball maybe 5 times a game. It was a very high risk offense. And what is a forward pass?

We are very fortunate.

During the 1970s Alabama dominated college football with the “Wishbone “ offense. They didn’t dominate by fumbling the ball numerous times in a game.

 

[gtgilbert]

This was one of the more egregious examples of the over-litigation of targeting that I have seen. There was NO WAY Jefferson could have done anything differently to avoid that hit. Nothing.

Yes he could. He was looking down at the ground, so the top if his helmet is what made contact. If he's got his eyes up looking at what he's hitting, the contact would be either his face mask or the bolt area of the helmet and it's not a penalty.

 

[gtgilbert]

Three things really bother me about targeting as it stands in terms of definition. First, wasn’t the REAL reason for implementation to remove egregious, malicious and dangerous hits from the game? Elimination of the idiotic spearing by one player on a defenseless player? But intent is never considered. I’ve seen in recent years ”cheap crap” where the intent to injure was clear but targeting wasn’t called. Then I’ve seen plays where it was simply two players playing the game, bodies collide and someone gets pitched out of game because cause of “well it falls within the definition“.
Second, to me it seems the onus to avoid the hit almost always falls of the defender. What the heck is a defender suppose to do if they “breakdown“ to tackle through the ball carrier and suddenly the offensive guy drops their pad level so the defender Is no longer driving through the chest but up toward the head and neck? Such was the case with Jefferson last night.
Finally, there is NO consistency in how it is apply. As I posted last night. I use to THINK I didn‘t know what constitutes targeting. Now I KNOW I don‘t know what constitutes targeting.

The call wasn't that the hit was to the head, it was that he used the top of the helmet. If JJ has his eyes up and initiates contact with the face mask it's not a penalty.

 

[BamaMoon]

I "tongue and cheek" told the visiting Bull fan last week that I'd blitz JM every play.

He said that would be their plan. That's what they did.

I wonder what Wisky's DC is thinking? Kirby? Every SEC DC on our schedule?

If a QB can't identify the blitz and audible a receiver into the vacated area for a short, quick throw, to make them stop it they won't.

It'll probably take losing a game (and we will) but something has to change OR we are going to see a repeat of last year OR probably not even that much success.

 

[teamplayer]

Three things really bother me about targeting as it stands in terms of definition. First, wasn’t the REAL reason for implementation to remove egregious, malicious and dangerous hits from the game? Elimination of the idiotic spearing by one player on a defenseless player? But intent is never considered. I’ve seen in recent years ”cheap crap” where the intent to injure was clear but targeting wasn’t called. Then I’ve seen plays where it was simply two players playing the game, bodies collide and someone gets pitched out of game because cause of “well it falls within the definition“.
Second, to me it seems the onus to avoid the hit almost always falls of the defender. What the heck is a defender suppose to do if they “breakdown“ to tackle through the ball carrier and suddenly the offensive guy drops their pad level so the defender Is no longer driving through the chest but up toward the head and neck? Such was the case with Jefferson last night.
Finally, there is NO consistency in how it is apply. As I posted last night. I use to THINK I didn‘t know what constitutes targeting. Now I KNOW I don‘t know what constitutes targeting.

It is a horrible rule that affects the quality and outcome of games. It greatly reduces the enjoyment of the games for some of us, but I also think some people enjoy watching the replays and talking and arguing about if something should be enforced or overturned.

 

[CB4]

The call wasn't that the hit was to the head, it was that he used the top of the helmet. If JJ has his eyes up and initiates contact with the face mask it's not a penalty.

While I will agree that JJ needed to be in better form with a head up position, there was nothing in my opinion that was so malicious in that hit that warrants Jefferson being hit with a first half suspension for the next game. Hit him with a personal foul? Okay. But making him sit next for a half next week is ridiculous.

The hit in and of itself only drew only mundane comments from the broadcasters initially, along the lines of a “solid tackle” comments. They only noticed it AFTER the play was stopped for review.
A Supreme Court Judge once said “I may not be able to define pornography. But I know it when I see it.“ IMO the same standard should be applied to targeting. It should be something that immediately when it happens you know it, because it was malicious and dangerous. Otherwise call it a personal foul and move on.

 

[gtgilbert]

While I will agree that JJ needed to be in better form with a head up position, there was nothing in my opinion that was so malicious in that hit that warrants Jefferson being hit with a first half suspension for the next game. Hit him with a personal foul? Okay. But making him sit next for a half next week is ridiculous.

The hit in and of itself only drew only mundane comments from the broadcasters initially, along the lines of a “solid tackle” comments. They only noticed it AFTER the play was stopped for review.
A Supreme Court Judge once said “I may not be able to define pornography. But I know it when I see it.“ IMO the same standard should be applied to targeting. It should be something that immediately when it happens you know it, because it was malicious and dangerous. Otherwise call it a personal foul and move on.

the top of the helmet rule is two fold. One is somewhat protective of the guy being tackled. The other, and honestly more important is that it's designed to protect the guy making the tackle. Having the head down like that is a very, very good way to end up with a serious injury to the neck. It may seem harsh, but it's there to tell the guys they simply can't do that and continue to play the game.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Yes he could. He was looking down at the ground, so the top if his helmet is what made contact. If he's got his eyes up looking at what he's hitting, the contact would be either his face mask or the bolt area of the helmet and it's not a penalty.

I would have to go back and watch it again. I do not recall his face facing the turf. But it was tilted down, yes.

But I think it all happened too fast for him to orient himself differently and in addition, the USF QB ducked at the last second as well, putting his head in harms way.