New Targeting Rule for 2026

[Huckleberry]

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Awesome

What is targeting again?

 

[Probius]

Awesome

What is targeting again?

It keeps changing so much that it's hard to know.

 

[Tubafore]

So, targeting on the final play is free for all and you'll only miss the untimed down. Good lesson

 

[Bama_N_Va]

Targeting happens when a guy gets his bell rung, so, the logical fix for targeting is to have all players just remove their bells in the pre-game warm ups.

 

[BhamToTexas]

So, targeting on the final play is free for all and you'll only miss the untimed down. Good lesson

I hear you, but I don’t know that we will really see this. Under the rules now you could send in a backup at the end of the game just to take someone out, but that doesn’t happen.

 

[BamaMoon]

In other rule changes, can anyone explain what this means???

-- Fair catch kicks have been approved, giving teams the opportunity to attempt a field goal or drop kick from the spot a returner fair-caught the ball. The defense is required to be 10 yards from the spot of the kick.

 

[Padreruf]

Very simple...if you make a fair catch then you can attempt a FG from that spot...the defense has to be 10 yards back. This has been a HS rule in SC for at least 30 years...my sons' HS football team tried this after making a Fair Catch on the opponent's 45. Wide left...but plenty long!!!

 

[bamamc1]

The targeting penalty is called differently from week to week. We'll see has this variation works.

 

[BamaMoon]

Very simple...if you make a fair catch then you can attempt a FG from that spot...the defense has to be 10 yards back. This has been a HS rule in SC for at least 30 years...my sons' HS football team tried this after making a Fair Catch on the opponent's 45. Wide left...but plenty long!!!

You'd think this would come into play more especially when a team has to punt from deep in the end zone.

A good kicker with virtually no rush could/should make this a lot!

But I guess the reason it doesn't come into play more often is that teams are usually interested in a TD drive inside of the 50.

 

[BamaMoon]

Concerning targeting, it's the worst rule in college football.

It usually happens when the offensive player ducks his head before impact or is going down and the two players' helmets collide.

As someone said, it penalizes players for playing the game. The only time it should ever be called is when it is beyond clear a player spears intentionally, which is rarely the case!

 

[bamaslammer]

They throw the targeting flag on ANY and I do mean ANY play that "looks violent" then they let the guy in the booth figure it out. So far I've seen zero consistency in what criteria they use. first they said it had to involved contact with the crown of the helmet then they started nailing us for inadvertent helmet touching. This isn't rocket science, I don't know why they can't define a set of criteria and only penalize when they are all CLEARLY met. Do they get paid a commission on penalties or what?

 

[Elefantman]

I would prefer the penalty for targeting to be removal from the game for the remainder of the current quarter and all of the next quarter. So the max time lost would be under 30 minutes. Get called for targeting in the 1st, return after the half.

 

[BamaMoon]

I would prefer the penalty for targeting to be removal from the game for the remainder of the current quarter and all of the next quarter. So the max time lost would be under 30 minutes. Get called for targeting in the 1st, return after the half.

How about just a 15 yard penalty on 1st time in a game. Second time, a penalty. 3rd time...

I guess after 3 in a game they should sit for the rest of the game.

 

[BamaInCummingGA]

First off they should be consistent with targeting calls.
As someone else already stated: If the defensive player is already going low to make a tackle and at the last second the running back/receiver lowers his head to actually cause the contact either call targeting on the offensive player or don't call it at all.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Awesome

What is targeting again?

That needs to be the inscription on Matt Austin's tombstone.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Concerning targeting, it's the worst rule in college football.

No, it's the second worst.

The worst is this one: Auburn creams the receiver and commits an obvious DPI early in the game - but it's only 15 yards. Then they do it again - 15 yards.

At that point, the officials don't want to spend the rest of the game doing nothing but throwing DPI flags, so they keep in in their pockets except for the most obvious call - and the Auburn secondary spends the rest of the game getting away with by the rulebook DPI while the announcers in the booth opt for "the refs are just gonna let them play."

That would change damn quick if DPI was the spot foul it was before 1987.

Spurrier used to do something similar but with punt returns. He'd have one of his goons clobber the key punt returner on the first fair catch and take the 15 yards - because that punt returner was going to be terrified the rest of the game.


Targeting is one of those rules with healthy and good intent but with terrible application. Reminds me of what the late umpire Ron Luciano said: "I never called a balk; I never understood the damn rule."

 

[DzynKingRTR]

That needs to be the inscription on Matt Austin's tombstone.

psh, no one is going to know what blue font means but us.

 

[gtgilbert]

They throw the targeting flag on ANY and I do mean ANY play that "looks violent" then they let the guy in the booth figure it out. So far I've seen zero consistency in what criteria they use. first they said it had to involved contact with the crown of the helmet then they started nailing us for inadvertent helmet touching. This isn't rocket science, I don't know why they can't define a set of criteria and only penalize when they are all CLEARLY met. Do they get paid a commission on penalties or what?

I think the confusion happens because there are actually two separate paths or sets of circumstances that can result in a targeting call and folks get the criteria for each confused.

The first is using the crown of the helmet. The 'targeted' player does not have to be defenseless. If a player does this, regardless of where the contact happens on the targeted player, it's likely going to get called. This is the version that is most often called on a ball carrier (not defenseless), because a defender doesn't keep his head up.

The other path is forcible contact to the head or neck of a defenseless player. This is typically against a receiver as they are catching a pass or right after making the catch or a QB right after making a throw but there are some other ways to define defenseless that are pretty well laid out.

Both, in theory should have at least one indicator or targeting, but one indicator is 'attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area' and another is 'Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet' so the other stuff listed about crouching or launching doesn't really matter.

Either path can result in the call and it does not have to be both. The only real subjective parts are 'defenseless' - i.e. has a receiver clearly become a ball carrier, and 'forcible' versus incidental.

 

[RdunawayTX]

That would change damn quick if DPI was the spot foul it was before 1987.

This. So much this. It would fix everything wrong with this rule except for the idiot refs.