Our experiences as football fans are being deteriorated by penalties.
Fouls and undisciplined play have undoubtedly played a major role in the Ducks’ season so far. Ranking the top 20 in penalty yards per game, Oregon’s sloppy play has been just as big a factor as any opponent on the schedule. However, some of these calls –– like a questionable targeting call on DJ Johnson against Washington State –– have brought outrage to Duck fans.
They aren’t alone. Nationwide, a complaint of soft and weak officiating calls and decisions demonstrate the path football is on: a path to a two-hand touch league.
Over recent years, it seems, football is becoming softer. New regulations for penalties and the criteria for calling them appear to be creating a game with major officiating influence.
College football and the NFL alike have been attempting to progress in their efforts to increase player safety and reduce long-lasting injury. I’m not fully convinced these new systems are sturdy.
Let’s start with targeting. It’s a rule to stop players from “targeting” opposing players head or necks during tackles. It’s a rule that has certainly impacted Oregon’s penalty-littered season in 2022. At least three players have been called for forcible contact to the head or neck and have suffered shortened games because of it. Dontae Manning, Bryce Boettcher and DJ Johnson all have been ejected from contests this year.
The rule isn’t what bothers me. Players should absolutely be protected from what used to be known as spearing. What bugs me, and I believe many football fans agree, is the frequency and the punishment.
Replay is used in these games to confirm targeting calls, and that’s great. But it should also be used to watch for intent.
How many examples have we seen where an offensive player is about to be tackled by a defending player going after their knees, when suddenly the offensive player lowers a head or shoulder and gets hit in the head. You’re telling me a cornerback trying to make a routine tackle on a guy who’s also going low should be removed and suspended?
Something doesn’t sit well with that.
I propose a rule change. Officials should be able to look at targeting calls and review them for intent. If an unlucky series of events leads to players colliding, a penalty, but no suspension should be enforced. As it stands now in college, players miss an extra half of a football game for a targeting call. In these clear-cut cases where no intent to harm is found, a suspension shouldn’t be necessary.
Now, I understand this would be a judgment call, and it would be in the hands of officiating crews. Because of this, if intent can’t be determined, the suspensions can be upheld. However, on these instances where players collide as both players go low, I don’t feel that warrants a suspension.
College football commentator Joel Klatt said, “I just hate the ejection. This is a problem with this rule… At some point you have to measure intent.”
Joel, I completely agree.
There is no targeting ejection rule in the NFL, and I believe college football should implement this immediately. I’ll leave it at that.
The topic of the NFL provides an opportunity to talk about another penalty that’s made headlines lately: roughing the passer.
The last month of NFL football has seen some questionable roughing the passer calls. In response to the calls, NFL fans have let the officials hear it. Kansas City defensive tackle Chris Jones was called for roughing the passer while making more contact with the football than the Raiders’ Derek Carr. The league also certainly seemed to favor Tom Brady with a favorable call in a close game against the Falcons.
When asked about it, Brady simply said “I don’t throw the flags.” Of course he doesn’t, but NFL quarterbacks sure benefit from it.
Ram’s defensive tackle said, “Hopefully we can do something to change that so we can, as rushers, be able to just play.”
The logic of this call is absolutely baffling to me. Defensive players can no longer land on quarterbacks with their full body weight. They can’t tackle anymore.
I’d like to give a disclaimer. I understand the hit on Miami’s Tua Tagovailoa turned the football world upside down and instilled a lot of fear for player safety and concussion protocol. That isn’t lost on me. What I’m saying is one look at either the Jones sack or the hit on Brady shows some seriously soft officiating and requires some case-by-case evaluating.
Again, use this incredible video-replay system that’s already used dozens of times each week. Make the call, review it, see if defenders are hitting the quarterback’s head or not and adjust the call accordingly. With all the technology leagues have available to them there is no reason to continually let horribly soft calls slip through the cracks.
More reviews and deliberation would lower the number of soft penalties being enforced in football recently, without negating the efforts to keep players safe. I’m all for calling out dangerous hits and plays that could cause injury. But on the ones that won’t, let’s take a closer look before we make weak calls that could have a heavy impact on the game we all love.
