Week 13 MNF: N.Y. Giants at New England (don't even try talking about the Bills here! ⚠️)

[Blank Stare]

F the Cheats

[MJS]

2 hours ago, CincyBillsFan said:

I watch a lot of college football and when they first adopted the rule you had a load of targeting penalty's because players were still leading with their helmets like it was a missile.  But over the years those kinds of tackles have been reduced dramatically.  Now you see payers using the shoulder aimed at the center of body mass. For me it has been a welcome and very visible improvement in the college game.

 

For what it's worth I asked AI abut the college targeting rule and injury's:

 

Yes, college football targeting rules have helped reduce injuries, particularly concussions, though the data is not definitive and some studies show a higher risk of concussion on plays where targeting is called. Studies indicate that since the rule's implementation, there has been a decrease in concussion rates, especially in high schools. While the rule is intended to protect players, some research suggests that the plays most frequently called for targeting are also more likely to result in a concussion, which may indicate the rule is identifying dangerous situations rather than preventing them entirely. 

Tackling has changed across the entire sport at all levels over the last 20-30 years as an emphasis on player safety, awareness of risks, and officiating have all necessitated the change. Yes, the targeting rule is part of that legislation, but I don't believe it is the cause of those changes. The changes were already happening. I think it is an unnecessary rule and is more for the NCAA to point to to say they take player safety seriously rather than something that really moves the needle.