Will Coley's ejection be reviewed by the SEC?

[PorkSoda]

He led with the helmet, though appears to have missed with the helmet (debatable), which resulted in leading with the shoulder.  But he hit him in the head and/or neck area.

Combine that with the WR being defenseless and it's targeting.

It's that simple.

I think it's too protective of a rule, but there is no doubt this is a penalty under the current rules

I'm not sure how we can all watch the same clip and see different things.  there was ZERO helmet contact.  he lead with his shoulder and hit the guy in the chest.

if he had hit the helmet, the guys head would have snapped back instead of forward.  its simple physics.

[Atlhogfan1]

I get the penalty.  I get why the leagues are holding up the targeting calls.

What I have an issue with:

the wording of the rule - need to define "head and neck area"

the statement "his head snapped back"  - it did but so what?  hard hits will do that

statements about him leading with his helmet

statements he hit him in the head or neck area - this is apparently extremely subjective


The A&M hit was egregious.  This one wasn't.  But the officials and league are going to protect themselves. 

[hog.goblin]

I'm not sure how we can all watch the same clip and see different things.  there was ZERO helmet contact.  he lead with his shoulder and hit the guy in the chest.

if he had hit the helmet, the guys head would have snapped back instead of forward.  its simple physics.

Yep, it's amazing how we can watch the same video and completely disgree.  Not just you and me, but the officials, announcers, and other hog fans.  But I haven't seen a non-Hog fan say it wasn't targeting.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

Think about this:

In the world of football, pansy is the new normal.

Just great.

[hog.goblin]

Think about this:

In the world of football, pansy is the new normal.

Just great.

Difficult to argue with that

[lasthog]

I'm not sure how we can all watch the same clip and see different things.  there was ZERO helmet contact.  he lead with his shoulder and hit the guy in the chest.

if he had hit the helmet, the guys head would have snapped back instead of forward.  its simple physics.

Not according to the Warren Commission's explanation of the Zapruder video.

[rude1]

The problem is he is getting there two steps late and not letting up until the last possible second. I mean the ball has been picked off by the time he arrives and the player he is looking to take out is in no position to make a play, this is why it was called and why CBB says he agrees with it. Has to learn to think quicker and call it off quicker rather than trying to avoid it after your right in the players face. I think too often many look for helmet to helmet contact before thinking it's targeting, when the reality it's "forcible contact to a defenseless player that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball."

[PonderinHog]

Yep, it's amazing how we can watch the same video and completely disgree.  Not just you and me, but the officials, announcers, and other hog fans.  But I haven't seen a non-Hog fan say it wasn't targeting.

He comes at you so fast, it just messes you up.

[HogNuttz]

He comes at you so fast, it just messes you up.

Those players were really flying around out there Chuck.