Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Sometimes the best intentions have unintended consequences that undermine and derail the purpose of the original plan.
As it relates to football, the aforementioned statement is best illustrated as it concerns the targeting rule. Designed to enhance player safety, which most all would support, the rule has created confusion as to what is acceptable in this violent sport.
This was the case during BYU’s game against Utah that saw Kai Nacua get penalized for a targeting hit on Utah receiver Demari Simpkins. Replays show Nacua dipping down to turn his left shoulder to avoid hitting the receiver above the neck.
The aggressive play resulted in a pass incompletion, but the official standing several yards behind the action called a penalty. After a review, Nacua was ejected and as part of the sanction has to sit out the first half of this week’s game against UCLA.
“I’m all about safety, but at the same time it’s a contact sport,” said analyst Lincoln Kennedy, who is in the College Football Hall of Fame and played offense line in the NFL for 11 seasons.
Understandably, upon the announcement of Nacua’s penalty first-year coach Kalani Sitake vehemently protested and subsequently drew a 15-yard unsportsmanlike infraction. Immediately, reaction blew up on social media with many criticizing the decision. Fox Sports commentator Mike Pereira, who served as vice president of officiating for NFL, called for the penalty to reversed during the review.
Amen.
In light of all the relatively new information on the extremely serious nature of concussions, all of us applaud college football’s desire to put a premium on player safety. However, in this case, the rule goes too far.
At no point did Nacua intend to target Simpkins with anything more than to hit him hard enough to cause the receiver to drop the ball. At the very least, to prevent a touchdown, Nacua was looking to hit a receiver who lowered himself to create a small target.
“It’s always an interpretative rule,” Kennedy said. “All of a sudden we’re creating a strike zone.”
Related:
Refs make ‘right calls’ with targeting rule in BYU-Utah game
A simple mention of the targeting rule in football will elicit a rabid debate for and against its merit in the game. For fans watching the rivalry matchup between BYU and Utah Saturday, it's a controversial subject in an important game.For his efforts, Nacua received an escort into the visitors' locker room. To further add to the absurdity, BYU will be without its best player in the secondary for two quarters against UCLA, which features future NFL quarterback Josh Rosen.
At some point, common sense has to overrule sensitivity. Because a play may look bad, particularly when the offensive player makes for a small target, it should not lead to such drastic action. At the minimum, unless the penalty is warranted beyond doubt, eliminate extending the ejection into a further suspension the following game.
Nacua was the first of two BYU players to get ejected for targeting. Cornerback Austin McChesney also will miss the first half against UCLA.
“It’s just really difficult for a young man to stop midstream in their run or a play and adjust according to what a receiver is doing,” Sitake said after BYU’s one-point loss. “It’s a difficult thing. For those that played the game it’s hard; you run full speed at something and then change your body position. I thought our guys did a great job with their body position. I don’t think there’s intent in there.”
During his weekly radio show on KSL, Sitake argued Simpkins wasn’t a defenseless player, pointing out the receiver lowered himself as he saw Nacua approaching. Joel Klatt, who worked the game as an analyst, stated the responsibility is incorrectly placed on the defender to protect player safety downfield.
Predictably, Utah coach Kyle Whittingham thought both calls were correct. Whittingham, who wasn’t sure a late hit on Utah offensive lineman Garret Bolles earlier in the game was a correct call, did admit football has changed since he played linebacker for BYU 35 years ago.
Obviously, in general, the rule changes have made for a safer sport.
“The hits that used to be routine are now targeting,” he said. “By the letter of the law, the two BYU hits were targeting. A lot has changed the last 10 years with player safety, and that’s for the best.”
BYU linebacker Butch Pau’u said players are taught to go through the offensive player, but the angle Nacua had on the tackle made it difficult to avoid any kind of contact near the receiver’s upper body.
These types of split-second decisions can create a great amount of doubt for a tackler.
“Kai got low as he could,” Pau’u said. “He didn’t want to take out the legs, he just tried to get a good, solid hit. But we can’t really do much as a defensive player. I don’t know what the refs want us to do. We are just going to have to respect their calls.”
