2022 CFP Peach Bowl | #4 Ohio State vs. #1 Georgia | December 31st, 2022 @ 8:00 PM EST

[JDailey23]

A play which resulted in a head injuring, the ref was five yards away and immediately threw a flag, and upon replay showed a defender launching both feet off the ground making contact with his helmet to the receivers head was the right call?

Correct. He didn’t lead with his helmet and that is part of the rule.

 

[LandofClevesMan]

I’ll be honest, I’ve lost track of what targeting is or is not.

I’ve also lost track of the burden of proof here.

Like if the ref thinks it is targeting in real time, I feel like the overturn must be indisputable.

The Harrison hit was close enough that I feel like the play stands……but much like the Michigan game, refs seem to be considering context now for some unknown reason.

Oh, well if we call this, Michigan has another chance to win…..and the game is basically over, so we’ll just not call it.

Oh, well if we call this, then Georgia basically loses, so we’ll just not call it.

They really need an officiating overhaul at this level. Just a lot of bad in both games to me.

Totally agree. i don’t believe in the conspiracies, but it does feel like calls are made to boost the drama in games. Retain viewership. Felt like targeting in the Michigan game too. The rule has notoriously bitten Ohio state on both sides in CFP history. It just seems like too much grey area. But i feel if a dude legitimately gets a concussion from a hit that looks even slightly unnecessary, they should call targeting. All the other calls up for debate.

 

[JDailey23]

Totally agree. i don’t believe in the conspiracies, but it does feel like calls are made to boost the drama in games. Retain viewership. Felt like targeting in the Michigan game too. The rule has notoriously bitten Ohio state on both sides in CFP history. It just seems like too much grey area. But i feel if a dude legitimately gets a concussion from a hit that looks even slightly unnecessary, they should call targeting. All the other calls up for debate.

I think the targeting rule should be removed. It’s not consistent and unfairly penalizes a team as a whole for potentially two games.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Totally agree. i don’t believe in the conspiracies, but it does feel like calls are made to boost the drama in games. Retain viewership. Felt like targeting in the Michigan game too. The rule has notoriously bitten Ohio state on both sides in CFP history. It just seems like too much grey area. But i feel if a dude legitimately gets a concussion from a hit that looks even slightly unnecessary, they should call targeting. All the other calls up for debate.

I don’t want to add even more subjectivity but I do agree and think the aftermath of the hit should be considered too.

Like, if you are on the fence and then see a guy get knocked unconscious, is it really controversial to stick with the call?

Are Georgia fans feeling completely screwed by a call when a DB leaves the ground and knocks someone out? I mean, I doubt it.

It unfortunately wasn’t surprising……as in the moment, I kind of just thought “Wow, this SORT OF looks like his shoulder, so they are definitely back tracking here”.

 

[LandofClevesMan]

Correct. He didn’t lead with his helmet and that is part of the rule.

idk. Dude led with his helmet. Side of his helmet hit Harrison’s helmet. It’s helmet to helmet contact. Guess i don’t know the rule anymore. It’s too inconsistent. Point being led to a head injury, which is what the point of the rule is. I guess by letter of the rule that wasn’t crown of helmet you’re correct.

 

[inliner311]

My first thought postgame after the final sequence was "where the fuck was Xavier Johnson on that set of downs?"

That guy was getting 5+ yards with every handoff. That was a situation where we NEEDED those yards.

Fuck, man. Idk. It's easy to second guess some of those late playcalls, but sometimes shit just happens.

If I'm upset with anyone from OSUs side it's Jim Knowles. He better have some answers next season or he gone.

I think Xavier Johnson was on the field but as a 3rd receiver. I just don't think they have many plays to get him the ball when he is playing the role of the 3rd receiver. I just don't think he has had enough reps with Stroud to build chemistry so he is just a guy running routes if he is used in that role.

 

[inliner311]

idk. Dude led with his helmet. Side of his helmet hit Harrison’s helmet. It’s helmet to helmet contact. Guess i don’t know the rule anymore. It’s too inconsistent. Point being led to a head injury, which is what the point of the rule is. I guess by letter of the rule that wasn’t crown of helmet you’re correct.

They need to make at least two levels of targeting. I think because the player get ejected that the refs will overturn calls because they don't feel it meets the level of the player needing to be ejected so they do away with the penalty. Really it should be like the NBA with flagrant penalties. A lower one with a penality for yards and a higher one with the penality plus ejection. I think we would have much more consistent calls if it's split and the players ejection is what they are looking for with the replay.

 

[LandofClevesMan]

They need to make at least two levels of targeting. I think because the player get ejected that the refs will overturn calls because they don't feel it meets the level of the player needing to be ejected so they do away with the penalty. Really it should be like the NBA with flagrant penalties. A lower one with a penality for yards and a higher one with the penality plus ejection. I think we would have much more consistent calls if it's split and the players ejection is what they are looking for with the replay.

Could definitely see that being a resolution to the targeting call. Too many absolutes. I try to look at it as if i were a fan on the other side for now. During this game my response would be “damn, dude screwed up and cost his team with targeting.” I generally hate the penalty. When refs throw flags that close to plays they see things replay simply cannot see. And that play was definitely game changing.

 

[bushwick_bill]

 

[inliner311]

Could definitely see that being a resolution to the targeting call. Too many absolutes. I try to look at it as if i were a fan on the other side for now. During this game my response would be “damn, dude screwed up and cost his team with targeting.” I generally hate the penalty. When refs throw flags that close to plays they see things replay simply cannot see. And that play was definitely game changing.

I never liked targeting either because it's so subjective. They were trying to make the game safer but it being all or nothing really swings games. The yards sometimes don't matter but in this case it was going to be huge. Also them losing one of their players would have been a huge hit to them. They knocked out our best receiver so it should have been something especially if it was called on the field.

 

[bushwick_bill]

 

[bushwick_bill]

 

[Ohio]

I think Xavier Johnson was on the field but as a 3rd receiver. I just don't think they have many plays to get him the ball when he is playing the role of the 3rd receiver. I just don't think he has had enough reps with Stroud to build chemistry so he is just a guy running routes if he is used in that role.

I mean in the run game specifically.

 

[-Akronite-]

This season we lost our two best receivers on hits that should’ve been penalties.

 

[inliner311]

I mean in the run game specifically.

Yea, I think the plays in the running game for Xavier Johnson are dependent on someone else being the 3rd receiver. I think some of the problem is Day had never really fully utilize Xavier Johnson like he should so there are a limited amount of plays to go to if they want to call Xavier Johnson number. I'm not sure if the personnel we had left lined up with the personnel to run Xavier's plays.

They had to put their best players on the field and Xavier Johnson as 3rd receiver was probably the sets that everyone else had reps at. I'm not sure they had much where Hayden and Xavier were being used as RBs. That kind of the stuff that could have been flushed out early in the season to keep in the playbook for when they needed it. Day just has made the playbook too narrow to build in contingencies for the skill set of players he has. Xavier Johnson is just prime example of it.

I think we look at Xavier Johnson as someone that should have been the hybrid in Urbans system while Day just looks at him as the backup receiver that they have some gadget plays for. The hybrid role gave Urban someone to turn to if they needed another playmaker. I've always thought it was a bad decision for Day to get rid of that role. It was like a stepping stone role that could swing both in the passing game or to the running game. Curtis Samuel and Jalen Marshall were prime examples of how to use that role to build up a playmaker.