Michigan State defensive back Malik Spencer found himself ejected from Friday night’s season-opener in East Lansing after being flagged for targeting, following a brutal hit on Florida Atlantic quarterback Cam Fancher. The hit, which occurred after Fancher attempted a late slide, has ignited a heated debate over college football’s controversial targeting rule.
Targeting in college football is one of the most polarizing and subjective penalties in the sport. According to NCAA rules, targeting is called when a player initiates forcible contact against an opponent that “goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball.” The rule is intended to protect players, particularly in the head and neck areas, but it often leaves room for interpretation.
The rulebook outlines several key indicators of targeting:
- Launch: A player leaves his feet to attack an opponent with an upward and forward thrust, aiming for the head or neck area.
- Crouch and Thrust: A player crouches, then thrusts upward and forward to make forcible contact with the head or neck area, even if one or both feet remain on the ground.
- Leading with Helmet, Shoulder, Forearm, Fist, Hand, or Elbow: A player uses any of these to make forcible contact with the head or neck area.
- Lowering the Head: A player lowers his head before initiating contact with the crown of the helmet.
Spencer’s hit on Fancher ticked three out of these four boxes. He launched himself into the tackle, led with his helmet to strike the head/neck area, and lowered his head, making forcible contact with the crown of his helmet. By the book, it was a textbook case of targeting, and the Big Ten officials made the correct decision in ejecting Spencer from the game.
RELATED: Arch Manning’s Future Takes an Unexpected Twist Following Drew Brees’ Bold Remarks
However, the situation was complicated by the timing of Fancher’s slide. The Florida Atlantic quarterback slid at the last possible moment, leaving Michigan State’s defense, already committed to the tackle, with little time to adjust and avoid the collision. This raises a difficult question: should the onus be entirely on the defensive player in such scenarios, or does the quarterback bear some responsibility for sliding too late?
This incident underscores the complexities of the targeting rule. Spencer’s actions warranted an ejection under the current rules, but the late slide by Fancher contributed to the dangerous collision. The dilemma highlights the ongoing challenge in balancing player safety with the realities of high-speed gameplay.
There’s no simple solution to this issue. The targeting rule is designed to protect players, but late slides often put defenders in a no-win situation, where avoiding contact is nearly impossible. The debate over how to address late slides and targeting in college football is likely to continue, as it’s clear that while the rule is well-intentioned, its application can sometimes lead to unintended consequences. As the sport evolves, so too must the rules that govern it, ensuring they effectively safeguard players without compromising the integrity of the game.
