Miami Hurricanes Should Look Forward, Not Backwards

44 is not 64.

When Butch Davis took the Miami Hurricanes job back in January 1995, he was 43 years old and coming off of back-to-back Super Bowl victories as the defensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys.

It was a different time and a different era.

With the termination of Al Golden, the job at "The U" has come open again. There has been...a rumbling? A groundswell? A casual mention? The correct words fail.

Anyway, let's just say that there has been mention of bringing back Butch Davis from his cable television exile, and 15 years away from South Florida, to coach Miami again.

Which begs this question: Why is he qualified?

The Aim of Targeting Needs Further Examination

Trying to limit helmet to helmet collision is a good thing in theory....

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

It’s an old proverb or aphorism. One way to interpret it is that even though an idea may look good or may have a noble intention, it can have unforeseen negative consequences.

The current approach to targeting in collegiate football is a prime example of this aphorism in action.

The spirit of the rule is, without question, a positive thing. Yes, football is a collision sport, with bodies flying around at an impressive rate of speed. Given the spate of head injuries, and the idea of CTE being a real thing that can affect lifespan and quality of life after playing days are over, doing something to minimize major concussions is a good thing.

However, when the idea of trying to minimize injury is affecting the on-field product, well, that is troubling.

This is one isolated instance from a game two weeks ago. The Michigan defender was blocked into the Michigan State quarterback who was lying on his back. Their helmets met facemask to facemask. Granted, Michigan State partisans will say that he was intentional in how he landed on Connor Cook; it appears to have been an accident. Upon review, the targeting call stood and the Michigan player was ejected.

Here is a video from 2014 showing a couple of accurate calls in conjunction with an absolutely awful application of the rule to a Clemson player.

Now, this is not to say that player safety is not important. That is not the case I am making at all.

(Although to be fair, there is just as much damage done from sub-concussive blows as from large, "He got blowed up!" kinds of hits. There is still more research to be done, obviously, but the issues related to head trauma from collision and contact sports seems to be taking more of cumulative effect approach.)

The initial rule was a personal foul penalty and an ejection. Upon review the ejection could be rescinded but not the penalty. That was changed a couple of seasons ago to allow for the rescinding of the penalty and the ejection. Which was a move in the right direction for sure.

However there still seems to be too much gray area and subjectivity as to what is targeting or not targeting. (Much like what is a catch or not. But that's another blog post.)

I would prefer it being two personal fouls and you're done for that game.

Or another option would be a point system like with technical fouls in the NBA. Let's say that your first targeting that's upheld is a 15 yard penalty. Second one is a penalty and you miss the balance of that game (no carryover). If you get popped for a third in a season you miss the rest of that game AND all of the next game.

It's not perfect, and it's a plan that needs ironing out. Maybe, though, it could serve as a jumping off point to revise how the rule is applied.