David Glenn

tbennett117 said:

Raleigh sportsradio guy was talking about the NCSU/Clemson game and was discussing the beef between the two teams and specifically the Dave Doeren TL comment about putting him on his back (non issue in my opinion). Glenn is not a NCSU guy and actually a northerner so is unbiased in the triangle which is why I like listening to him. He gave some background to our beef with DD’s previous comments about Gallman. During his comments he said absolutely that play was targeting and should have been called.

I just thought it was interesting a Raleigh guy would say it but again unbiased. All the other local Raleigh sports guys and many of their fans say it wasn’t targeting.

I think David Glenn has a podcast if you are interested in listening to him in the future. And he loves some Dabo. I’ve heard Dabo on his show many times.

Smokey Gleem....lmao. He went to Unc-CH after graduating elsewhere and was/is the owner of the Poop Sheet ....now the ACC Sports Journal or ACC Sports.com. He was the publisher and owned along with former Unc-CH basketball player Dennis Wuycik. He's a ####### from Philly that hates NC State and we hate him with a passion. It's sucky sports radio but it is partially sports radio. Yeah, he'll interview DD or Debbie Yow. He's an idiot. If you want to hear football Sports Talk on that station....listen to former ECU Coach Steve Logan....the rest is fluff and filler....til basketball season starts for Duke and Unc.

The hit was not targeting (on purpose) but it was a helmet to helmet hard hit. I'm not sure if that was on the books 2 years ago but if it was the refs missed it.

NC State wants to play hard nosed football by the books....we hope every call make is made correctly!!!!!!!!!! We want football players to decide the game and hurting Clemson players is not our mission but hitting them hard and often is!

BigCUFan®

CU Medallion [64519]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 88961

Joined: 3/27/01

On a targeting call, intent is irrelevant.

Oct 19, 2018, 1:35 PM [ in reply to Re: David Glenn ]

Fans get frustrated with the rule’s inconsistent usage and flawed enforcement.

Here's the rule;

No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting

No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

Launch—a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet

Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14):

A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
A player on the ground.
A player obviously out of the play.
A player who receives a blind-side block.
A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
A quarterback any time after a change of possession.
A ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feet-first

Based on the black letter language of the rule, the hit on Gallman was absolutely positively targeting.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.

David Glenn

Stopped reading at

Stopped reading at

I think that's all that's left in Raleigh***

It absolutely positively was targeting***

Re: David Glenn

Re: David Glenn

On a targeting call, intent is irrelevant.

i like Steve Logan too

TigerBoard POTD