Sunday observations: Should targeting lead to ejections?

Penn State picked up a huge 16-10 win Saturday at Wisconsin, and here are some follow-up observations from the game.

The targeting call on Penn State linebacker Ellis Brooks

Yes, I do believe it was targeting. Some of you may not. Here is the play:

Brooks led with the crown of his helmet and hit Wisconsin QB Graham Mertz in the head. It was close, sure, but in my view, the replay does show a hit to the head. Officials didn't call it on the field, and only after Wisconsin called a timeout to allow the refs to look at it longer was it actually called.

"But ... but ... but ... that's just football," some of you are thinking.

Yeah, it's football. The way it USED TO BE played. The way the sport is officiated now, that is targeting.

Penn State fans don't want it to be targeting, because it happened to a player on your team. But as I say all the time, if it happened to a player on the other team, you certainly would want that to be called targeting.

Here's what James Franklin had to say about the call, during his postgame show with broadcaster Steve Jones:

"I don’t agree with the call," Franklin said. "You can’t target a ball carrier unless you use the crown of your helmet. I didn’t think he did that."

Franklin later added, "You have to turn your head down and use the crown of your helmet. And I get it. I understand the reason for the rule. They’re going to lean on the side of protecting the players. But what else does a kid do there?"

Here's the problem with all of this:

Targeting reviews often are very subjective, as in, there may not be definitive proof or angles of showing a direct hit to the head. Even in the hit above, some people seem to think Brooks hit Mertz in the shoulder first, then the head. And Franklin didn't think Brooks led with the crown.

Where all of this becomes a big, big deal is that the player flagged for targeting gets ejected from the game. If it happens in the second half, he also has to sit out the first half the following week, as Brooks will this week against Ball State.

The ejection part has become a major point of frustration in college football. Analysts everywhere have decried the ejection rule, most claiming that targeting should be a 15-yard penalty but adding that the player should not be ejected.

FOX's Joel Klatt blasted the ejection rule after the game on the TV broadcast.

"Hey, college football, at some point you've got to measure intent," Klatt said. "The guy's not out there head hunting, he's playing fast. It's a violent sport. This is a good player. This is a really good player. He's the heart and soul of this defense right now. He shouldn't be ejected from the game. You want to throw a flag, throw a flag. Don't eject the guy from the game. You've got to fix this in college football. It's a disgrace."

There's a lot to unpack there.

First, it doesn't matter if it's a good player or not, or if he's the heart and soul of the defense. All of that is an analyst caught up in a good game and not wanting to see a player get kicked out.

The targeting rule is in place to protect everyone -- the guy doing the hitting and the guy getting hit -- because it is a violent sport, just as Klatt said.

The sport needed to change after decades of dudes getting drilled repeatedly and having to deal with life-changing concussions. And the sport has changed with the way players are taught to hit at all levels -- by keeping their head up.

I'm probably in the very small minority here, but I actually do believe players should get ejected for targeting. Hits to the head are very, very serious, and they need to come with very serious penalties.

The issue, though, that infuriates so many people is that what is called targeting in one game sometimes doesn't get called in another game on a similar play. Again, there's so much subjectivity and ambiguity in the way replays work -- such as the human element, different stadiums and different TV broadcasts that have big discrepancies in replay capabilities.

We all want to see the best players stay on the field so that they can decide the game. That's a huge part of what has led to so much anger over players getting ejected for targeting.

But to me, safety is far more important than any of that, which is why I do not have a problem with players getting ejected for targeting.

Like everyone else, I have a problem with the inconsistency in the way targeting is called or not, and absolutely, that must be corrected in college football.

Like I said, I know I'm in the minority with my opinion, which is evidenced by my Twitter poll results:

REPORT CARD

Here are my grades for each unit:

OFFENSE: C-

I expected a lot more. Getting shut out with one first down in the first half was crazy. Penn State was very fortunate the defense played so well and that Wisconsin kept shooting itself in the foot.

DEFENSE: A-

The main thing that matters is Penn State gave up only 10 points on the road to the No. 12 team in the country. That's impressive. I'm only going A-, though, because the Badgers did move the ball well, with 29 first downs, 180 yards rushing and 359 total yards.

SPECIAL TEAMS: C-

Penn State did block a field goal (Arnold Ebiketie), which saves this grade from being worse. The Lions would really be kicking themselves if they had lost this game because of Jordan Stout's missed PAT or 23-yard field goal.

COACHING: First half C-, second half A-

Once again -- and this happens many times each season -- Penn State's coaches made great adjustments at halftime and came out looking like a different team in many ways in the second half. The defense was fine in the first half. The offensive adjustments were terrific, going from zero points and 43 yards to 16 points and 254 yards in the second half. KEEP THROWING DEEP and this offense will be in good shape.

PSU IN THE POLLS

Penn State, No. 19 in the preseason poll, will make a big move up this week, but we'll have to wait until Tuesday to find out. The AP and coaches polls typically are released Sunday, but there are still games scheduled for Sunday and Monday this week, so the polls were pushed back.

These are the teams ranked ahead of Penn State in the AP poll that lost: 3 Clemson, 10 North Carolina, 12 Wisconsin, 14 Miami, 16 LSU, 17 Indiana.

Look for Penn State to land somewhere in the range of No. 13 this week.

BET ON IT

Penn State is favored by 22 over Ball State this week. The Cardinals opened up with a 31-21 win over Western Illinois.