SEC’s New Targeting Rule A Win For Common Sense

NCAAF College Football News, Photos, Stats, Scores, Schedule & Videos...

SEC Media Days 2026 was, as usual, a lot of sizzle and very little steak. But one announcement was significant enough that it merits further consideration.

The league announced that beginning in 2026 a player’s first targeting ejection of the season will no longer carry an automatic suspension into the next game. The player is still disqualified for the remainder of the current game, but may play the following week regardless of whether the foul occurred in the first or second half. A second targeting ejection in the same season results in missing the first half of the next game, while a third results in a full game suspension. Conferences may also use an appeals process after a second offense. This all aligns the SEC with the NCAA’s new one year trial rule. 

The change could reduce the impact of borderline targeting calls on future games, especially when star players are ejected late in a contest. Supporters of the changes argue the new rule preserves player safety while making the punishment more proportional since a first offense no longer creates an automatic carryover suspension. Critics may worry that removing the immediate next game consequence could slightly weaken deterrence, though players still face ejection and escalating penalties for repeat violations. At a minimum, there’s a strong argument that this rule penalizes repeat offenders and actual “head hunters” while not penalizing players as harshly for an isolated incident.

According the SEC coordinator of officials John McDaid, six FBS players were given two targeting fouls during the 2025 season. Seven players were given two targeting flags in both 2021 and 2022. Five were flagged twice in 2023 and four were given two in 2024. No FBS players were given three or more targeting fouls in a season over the last five years. McDaid highlighted the data as evidence showing the targeting rule is effective to shape player behavior. Personally, I think some of it is also a shift in coaching practices now that the targeting rule has been generally in its current form for a decade. Nobody teaches tackling the way Greg Blue did it anymore, whether for good or ill.

Other conferences are likely to monitor the rule’s effects closely. Because the NCAA approved the policy as a one year experiment across  the Football Bowl Subdivision, many leagues are expected to gather data on player behavior, officiating consistency, and injury trends before advocating permanent adoption or further revisions. If the trial appears to be  maintaining safety while reducing controversy broader support across college football seems all but assured. Conversely, if repeat offenses increase or enforcement becomes more contentious, conferences could still push for stricter penalties or modifications before making the rule permanent.

It remains to be seen how these changes will actually affect the game. I think the best outcome would be that they really don’t, and we don’t notice the change. I’m all for player safety, but there’s long been a school of thought that the current rule is overly penal, especially on bang/bang plays where there’s clearly no intent to injure. Not taking players off the field for extended periods in that situation strikes me as, on balance, a more sensible way of administering the rule.

Go ‘Dawgs!!!

More at NCAAF College Football News, Photos, Stats, Scores, Schedule & Videos