Kenny Dillingham: ‘I don’t know what targeting is’ after no-call in Peach Bowl loss
Jan 1, 2025, 4:43 PM
Kenny Dillingham came away puzzled by the lack of a targeting call in the fourth quarter of Arizona State’s 39-31 Peach Bowl loss to Texas in double overtime on Wednesday.
ASU devised a herculean comeback to tie the game at 24-24 after trailing by 16 midway through the fourth quarter and had the ball with a chance to go win the game in regulation.
Quarterback Sam Leavitt found receiver Melquan Stovall over the middle, and Stovall got laid out by Texas defender Michael Taaffe. There was helmet-to-helmet contact which drew a review, but officials deemed the play clean.
Why have a targeting rule if you are going to call obvious targeting in the biggest games?
How could they look at this and deem it not targeting???
pic.twitter.com/GhJVMHAvMy— Jay Feely (@jayfeely) January 1, 2025
RELATED STORIES
“In terms of the targeting, I mean, I’m going to be honest, I don’t know what targeting is,” Dillingham said postgame.
The irony of the situation stemmed from ASU’s Big 12 title game win over Iowa State, as standout defensive back Shamari Simmons was called for targeting on quarterback Rocco Becht. ASU appealed his suspension but was denied.
Simmons had to sit out the first half on Wednesday and immediately made an impact on the game out of halftime by forcing a safety.
“We lost one of our best players in the first half for targeting, and I just don’t — I just don’t know what it is,” Dillingham added. “So I don’t want to comment on something that I have to get a better grasp of what it is just because I just don’t quite understand it. I do want to protect the players though. So whatever rules that are put in place to protect the players, I’m all about.”
The NCAA has two rules regarding targeting, saying no player shall make “forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless player or contact an opponent with the crown (top) of their helmet.”
Kenny Dillingham said he does not know what targeting is after a controversial non-call during the Peach Bowl. pic.twitter.com/nMsxiGgyzq
— Arizona Sports (@AZSports) January 1, 2025
Former official and NBC rules expert Terry McAulay posted on X that it was a clear targeting penalty.
At that point in the game, it proved consequential.
ASU punted the ball back to Texas with just over a minute on the clock, and the Longhorns drove down the field to set up a field-goal attempt. Kicker Bert Auburn missed from 38 yards to set up overtime, and Texas won the game on an interception in double OT.
Former players, analysts confused by no targeting call in ASU vs. Texas
If that’s not targeting do away with the rule
— Booger (@ESPNBooger) January 1, 2025
That is a disgrace.
If that’s not targeting, what is?#ASU #Texas— Mike Greenberg (@Espngreeny) January 1, 2025
According to the college football rules (from my understanding) that was targeting.
As a football player, it was a facemask to facemask hit. I don’t think it was malicious, dirty or targeting in any way.
Either way, ball don’t lie. https://t.co/rdnC9IXhHd
— JJ Watt (@JJWatt) January 1, 2025
Evidently, I don’t know what targeting is. I share that in common with these officials.
— Scott Hanson (@ScottHanson) January 1, 2025
I’m sorry. I was trying to bite my tongue bc I talk about it a lot but how the hail was that not targeting? I mean I don’t understand the rule at all. It sucks.
— David Pollack (@davidpollack47) January 1, 2025
Watching this @TexasFootball @ASU game and just watched a textbook “targeting” play get reviewed and determined by the review booth that it wasn’t. I’m really beginning to think the games are rigged. Compare that hit alot of targeting hits throughout the year and I’ve seen less…
— Terrell Owens (@terrellowens) January 1, 2025
I give up on what is targeting
— Damien Woody (@damienwoody) January 1, 2025
