INDIANAPOLIS (AP) 鈥� Division I football rules makers have proposed a one-year trial rule allowing a player disqualified for targeting for the first time to play in his team’s next game regardless of which half the penalty was assessed, announced Thursday.
Currently, players disqualified for targeting must miss the rest of the game and, if the penalty occurs in the second half, sit out the first half of the next game.
Under the Division I Football Rules Subcommittee’s proposal, a player disqualified for targeting a second time during the season would miss the first half of the next game. A third targeting ejection in the same season would cause the offending player to miss the entire next game.
Targeting is forcible contact with an opponent’s head or neck area where the offending player often uses the crown of his helmet to make contact or launches his body into the opposing player above the shoulders.
Oversight committees for the Bowl Subdivision and Championship Subdivision must approve proposals before they become official. Those committees meet next month.
There were 117 targeting fouls enforced last season in the FBS, and 64 players who were penalized in the second half had to sit out the first half of the following game, national coordinator of football officials Steve Shaw said Friday. Five players were called for targeting a second time, and there were no three-time offenders.
Shaw said the average number of targeting penalties enforced has decreased from a high of 0.27 per game in 2020 to 0.13 last season.
鈥淚f you go back and watch film from 2017 or 鈥�18 versus today, the players play the game differently,鈥� he said. 鈥淭he hits on the quarterback, hits on receivers and defenseless players, the game has changed in a positive way and our injury rate shows that. We can鈥檛 let up, so with this experimental change, we鈥檙e going to monitor this very closely and make sure it doesn鈥檛 change behavior.”
Dress code
The rules subcommittee proposed that players wear leg coverings from the top of their shoes to the bottom of their pants. Players would have to wear the same covering style and colors for that particular game.
Players out of compliance with the rule would have to leave the game for at least one down and correct the issue. A team would receive a warning for the first offense.
If a team has a second offense under this proposal, the offending team would be given a 5-yard penalty. Any subsequent violations of the rule would result in a 15-yard penalty.
鈥淭he current look of the uniform is clearly not meeting the expectations of the college football community,鈥� Edds said. 鈥淭his will take a collective effort by administrators, coaches and officials to communicate expectations to players and equipment managers. This proposal, we believe, is definitive and gives us a chance for consistent enforcement across Division I football.鈥�
Fair catch kick
Under a proposal, a team could choose to attempt a fair catch kick after a completed or awarded fair catch. The kick would be a field goal place kick with a holder or a drop kick from the spot where the returner caught the ball. The defense would be at least 10 yards from the spot of the kick.
If the ensuing kick goes through the uprights, it would be worth three points.
Subcommittee members believe adding the rule would align Division I rules with those in the NFL and high school football. The rarely used play came up in 2024 in the NFL when the Los Angeles Chargers’ Cameron Dicker converted from 57 yards against the Denver Broncos.
___
Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up . AP college football: and
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
