Joel Klatt reacts to controversial targeting call on Arvell Reese, overturned decision

Ohio State linebacker Arvell Reese was ejected for targeting during the fourth quarter of Saturday’s win over Nebraska. However, that call has since been overturned, and he will not have to sit out for the first half of Saturday’s game at Penn State.

Fox Sports analyst Joel Klatt shared his reaction to the targeting call and it being overturned on his podcast this week.

“Arvell Reese, who’s a backup linebacker for Ohio State, he was called for targeting late. Really late, fourth quarter, against Nebraska. And it was a highly questionable call,” Joel Klatt said. “I mean very questionable call. Which a lot of targetings are. But this one was then reviewed by the league and Ohio State won the appeal.

“They appealed to the Big Ten, who went to the NCAA, who overturned the call. … They say like, ‘You know what, that shouldn’t have been targeting.’ So his suspension for the first half of the Penn State game goes away. Because remember, if you get ejected via targeting in the second half of the game you’re playing, then you have to sit out the next half.”

Klatt added that Arvell Reese having his suspension overturned is a big deal for Ohio State. The sophomore has 17 tackles, including 2 tackles for loss, on the season.

Reese could be important to helping the Buckeyes slow down Penn State’s rushing attack.

“Now he does not have to sit out against Penn State, which is actually huge for Ohio State’s defense. Because against that run game, they’re going to need some depth at the linebacker position. So that’s a big boost for Ohio State,” Klatt said.

Joel Klatt also offered his thoughts on targeting calls in general in college football, not just the one on Arvell Reese. He is fine with targeting calls staying in the game, but he feels that there are too many ejections with the way the current rules are.

“Targeting in and of itself is not bad for the sport. The way that we penalize the players is what’s bad for the sport. If you want to call unnecessary roughness or targeting on some of these hits, I’m fine with that. … [But] a lot of times these are just football plays, which the Arvell Reese play was just a football play,” Klatt said. “And now you’re ejecting the player? That’s crazy. If you want to eject a player for spearing with his helmet and going down and actually targeting with the crown of his helmet, I can be on board with that.

“But suspending a player, ejecting a player, for making a football play that is deemed forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless player? I’m not on board with. I’m not on board with. If you want to throw a flag and mark off 15 yards, fine. OK, fine. I’ll give it to you. … But stop ejecting players for this penalty. This has to be addressed. And it’s been egregious ever since they instituted it.”