While the play was accurately called as "clipping" and a penalty was properly assessed, that is the only thing that was called correct in this instance. The media buzz calling it dirty and cheap and the calling for suspensions is completely unwarranted and that video shows this clearly. There is a picture from the backside that perfectly shows this as well. If this was any other player not named Clowney there would not have been a second more given to it anywhere. If you notice the video it shows Holts intention clearly. If the clip was about three seconds prior to what it currently shows you would see that Holts was clearly falling and was not intending to hit or protect anyone. Pay attention to the stripe on his helmet. At no point does it veer or point towards the defender he is claimed to be targeting with a cheap shot. The body follows the head and his head is pointed straight towards the ground (since he was falling). Also pay attention to his hands. His hands do not go towards the supposed target at all. Where is the intent? His intent is to catch himself from falling. Now let's look at the surrounding details. It was at the end of the game where it was basically decided. If he was going to target someone wouldn't be a person who actually made an impact on the game not some three tackle practice dummy who was off the field as much as he was on? Also we are not a great rivalry. We will not meet them in a conference championship game possibly so what is the motivation? There is none. There was nothing dirty or cheap about this play. It involved a media darling that they hyped up and then watched as he did nothing so they had to make another story out of nothing to cover that crap up. End of story.
And the dook hit was nothing similar that was dirty and after the play and the intent is clear. There was no need and it is a rivalry and that game was not decided so.....Also where was the great media outcry oh yeah no football gods/darlings were involved so....