Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
That means the dozen or so folks who are the committee now, and presumably have been there maybe 10 years are only qualified to answer questions about changes they themselves made. That must really complicate fielding questions from state offices.
|
BITS, do some research and find out how it works
BEFORE you flap your gums.
Members of the NFHS rules committee serve
FOUR year terms. No one has been on the committee for "maybe 10 years." If you take out your books from 2005-06 and 2006-07 and look at the page with all of the committee members you will see that those whose terms expired in 2005 were replaced by someone who will serve through 2009.
There are eight sections made up of a select group of individual states. Each section has one representative on the committee. Which individual state that person comes from rotates inside the section.
I know all of this because this year it was Nevada's turn to send the representative for section 7 to the committee. When the 2007-08 rules book comes out, you will see that Mr. Whelchel from Arizona has been replaced by a guy from Nevada.
Now will this new member from NV have any particular insight into the drafting, discussion, selection of the final language, and/or intent of a rule change or case play which came out back in 2002? Of course not. He will know no more about that particular item by virtue of his being appointed to serve on the committee than you or I do. The best that he could do is ask his colleagues who may have some information to share depending upon from how long ago the specific item dates or perhaps there are some archived notes from the past meetings and discussions which he could obtain from the NFHS office. Although I doubt that if such exist that the NFHS is the body holding them.
Perhaps you think that he receives the secret red pill of omnipotent NFHS rules knowledge upon his selection to the committee!
