Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goodman
Then how do you explain their adopting a provision which, although it was intended to have the same effect as a recently-adopted NCAA one regarding approach by the kicking team to their free kick line, was worded differently in a way that made it hard to administer if officials were actually to take it literally (which I'm sure they didn't)? Why didn't they just adopt NCAA's language? They used to cooperate via a liaison committee with NCAA, ideas going back & forth, sometimes adopting the same change at the same time if they both found it appropriate.
|
Coaches or individuals that would be involved in FED Rules would not likely do it for a living as a college coach would. That was the point, not how many play under those rules. And because there is so much more money on the line in a college game, there are coaches always looking for an advantage or figure out a way to do something that might need to be addressed by the rules committee. Not so much the case as something that happens in Nevada for example, might not every take place in Ohio. Even the A-11 Offense that was developed was a rare situation. But Bill Belichick or Oregon has nothing better to do than to find a rule to exploit. They have more training time and more practice time with their players and systems. A HS football coach might not ever have a player in the off-season just based on other sports and other activities.
Also I think the FED and rightfully so does not want to have to deal with the logic of the NCAA or any other level for that matter. Just like the NCAA is not going to use NFL rules for their stuff either. Different consequences to a rules change and a different staff as officials to train for those rules as well. Making the rules the same only benefits really a very small percentage of people.
Peace