NFHS 2017-18 Rules Changes

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Making the box bigger is not going to change coach behavior. The coaches who are idiots will still be idiots - the fact that he/she has 14 more feet to roam will just make it easier for everyone in the building to see him/her being an idiot.

You are right, I am a little tired of having to worry about if a coach is in the box or not. And at least this gives them more room and being in the box is a lesser issue IMO. I hardly ever work a college game and worry about a coach being out of the box.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are right, I am a little tired of having to worry about if a coach is in the box or not. And at least this gives them more room and being in the box is a lesser issue IMO. I hardly ever work a college game and worry about a coach being out of the box.

Peace

When they're out of the box in a college game, it's usually, "Holy ****, look at where HE is." Whack.

[BEAREF]

Originally Posted by Rich

When they're out of the box in a college game, it's usually, "Holy ****, look at where HE is." Whack.

And NCAA-M and NCAA-W are recommending extending the coaching box to 38'

[Nevadaref]

There is too much involvement in the game from the coaches. We have gone from captains talking to officials and picking FT shooters to coaches doing that, from no coaching box to 6 feet, to 14 feet, to 28 feet, and from players requesting time-outs to coaches doing it during play.

The rules committee has lost the proper balance and coaches are now over-emphasized. It's unfortunate. The trend is now to give coaches more freedoms and more power, yet less responsibility.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is too much involvement in the game from the coaches. We have gone from captains talking to officials and picking FT shooters to coaches doing that, from no coaching box to 6 feet, to 14 feet, to 28 feet, and from players requesting time-outs to coaches doing it during play.

The rules committee has lost the proper balance and coaches are now over-emphasized. It's unfortunate. The trend is now to give coaches more freedoms and more power, yet less responsibility.

Would you prefer this coaching box:

[Nevadaref]

Is it filled with water?

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Is it filled with water?

Soundproof?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is too much involvement in the game from the coaches. We have gone from captains talking to officials and picking FT shooters to coaches doing that, from no coaching box to 6 feet, to 14 feet, to 28 feet, and from players requesting time-outs to coaches doing it during play.

The rules committee has lost the proper balance and coaches are now over-emphasized. It's unfortunate. The trend is now to give coaches more freedoms and more power, yet less responsibility.

Coaches in every sport that I can think of are apart of the game and the decision making process. I really do not care either way. We have tools to take care of them if they get out of hand. We really need to get over it honestly.

Peace

[Rich]

As a part-time HS administrator, I've learned that the coaches are the ones that (we hope) stay through many classes of kids. Kids and their parents come and go -- it's the coach that provides continuity of the program.

For some reason, some officials think they should be marginalized / minimized -- I find that ludicrous.

[amusedofficial]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is too much involvement in the game from the coaches. We have gone from captains talking to officials and picking FT shooters to coaches doing that, from no coaching box to 6 feet, to 14 feet, to 28 feet, and from players requesting time-outs to coaches doing it during play.

The rules committee has lost the proper balance and coaches are now over-emphasized. It's unfortunate. The trend is now to give coaches more freedoms and more power, yet less responsibility.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is too much involvement in the game from the coaches. We have gone from captains talking to officials and picking FT shooters to coaches doing that, from no coaching box to 6 feet, to 14 feet, to 28 feet, and from players requesting time-outs to coaches doing it during play.

The rules committee has lost the proper balance and coaches are now over-emphasized. It's unfortunate. The trend is now to give coaches more freedoms and more power, yet less responsibility.

I agree completely, and I think it's yet anothertrickle-down from college. Coaches are the most important personalities in college basketball because their year-to-year presence provides the continuity needed by the big dollar TV contracts. Players turn over in one to three years so coaching personality is the only consistent factor in the college game and is the major way in which the game ismarketed. (sure, there are exceptions, such as the tournament Cinderella teams that emerge every late March)

Yes, coaches in all sports provide direction, but in no other sport do we see coaches hollering instructions virtually every second of every game. Extending the coaching box is more than a policing issue, it shows an unfortunate NFHS buy-in to the marketing of coaches and the continued diminution of what should be its core goal of letting the kids play. We don't allow coaches to stand at second base, or on the blue line, or next to to the umpire during a goal-line stand, why is it OK for them to wander all the way down the court.

The excuse given, that smaller box serves to "limit the level of communication between coach and players" shows this rule change to be a solution in search of a problem.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

Yes, coaches in all sports provide direction, but in no other sport do we see coaches hollering instructions virtually every second of every game. Extending the coaching box is more than a policing issue, it shows an unfortunate NFHS buy-in to the marketing of coaches and the continued diminution of what should be its core goal of letting the kids play. We don't allow coaches to stand at second base, or on the blue line, or next to to the umpire during a goal-line stand, why is it OK for them to wander all the way down the court.

In football they allow coaches to be on the sideline for most of the field. What does standing on a base or not standing on a base have to do with this issue? Coaches in many sports including baseball have privileges that extend beyond the actual playing of the game. In baseball that is the only sport that allows a coach to stop the game just to argue a judgment that is being called by an official. So though a coach is not allowed to stand on second base, he can certainly go to second base if he does not like a call there.

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

The excuse given, that smaller box serves to "limit the level of communication between coach and players" shows this rule change to be a solution in search of a problem.

Well I might agree if not every level to some extend had this ability to move that far. Even college is now extending their coaching box this coming year. I got tired of having to worry about where a coach was standing for the most part when they were not doing or saying anything.

Peace

[SC Official]

I honestly can't see why or how anyone would be upset with extending the box. We have so much administrative nonsense that the NFHS requires us to deal with, and this is making our job easier. The only thing different for me is that now the coach can come down to the end line and chew my ass when I'm at L and I can't penalize him for being outside the box, but I can now officially warn or perhaps even whack him for his behavior.

Comparing sports is apples-to-oranges, as JRut noted.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

I agree completely, and I think it's yet anothertrickle-down from college. Coaches are the most important personalities in college basketball because their year-to-year presence provides the continuity needed by the big dollar TV contracts. Players turn over in one to three years so coaching personality is the only consistent factor in the college game and is the major way in which the game ismarketed. (sure, there are exceptions, such as the tournament Cinderella teams that emerge every late March)

Yes, coaches in all sports provide direction, but in no other sport do we see coaches hollering instructions virtually every second of every game. Extending the coaching box is more than a policing issue, it shows an unfortunate NFHS buy-in to the marketing of coaches and the continued diminution of what should be its core goal of letting the kids play. We don't allow coaches to stand at second base, or on the blue line, or next to to the umpire during a goal-line stand, why is it OK for them to wander all the way down the court.

The excuse given, that smaller box serves to "limit the level of communication between coach and players" shows this rule change to be a solution in search of a problem.

They don't get the whole court. They get 1/3 of that.

Your attempt to minimalize coaches is noted, although I think it's misguided. Kids come and go. The best programs are usually that way because of the influence and continuity the coach provides.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

I agree completely, and I think it's yet anothertrickle-down from college. Coaches are the most important personalities in college basketball because their year-to-year presence provides the continuity needed by the big dollar TV contracts. Players turn over in one to three years so coaching personality is the only consistent factor in the college game and is the major way in which the game ismarketed. (sure, there are exceptions, such as the tournament Cinderella teams that emerge every late March)

Yes, coaches in all sports provide direction, but in no other sport do we see coaches hollering instructions virtually every second of every game. Extending the coaching box is more than a policing issue, it shows an unfortunate NFHS buy-in to the marketing of coaches and the continued diminution of what should be its core goal of letting the kids play. We don't allow coaches to stand at second base, or on the blue line, or next to to the umpire during a goal-line stand, why is it OK for them to wander all the way down the court.

The excuse given, that smaller box serves to "limit the level of communication between coach and players" shows this rule change to be a solution in search of a problem.

Baseball has coaches at 1st and 3rd base. The manager/HC can actually come out to the mound and talk to the pitcher. Football coaches are allowed to go 20 yards on either sided of the 50 yard line.

Basketball coaches are not even allowed to half court, nor are they allowed to even come out on to the court during time-outs. They don't get to go out to the free throw line and settle down a player.

Your comparisons are not making much sense in this context.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Baseball has coaches at 1st and 3rd base. The manager/HC can actually come out to the mound and talk to the pitcher. Football coaches are allowed to go 20 yards on either sided of the 50 yard line.

Basketball coaches are not even allowed to half court, nor are they allowed to even come out on to the court during time-outs. They don't get to go out to the free throw line and settle down a player.

Your comparisons are not making much sense in this context.

Also in football a coach and come out to the middle of the field during the timeout if they choose.

Again I like the change because even if I am the Lead and the coach comes to me, I can say something back to him without likely having to yell. Why is this any different than when the coach comes to me in the Center position?

Peace