Philosophical discussion - should NF and NCAA rules be the same?
 

Is there really any reason to have different sets of rules for HS and college anymore? I know there's no compelling reason to have them the same except it would make it easier on officials who do both, fans who watch both and players moving from one to the other. Here's the only three reasons I've ever heard for having them different. I'm not saying I agree with these reasons, or that they're (IMO) valid anymore, just that these are the ones people usually state.

1) the talent level is so different you must have different rules to accommodate this

2) the more experienced officials at the college level are able to make calls that pertain to subtleties in the rules which HS officials can't handle, so you can't bring HS rules up to the college level and expect the HS game to be called properly

3) there are things allowed in the college game that many HS facilities could not support because of budget problems ( I have no idea what this means but I have heard it - is there some kind of a dunking difference?)

My questions are - first, is there an advantage to anyone to have the same set of rules at both levels: second, if so, should HS just adopt NCAA: third, are there still any valid reasons not to have them the same?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts everyone. :)

My two cents (from someone who has reffed high school, women's CC and men's CC).

Make the rules AND the mechanics the same at the HS and NCAA level for crying out loud.

20 years ago, the rules weren't really that different. Timing, of course, and a few others. Now, the NCAA committees have made a lot of changes in recent history and the codes are much more messed up in my view.

If HS is going to go NCAA, which code are they going -- men's or women's? And why? HS associations would end up editing either code anyway, so what's the point? Jr. Highs aren't going to play 20 minute halves.

I work football in Texas where we use NCAA rules, and I'd never want to work Fed rules for several reasons. It works well for us as the codes can be very different in some cases. In basketball, the different codes don't make the game change much.

I'd rather see the differences in rules be between women and men, than between high school and college. I don't see any real reason for the difference between the age levels, but I like the idea that baseball and softball are two different games, and one is the women's game and one is the men's game (until the men get old and soft!) Why not do the same in basketball?

But then, I haven't done much college (unless you define zero as "much"), so as a ref, I don't know that my opinion counts for much. But the differences seem so minor that I don't see why they're significant. Still, I suppose the differences in the game between high school freshman and the Final Four ought to count for something.

I agree that the men's and women's game should be the same more so than HS vs. NCAA.

As a middle school AD and HS official, I think that money plays a role in some rules. Shot clock being one. I don't think there is a need for it in HS. I can see this as a administrative nightmare that would effect the officials. One more thing to keep an eye on is not going to make the officiating better.

As an aside, I think 35 seconds is too short of time. When the rule came out it was 45 and I personally liked that better.

Rules regarding the lights on the backboards and such are also asking a lot. Some schools have them, but I would say it is around 5% of the schools that I have officiated.

These are the only ones I can think of where cost .would come in...unless you want the HS floor lengthened to 94 feet. I'm happy at 84 feet myself.

I'd like to rebounding take place on the release and not on the rim for FT's once again in HS.

Since I don't work college I can't say it matters to me. Having worked a few games involving college rules during the summer once in a while, I can see where one can make a mistake easily.

When it comes to baseball, I'd ban aluminum bats at all levels.

I agree 150% with you. To me, the game is different from men and women basketball. Yes, college is a lot faster, but the kids are bigger and stronger.

Wow! Talk about blatant sexism!:rolleyes:

Whatever happened to equal rights and all that stuff?

Sad day for all of those brave visionaries and pioneers who once burned their bras.......:mad:

First of all, you can't agree 150%. 100% is the maximum. :)

I think what you are referring to is calling the game a little different based on the ability and strength of the players. I agree with that, but you can do that under the same set of rules.

I agree 118%.

Go to your room.

As long as you guys don't start agreeing in metric percentages, I'm OK with it. ;)

I see one smilie and one frownie. Are you serious or joking?

I think (if I'm not mistaken) that NFHS and NCAA women's are very similar . . . or so I've been told. I think (again, if I'm not mistaken) that Mary Struckoff is over both - so that would make sense.

Yes.<i></i>

Well, NCAA rules require a 94' court. At some schools, it'd be expensive (if not impossible) to extend their court from 84'.

The usual complaint of increased cost is that of the shot clock. While they can run a few hundred to a thousand dollars each, it's a one-time cost.

Why stop there? Why not adopt NBA rules for all levels? Or FIBA rules?

Honestly, I don't mind the different rule sets all that much. What I do dislike is the constant minor tinkering every year. Just leave the rules alone for a few years.

yea, that's what I figured.

I don't care about court length and shot clocks. What makes it a pain to go back and forth is the game rule and mechanics such as:

High school reporting. Preliminary signal. Then run to the spot and stop. One hand reporting. College reporting. No prelim signal unless a sell is needed. Walk and talk. Two hand reporting. In men's NCAA this coming year, go opposite the table instead of staying table side.

Block charge. Basket cannot count if airborne shooter fouls in NFHS or college women. In men, if the shooter fouls after the release, count the bucket.

Clock stops on any made basket in the last minute of the game of college. Not in NFHS.

Just minor differences like those that could easily be standardized at all levels.

BTW, I saw a men's NCAA rule bulletin that indicated that a defensive player CAN draw a charge even if he is set-up right under the hoop next year. Interested to hear more details on that one (and hear all the assignors then do their own interpretation of it). :rolleyes:

What made you think he couldn't?

Do you mean besides the fact that it was listed as a rules change?

Nope, I think that he means the <b>fact</b> that it's listed as a 2007-08 <b>Womens</b> rule change only, Z. The NCAA Mens rule on LGP under the basket has always been the same as anywhere on the court.

In theory, anyway. . .

As is the case of every NCAA rule, <i>n'est ce pas</i>? Your point?

The PC under the basket is a little more theoretical than most, in that it exists only in theory.

Please - I just ate. :eek:

This would be completely wrong. For one thing the NCAA Women's game does not have a 10 second back court rule and the closely guarded rule does not at all reflect the NF rule. Let us not get into the way Ts are handled and other little interpretations.

I feel that all these levels need to stay different. For one thing, NCAA Men's and NCAA Women's are two different games. This is like comparing Baseball to Softball. The games style is played a little differently and the expectations of each game are different. I would not agree that all levels should be that similar. First of all let us understand the rules of basketball are really not that different anyway. The rules that are different are in many cases very minor and do not come up unless you have a usual situation. Also let us understand that each level has a different set of concerns that you will not see at another level. NCAA games have bigger, faster and stronger players on both sides of the isle. The NF game is about safety and simplicity. If you started adopting NCAA rules, you would confuse the average player or coach and you would not put into account that many players at the NF level are not as talented to do the things that NCAA rules were created for.

Keep the levels separate. I do not think many of us would like to see many NBA rules at the NF level. So why would we want NCAA rules (which are not the same between Men’s and Women’s) when some of those rules would only cause other problems we cannot yet imagine.

Peace

Rut - just curious - what NCAA rules do you feel would "confuse" the average HS player?

OK - coaches I can understand, especially when the rule involves counting higher than 10 without them taking their shoes off. :cool:

Would it be more convenient? No question. But, as stated, it's a philosophical question, which includes one's position on whether the two should have the same governing authority.

Any time you have two different organizations "in charge" (in this case, NCAA and NFHS), you're guaranteed to have different rules in place.

Some states have different organizations for boys and girls. Iowa, for example, has some rules variations between the two. No, comedians, I'm not talking about half-court girls basketball.

When I left the state, girls were just beginning to jump ball at the start of the game again. They moved the girls up a space on the free throw lane, keeping the bottom space open. The AP arrow always switched as soon as the thrower got the ball for the throw in. Girls coaches had the coaching box, boys coaches did not.

So, bottom line, I'm not comfortable putting the NFHS in charge of college ball, or the NCAA in charge of HS ball, or a third organization such as USA Basketball in charge of both for the sake of clearing up some minor inconveniences. Maybe it's just the federalist in me. :)

I thought that's what assistant coaches were for.

"Robin, come here, I need to use your fingers."

When I say a rule would confuse, if a coach does not understand the rule, the players will not understand that rule as well or know how to navigate through the game with a particular rule.

For example I believe that a shot clock is usually too taxing for the average player to navigate. Not to say that many players would not be OK with such a rule, but many players cannot run an offense properly and they have all the time in the world. The shot clock only adds to the anxiety for the average player.

Also understand that the T rule is very different at the college level. Men's and Women's sides do have differences, but I think the rule just brings confusion to those that have to apply it. The NF rule is clear and gives a clear punishment as opposed to the NCA rule which you can benefit from getting a T. And also remember before many of the rules we use today, the NCAA used them first.

Peace

I agree. Even with 5 years of NCAA scorekeeping experience, I still get confused from time to time at the differences between direct and indirect technicals - particularly which ones count towards player & team totals - with NCAA rules.

I'm not sure I understand this claim. What sort of T gives the team/player against which it's called an advantage?:confused:

Maybe an excessive time-out in men's rules? You get the T, but sometimes the POI is that you get the ball back.

Could someone list maybe 3 rules or mechanics from college that absolutely would not work in HS? (and vice versa).

Someone mentioned that some players could not navigate a shot clock, but that is not true because we use a 30-second shot clock for high school girls here in the state of Washington and it is no big deal.

All I'm hearing so far is that the problem is confusion between the different sets of rules. I have not yet heard good arguments for having those differences.

Didn't help Michigan.

That's because the POI wasn't the rule then.

In NF if I call a T on your team, you lose the ball and I give FTs to your opponent. In NCAA I can call a T for you and you can get the ball back at the same spot you had it before the T.

Now the reason this is not a problem at the NCAA level in my opinion, is the fact that college coaches have so much control over their programs. Very rarely have a single college player say "boo" to any official during a game because that T might lose a game, might lose a title and lose a job if it happens at the right time. A HS coach is not paid hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars and they are not accountable to as many people. So if a coach has an out of control kid, they cannot just get rid of that kid like a college coach can with one of their players. I think this is a rule that shows why you do POI for all Ts would be OK at the NCAA level, but might be a disaster at the HS level.

Peace

I think you are approaching this in the wrong way. The issue is not whether college rules would not work or not work. The issue is there are rules that are not appropriate for college aged kids as opposed to HS aged kids. I would say the very same for the NBA and their rules. Recently we could not even agree on language and application of the terminology "Flagrant 1" and "Flagrant 2" fouls and how that would apply to the HS level. Considering that when we have basic college rules some times filter down to the HS ranks, there always seems to be a confusion period to how to apply a simple college rule.

Do we really think the game would be served at the HS level if we moved back the 3 point line? What about the Women's rule that only has closely guarded on a held ball and 3 feet away rather than the NF 6 feet? I can tell you that at least on the Boy's side; we would just have a couple of very good ball handlers just dribbling all over the place. You would not promote passing or actual ball movement, but you would have a dribbler just holding on to the ball. Would you want to just throw out the requirement for giving a doctor's note if a player is unconscious? I realize this is not a big rule, but I do not think I want HS coaches deciding if a kid with a head injury is going to play because they personally think it is a great idea. Or what about the lack of airborne shooter rule that is used on the Men's side? You really want officials making that call? Those might not be the best rules you want to discuss and I am sure you and others might disagree, but there are rules at the college level I would not want to see at the HS level.

Peace

<s>I'm surprised no one has</s>Snaqs mentioned the purely political aspect - who's going to give up their "authority" on rule-making? Since we are dealing with different organizations, (NFHS, NJCAA, NCAA, NAIA, NBA), with different people and differing philosophies, there are bound to differences. If we tried to combine any of these rule-making bodies, who's going to be the one to have less say or more say on the committee? I'm sure there are a number of people within the NF that don't want any part of the college game. There are probably just as many in the NCAA that don't want to consider kids that play HS or grade school in the rules decisions. So, there will be differences.

At least they haven't changed the rule where the most number of points wins.

Let us take it a step further. I know many are probably only thinking of what might happen as it relates to basketball. Basketball from what I can tell has more similarities between rules than most sports I am aware of. Football has over 200 differences from NCAA to NF. You really think the NCAA is going to want to throw out all their rules that coaches have spent years trying to "screw" just to make everything similar for HS kids? I do not think so.

Peace

Ahem: post 28

Exactly. Who's going to be the one to agree to 200 changes for the upcoming season? Or, are both going to agree to 100 changes each?

I don't see it happening in my lifetime. Or my kids' lifetime.

Oops, sorry. I must've skipped over it because I didn't see any windmills...

Edited for proper credit.

:)

I feel so taken for granted. :(

I'm really sorry.

Does a cookie help?
http://www.cookiemold.com/R101cookWEB.jpg

That's just wrong.

I know, I know, I'm goin' to hel!

Do want me to say "hi" to JR while I'm down there?

You'll have to say it on your way passed him, 'cause you're beating him there.

I don't think I'm approaching it the wrong way because I'm just tossing it out there for discussion. That's why my original post was titled, "Philisophical Discussion."

Also, as I pointed out in an earlier post, I'm not talking about things like shot clocks and court markings. There will always be structual limitations at some gyms. Our HS district playoffs are often played at our only high school that has a 94-foot college court which is no big deal. I'm not talking about doctor's notes for concussions either. I'm talking about the minor differences in game rules (or mechanics even) that really could be changed (by either HS or NCAA) which would not affect the game and would prevent officials from screwing up a rule (or having two remember two or three sets of mechanics).

Just a minor example. Last year, three of our association officials were working a district playoff game. A technical foul is called on a player. Two shots are assessed and then the official (who also does D-2 women's college) went to POI. Yeah, I know there is no excuse for it (and his partners should have talked him out of it even though he is an official that is not much for discussing any of his decisions) :) but to me it would be no big deal to either make HS T's be 2 shots plus POI or else have college T's be two shots plus ball to opponent and administer at half-court.

And yes, I know it's a lot about politics and neither side would ever budge as long as there are several different people involved in those decisions.

Is a "Phil i sophical Discussion" a conversation held in Philadelphia? :confused:

When is this board going to include spell check? :)

Was that Lonnie??? For crying out loud, I'll kick his butt for you next time I see him!:D

Here is the thing. All those things you claim is not an issue can be a very big issue. The NCAA does not require many D2 and D3 schools to do things because they do not have the resources as the D1 level.

Since you mentioned it, it would be very difficult to institute replay at the HS level. Most schools do not have the resources. NCAA games have more at stake than a local championship. NCAA games literally have millions of dollars on the line so their rules are going to be more complex for that level. Do you want to leave a big play in the hands of some freshman that does not even know how to use a camera at the HS level?

I do not know what politics has to do with this. NCAA is a completely different governing body than the NF or the NBA or FIBA. The only people that would be clamoring for this would be officials for the most part. We are the only ones that can work a HS game and a D1 game in the same week. Coaches and players do not have that kind of dog in this fight. And the NCAA is made of entirely coaches that produce their rules.

Peace

Many of you know that I officiate football as well.

In the Canadian football scene, there are two rulebooks: one for amateur play and one for professional play (CFL). 99.9% of the football officials in Canada only need to focus on one rulebook. Kids at 6 years old play with the same rules as those at the CIS level (equivalent to NCAA).

In the Ontario basketball scene, high schools and club basketball play with Federation rules. CIS men's play modified NCAA men's rules and CIS women's play with modified FIBA rules. Having done two pre-seasons of CIS basketball, I can tell you that there is considerable time taken to ensure that officials transfer from one level/ruleset to the next. I think now CIS women's might play modified NCAA women's rules.

With every rule, there is the spirit and philosphy behind the rule. Beginning officials working the 10-year olds hear the philosophy and have the on-field experience with the philosophy without having to change to a new ruleset.

This time taken for re-training doesn't exist in Canadian football. I agree that it doesn't take much to learn new rulesets and those moving up to a new level of officiating have already shown aptitude with the philosophies of that next level. However, my observations tell me that the model that Cdn football has (1 ruleset) produces officials that are ready to move up to the next level quicker.

IOW, I think our football officials are better than our basketball officials. Does having one ruleset help? Yes. How much? Dunno.

I agree that many, many rules differences between NCAA and HS are unnecessary. I see a lot of rule screw-ups that are due to an official not being able to remember the correct rule for the level that he/she is officiating. There really needs to be an effort to merge the rule sets as much as possible.

Good discussion. One thing that was left out in this discussion that I think is the main point of why we should do this. Progression of the athlete, progression of the official. The quicker we get the kids to playing college rules, the better the player for college, and for the next step, the pro's. The women are doing this. In AAU, girls are playing with the shot clock and NCAA rules starting at age 11. They also play the game with 3 officials. Likewise, a WNBA official can also be a NCAA-W official (or vice-versa) and there's no problems going back to the coaches.

What I'm talking about here is preparing the athlete and the official for the next level. That next level being college and then the pro's. I don't have a problem with the way it is right now. It just seems like it's so screwed up and that nobody was paying attention when this all came about. We didn't have a global view when the organizations where formed.

A 3rd aspect to this discussion is the fact that HS games are not wagered. What I mean is there is betting on NCAA /NBA games, which dictates a specific rule set, like the shot clock. When we start legal betting of HS games, then we might start to see more NCAA rules in HS. Right now, the rules and the way the philosophies behind how the game should be officiated is so different, it's scary. I had a varsity HS game where we called a double foul, POI right, veteran partners insisted it was AP and i wasn't changing their mind. I had an AAU game later this spring and called a double foul and went AP. I was for sure I was doing the right thing. Dammmmmnnnnnn......!!!!!

WTF????!!!!

Are you really surprised?

Peace

I'm not sure that I really followed Old School's post. But if I did, I think he kind of agreed with me.

If he agreed with me, then I would like to completely take this whole thread back and retract everything I said. Keep the rules different. In fact, make even more differences! :)

Nah, just caught off guard. His post was, up until that point, merely pointless. Kind of like watching a jogger running across a bridge when he suddenly changes direction and just runs off the side with his legs continuing to run all the way down to the river below.

ROFLMAO! dot dot dot

Never seem this before, not even in a cartoon. Come on, you can do better....

This is fun and all, but I"ve got a life. You can troll here by yourself, OS. Ta ta!

I told you that you were coming at this issue from the wrong angle. :D

Peace

Darn it, we where having so much fun....

First, I really don't care which set of rules are used at the HS level. Just let me know the rules you want used and I will enforce them evenly to the best of my ability.

That being said, the only people (unless you include rec/summer ball) moving between rule sets are officials. I like others have seen officials kick a rule application because they were thinking one set and working a game govern by another set. Who's fault is that? It is certainly NOT the rules committee or governing boby...it is the official's. It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get anyone to change their rule set just for the sake of change. If the official cannot keep his rules/mechanics straight then he or she is not as good as they thought and should give up one of the levels.

I really do not see how using the NCAA rules in high school makes the high school game better. If it doesn't make the game better, why change? Given the small percentage of officials that are constantly moving back and forth, it seems silly to make the changes simply to make their life easier.

Or for the sake of the official.

You make some great points and thanks for sharing your thoughts. Others gave up, shut down mentally when I challenged their interlect. The only problem that I see is when you get to the upper level/final games and the talk about which officials to use surfaces. Let's get the best officials available is usually the thought process. Well the best officials availalbe tends to center mainly around who gets paid the most to work basketball which is college officials. If you're a HS ref and you ever watched a college ref work a state playoff game, you know what I getting at here. Then you have a mis-interp of a rule and all hell breaks lose. We get it both ways too, you know that. If you put a hs ref on a final game and they miss a call, should have went with the college guys.....

Somewhere down the line, I think we need to make it easier for the people who have to call the games so that you can truly use any official from any discipline. NCAA women to WNBA. Isn't that a pleasure to see. It helps the officials and the assigners and the game. To me it's a win-win but that's just my opinion.

LOL....my interlect can beat your interlect.

Well, I challenge your interlect to a drool.

Lah me......:D

The only thing you've challenged here is logic itself. The problem is, it's like challenging gravity. You can't win.

Ya' can't argue with the guy. Remember - he's brillant!

Reminds me of a person who really actually said to me one time, "I used to have a problem with denial, but I don't think it's any big deal."

Thanks, OS. I haven't laughed that hard since the last time you posted!

edit to add: Thanks for pointing it out JR. A good night's sleep and I think I've shaken it...

Good Lord, it's catching......

Old School Virus.....

There is no cure. It destroys your interlect.:eek:

What would you guys do without me providing a little comic relief. We all need to laugh sometimes, even if it's at ourselves.

If that's the case, you must be hysterical 24/7. :D

Do you think my intellect can challenge his interlect?:)

Luckily, there are treatment options you and your doctor can discuss.

True, but make sure you read the side effects in fine print; and call your doctor if you experience priapism.

Why?:confused:<i></i>

Well, the definition I found included the phrase "often painful". :(

So he can prescribe a nurse.

Or, conversely for the more progressive folks among us, so as not to upset them:

"So she can come right over."

Persoanlly, I'd like to see a modified form of the NBA "2 fouls under 2 minutes = penalty" rule at the end of each half in NFHS. Would help when a team has only committed 0-4 team fouls up to that point and decides they need ot foul away to get the ball back.

Totally agree, Fed. is not into better game management.

I understand your point and it has merit, but think of it this way. If a team is trailing late in a close game and they "need" to foul, as long as they're making a play on the ball, they can get more aggressive and you just call the foul even if it happens repeatedly. I don't think we should unduly penalize them for being more aggressive if they played well enough up to that point that they didn't accrue many fouls by imposing shots for fewer than seven fouls in a half. If they're just fouling to stop the clock, call the intentional. I feel this is where a lot of problems stem from - officials being reluctant to call intentionals when they are warranted.

Also, I rarely see teams pull this at the end of the first half, only at the end of the game.

I agree with Mark. Also, teams that haven't fouled and are in the lead often use their fouls strategically. An NBA-style rule would take that away; a benefit for not fouling early gets taken away.