Field Goal Coverage

[MJT]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Our Association has proposed different coverage as we experiment with our new five-man mechanics.

Instead of using standard mechanics the proposal is to have the BJ and U cover the poles while the LJ and HL stay on the LOS.

Does anyone do this? If so, what is your experience.

If the U is under a post, who is watching for a snap infraction, holds by the middle three, pull and shoot by the defense. The U has to watch these things and I don't know how else you could get them covered if he is not in his normal position.

[Rich]

Why can't people just work the mechanics written for the ruleset they work?

[JRutledge]

Maybe everyone does not agree with those mechanics. Or there have been people that have found holes in the written mechanics. This is the very reason my state threw those mechanics out because the NF never updated their mechanics and we had coverage holes directly associated with those mechanic flaws.

Peace

[bisonlj]

I think the best mechanics work toward the things most likely to happen. Putting the U at the upright places a whole on anyone watching for holding, etc. as mentioned in an earlier post. This is something that is likely to happen on any play. Putting the LJ or HL under the upright places a whole on that sideline in the event of a fake or broken play that challenges the sideline. In my 9 years of officiating that has happened 2 or 3 times. And in none of those instances did the sideline really get challenged. I'll go with the odds and keep the U in their normal position and bring a wing under the upright.

[surehands]

Umpire under on any field goal or point after is the mechanic for the State of MI this year. Outside the 15 the BJ is the only one under.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I think the best mechanics work toward the things most likely to happen. Putting the U at the upright places a whole on anyone watching for holding, etc. as mentioned in an earlier post. This is something that is likely to happen on any play. Putting the LJ or HL under the upright places a whole on that sideline in the event of a fake or broken play that challenges the sideline. In my 9 years of officiating that has happened 2 or 3 times. And in none of those instances did the sideline really get challenged. I'll go with the odds and keep the U in their normal position and bring a wing under the upright.

I agree that the breakdown on a field goal/try is rare. But, with that in mind, how often have you had a flag for roughing the snapper, holding by those middle three, or any other foul by the interior lineman?

It has been equally rare in my 22 years of officiating football.

I have had 'wing' blockers go low on B players charging from the outside much more often than interior lineman getting flagged for anything. I would rather have the wings stay and the U go back with the LJ. That is what we are instructed to do in MN, for a number of years.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

I agree that the breakdown on a field goal/try is rare. But, with that in mind, how often have you had a flag for roughing the snapper, holding by those middle three, or any other foul by the interior lineman?

It has been equally rare in my 22 years of officiating football.

I have had 'wing' blockers go low on B players charging from the outside much more often than interior lineman getting flagged for anything. I would rather have the wings stay and the U go back with the LJ. That is what we are instructed to do in MN, for a number of years.

Yes, but there is a snapper on every play and blocks are made on every play so you still need to be in position for it. If nobody is watching for it, they can get away with it. The threatening of a sideline is much more rare so from a mechanics philosophy it makes much more sense to give up the sideline than to give up blocking in the middle.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

Yes, but there is a snapper on every play and blocks are made on every play so you still need to be in position for it. If nobody is watching for it, they can get away with it. The threatening of a sideline is much more rare so from a mechanics philosophy it makes much more sense to give up the sideline than to give up blocking in the middle.

When we vacate a position, whether it be a LJ, HL, or U, that same argument can be made every time about something.

Rougher the snapper has never been an issue for us up here on the tundra.

I'm assuming that is why we are instructed to have the U under the posts. Our State 'Rules' interpretor wants the goal line covered, the outside defenders protected, and the line play observed by the wings. The U is to observe the center until he can be legally engaged, and then pick up the ball.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Maybe everyone does not agree with those mechanics. Or there have been people that have found holes in the written mechanics. This is the very reason my state threw those mechanics out because the NF never updated their mechanics and we had coverage holes directly associated with those mechanic flaws.

Peace

That's fine, but who's watching the line play? I know I'm not (as the R). I'm watching for a false start until the snap and then I'm watching the kicker and holder and nothing else.

What makes a wing to my back so important we want to leave the middle of the field open?

Local associations shouldn't be making these decisions, was my point. If the state wants to use their own mechanics, fine, good on them.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

That's fine, but who's watching the line play? I know I'm not (as the R). I'm watching for a false start until the snap and then I'm watching the kicker and holder and nothing else.

What makes a wing to my back so important we want to leave the middle of the field open?

Local associations shouldn't be making these decisions, was my point. If the state wants to use their own mechanics, fine, good on them.

I am not an advocate of that mechanic. But to suggest that we only have to follow what the NF says, when the NF does not change with the times or improve on old mechanics, then I can see why states would want to find something else. The NF is not God and they certainly cannot tell each jurisdiction how to officiate the game. We are not talking about rules here, we are talking about mechanics. There are all kinds of situations that have changed in the game and to do something that was done only when no one passed the ball and everyone was option is not a good idea if you ask me.

Peace

[Theisey]

Just my opinion, but I see no sense even discussing mechanics in forums like this because there are just to many variations of doing the same thing.
Now I see that even within my state, there is an association unique way of doing something that the rest of the state doesn't do.

My opinion again, but if a mechanic in the NFHS book is as has been stated is outdated, then get the darn thing changed just like if it was a rule. Mechanics really are rules, they are rules in how to officiate the game. We should be doing it the same no matter what state you are in and no matter what association within a state you are in.
It's called consistency.

Every year, NF changes things in their (our) mechanics manual, so don't think they can't adapt. Someone has to propose change(s) and follow through until implemented so the rest of us can use it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Theisey

Just my opinion, but I see no sense even discussing mechanics in forums like this because there are just to many variations of doing the same thing.
Now I see that even within my state, there is an association unique way of doing something that the rest of the state doesn't do.

My opinion again, but if a mechanic in the NFHS book is as has been stated is outdated, then get the darn thing changed just like if it was a rule. Mechanics really are rules, they are rules in how to officiate the game. We should be doing it the same no matter what state you are in and no matter what association within a state you are in.
It's called consistency.

Every year, NF changes things in their (our) mechanics manual, so don't think they can't adapt. Someone has to propose change(s) and follow through until implemented so the rest of us can use it.

That sounds great, but the NF is not going to field calls about missed plays because of mechanics. Or if a play was not covered in the suburbs of Chicago, I do not think a person in Florida is going to care much.

BTW, the NF does not care what states do mechanically and I have been told that by people in the NF directly. Mary Struckoff who is the NF Basketball Rulebook Editor and has some other significant roles with the NF, came to a conference in our state and discussed many things the NF was trying to implement and she made it very clear the NF does not try to influence mechanics with their membership. She even gave a couple of examples where states had mechanics that were so far away from the NF Manuals, that they did everything to convince their state, but there was nothing they could do about them using such mechanics.

Three years ago my state (which is a 100% membership state with the NF, whatever that means) created our own mechanics. The IHSA no longer sends out the NF Official's Manual in any sport. In football specifically the IHSA created all their mechanics on a PowerPoint Presentation. Now we use basic NF Mechanics, but there are many differences that are based on coverage mistakes that have been seen at the State Final level. One of the major differences we use is how the wings flow down field during pass plays. The NF suggests that we go down field 5-7 yards when you read pass. Well our state noticed that that mechanic was not putting officials in the best places to see plays or they would be completely out of position to cover pass plays. Our state wants the wings to flow downfield only after all eligible receivers have crossed our faces (on the wings) before going down field. Most HS passes are less than 10 yards and it was easy to cover most plays near the LOS. That is just one major change and there are others that were changed because of what happen in big time games because the NF either did not address an issue or what was used was considered outdated. I know that when they would send those books to us, nothing would be different. And even when there was a change, the diagram never changed. The same thing applied to the other sports as well and coverages have improved across the board.

Peace