Field Goal Coverage

[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.

[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.

[PSU213]

First of, no matter what you do, you will have some hole in coverage with 5 officials. In PA we were lucky enough to work with 7 officials in the playoffs. In this senario, the BJ and FJ would be under the posts and then the SJ moves inside to be a 2nd umpire. Now it seems to me, this would only be done if someone felt there was something very important to be seen there that it necessitated a 2nd set of eyes. It, therefore, seems unlikely that in 5 person mechanics, we would totally 'vacate' the middle by have the umpire under the posts. And, once again, you can make an argument for/against any coverage sheme based on the areas that don't get covered so well.

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

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

Ed, does your association area (LI?) do what the want to or do they do what the state office says regarding mechanics?
I'm not asking in a snotty way, I'm just trying to determine if this may be something that may eventually work it's way into the other sectional areas.
Which of course at this time do exactly what the NFHS book says to do as that's what the state says to follow.. except to use white only bean bags.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Theisey

Which of course at this time do exactly what the NFHS book says to do as that's what the state says to follow.. including white only bean bags.

I must have missed something here, but the last I checked you would wear blue bean bags under NF Mechanics. I do not know for sure, my state stopped using the NF Mechanics about 3 years ago.

Peace

[Mike L]

Getting back to the original question, we used to have the U go underneath from 15 yds in on field goals and on PATs. For a variety of reasons, mostly because it was felt we need to have that presence in the middle to protect the snapper and the usual nefarious deeds done by the interior linemen, the U stays put and the LJ goes under for all scoring kicks.

[Theisey]

You didn't miss anything Rut, I meant to say except for white only bags. I went back and edited the post.

[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.