Coaches make the rules?
 

I often see officials post that coaches make the rules. The NFHS rules committee makes the rules changes, right? Someone explain the entire process to me again. I can't find that info for some reason. I know we have discussed it but can't get all the info.

The rules committee comprises state reps from the various regions of the country. These reps are in touch with coaches and AD's from their respective states.

If you have a change to suggest, send it to the OHSAA, who will evaluate it for forwarding to NFHS.

In Ohio, I believe each sport has a rules advisory committee that meets after each season. They take input from the coaches' association and officials and, if warranted, send recommendations to the NFHS rules committee.

As a coach, if you have a rule you'd like to see changed, your best bet is to contact your coaches' association.

Each year I get an online survey from the NFHS regarding possible rules changes and I fill it out. Prior to that, and pretty soon, I will get an email from my state guy asking if there are any things that I would like to see changed in the rules. I think he forwards the ideas to the NFHS. Now, I do the state workshop in my part of the state so maybe that is why I get the opportunity to give my opinion. I am not sure if all officials in my state get the chance.

The vast majority of the people that sit on the NF Rules Commitees are administrators that represent their states. I know people love to point out the one guy that is an official on the committee, but by in large the NF is no different than the NCAA mostly coaches or people that have little to no expereince actually officiating a game. I think that is obvious how little officiating experience sit on these commitees when certain rules are suggested to be enforced or expected to be changed and it takes them years to consider all the possiblities and the holes a new rule or revision tends to make.

Peace

I think a lot of coaches would like to see 8-2-2 changed to only include PFs or USCs be tacked on to try or ensuing kickoff.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that one in this year's survey.

Has there been any data come back yet on how many more/fewer kickoffs are returned this year compared to last year? I'm wondering if moving the kicking line and the touchback placement has had an appreciable affect in that regard, since that was the justification for all the moves.

I think the "helmet coming off" rule has resulted in the intended affect, though. I've only seen one helmet come off in my high school games this year, and it was one that we could tell was loose before the game even started but the bull-headed ACs wouldn't tighten his straps.

However, when you start making exceptions to the rules, that's when it gets screwed up. For that reason, the Fed isn't fond of exceptions. That's why the rule is written the way it is.

So would a lot of officials.

You don't need to make exceptions. Reword it positively, not negatively.

Personal Fouls and Unnecessary Roughness penalties that occur... blah blah blah...

Easy to write, easy to understand.

Here it is, just insert "personal" into 8-2-2:

If an opponent of the scoring team commits a personal foul (other than
unsportsmanlike conduct on a nonplayer foul) during a down in which a touchdown
is scored and there was not a change in possession during the down, A
may accept the results of the play and choose enforcement of the penalty:
a. On the try, or
b. On the subsequent kickoff.

With this change, it's also advisable to delete the parenthetical remark, which no longer makes sense (UNS is not a PF).

Modify 8-2-3 in the same way.

And the NFHS would be well advised to simply point at the NCAA rulebook and say, "we're going to that." I can't think of anything (other than blocking below the waist, which is a disaster in NCAA) where the NFHS rule is better.

We had defensive holding against an eligible receiver on a touchdown play (where the ball was thrown to a different receiver). There's no good reason to allow the TD *and* penalize 10 yards on the kickoff. It makes no sense whatsoever.

We had a call in our game Friday that was a TD and a DPI. The DPI was assessed on the kickoff and the coach on my side (B at the time) went ballistic about A being able to take both the TD and penalty. I explained to him that it changed a couple of years ago and this is the way it's supposed to be enforced now. My R told him the same thing. I'm not sure if he believed us or not, but he at least didn't dwell on it after the KO.

There is more than 1 official on the rules committee. I don't believe it's a majority but it's enough to have input and influence. We are represented by our state sport commissioner who has officiating only as a small part of his role.

You must work in Texas if you are asking about the kickoff spot changing. That's an NCAA-only change. I'm sure it's had an affect on D1 games but I think we've only had 4 or 5 touchbacks the entire season in our D3 games. The 5-yard head start has probably had more of an impact at our level.

The only thing the helmet rule has done is create more whining from players who can't tighten their helmets that it's getting ripped off. We had 1 player lose his helmet 3 times in 1 quarter! Two of them were on back to back plays he was in. I think the penalty will need to be harsher because these players don't seem to get it. I thought it would eliminate the helmets popping off but the rate seems to be the same or higher.

We've had quite a few touchbacks in NCAA D3 games. We also haven't had a single kickoff returned past midfield.

The coach should know the rule, but it makes no sense to enforce this and allow the TD to stand. They could fix this quite easily -- personal fouls and dead ball fouls (and live enforced as dead) only, the rest are declined by rule. Easy enough.

I totally agree on all accounts, but as written that's not the way it is. :(

I know. That's what should be fixed.

When we had defensive holding on the TD, I signaled in this order.

Holding, defense. Touchdown. Penalty enforced on the kickoff.

The PA announcer said that the holding was declined. Well, that's not what I signaled.

So now I had 2 crew members coming to me assuming I had screwed up. Then I had the defensive coach livid when we enforced the holding on the kickoff. Fortunately, the H was able to talk him down off the ledge pretty quickly.

(Didn't matter in the end -- the kickoff went through the uprights, so it would've been a touchback anyway.)

I do not see the big deal. It is so rare and if you take your time usually you will not call the foul anyway. I would not want to go to NCAA rules for high school games for many reasons. Coaches have enough time understanding basic rules, add exceptions to a lot of stuff and we will have more issues. I am fine with the add on rule for scoring plays.

Peace

+ infinity!

#82 is tackled at the line of scrimmage when starting his route -- wing throws a flag. The pass is deep to a different receiver.

This is not one you can avoid by taking your time. It's a foul that must be called -- we don't know where the pass is going to go.

And we shouldn't have to pass on an obvious DPI flag because a receiver caught the football. What if there's an offensive penalty we could otherwise offset? Now we've penalized the offense unnecessarily.

Agree. Changing your call selection to adjust to a bad rule only compounds the problem. Fix the rule at the root of the problem.

Honestly, I feel like most coaches would know the NCAA exceptions better than most rules that NFHS is trotting out for football.

I did not say you can avoid all these situations, just stating that most of the time these are avoidable because the penalty is likely not going to be thrown if you wait. A hold depending on how bad is not going to result in a good play most of the time anyway. I have passed on a minor DPI before because the play was not affected. Then again, I am not in the camp this is a bad rule. Before the rules change coaches wanted to take the penalty on the try or kickoff anyway. I honestly do not care what coaches complain about in the first place. The rule is clear and most of the time you move anyway without much fanfare.

Peace

The only way to change bad rule is to enforce it.

I can understand the philosophy behind this rule. The idea being to not allow a desparation foul on a potentially scoring play to benefit the defense. I could go either way with it, for the following case:

DPI but A receiver makes the catch, he is tackled at the B1. --> Decline DPI, A's ball at the B1.
DPI but A receiver makes the catch, he scores a touchdown. --> Accept DPI, enforce on try or kickoff.
You're penalizing B double for essentially "not fouling hard enough". My beef with it is that it encourages B to foul hard in all cases, to make sure there is no score. If he's gonna shove the receiver, he may as well maul him.

If it rises to the level of a personal foul, then enforce it on the kickoff. DPI is not a safety foul and there's no need to enforce it when it is unsuccessful (and a touchdown is scored).

I can get behind this reasoning... and this is starting to sound like a very familiar conversation.

Maybe I've just been talking to myself again.

At last, a concise summary. Thanks.