NFHS fall sports questionnaire up....
 

What do they mean by "major problem"? Does it have to be frequent to be a major problem? Or can it be a major problem by virtue of its being a PITA if it occurs, no matter how rarely it occurs?

My guess is it will be a foul if you continue to participate after your helmet has come off.

I took it as a coach. My biggest beef is illegal helmet contact not being called as such. I saw multiple defensive players this seasons lead with the crown of their helmets with no penalty. There are things in high school games that would draw suspensions and fines in the NFL that aren't even flagged at this level.

The other one I noticed was the chain crew using electronic devices. I never noticed that, but the chain crew in one of our playoff games was very unprofessional. The down box operator repeatedly cursed at the HL on our sideline ("That call is bullsh*t", "f-ing terrible", etc). During the second half he kept doing it so I went to the HL away from the chain crew and told him the guy was cursing around our players (We don't curse around players, so he shouldn't be either). As soon as I told him, the down box guy comes running up and tells me to coach and leave him alone. I wouldn't allow a basketball table crew to openly disagree with calls, much less curse at me or my partners.

Interesting to see the spot where a kick from scrimmage comes down proposed as an enforcement spot (in case of foul-IW concurrence), because that one's used in Rugby Union. I've often thought about having the spot where a forward pass is touched or grounded or leaves the field available as an enforcement spot for PI.

I took the survey as a coach from NY, but wasn't sure whether they should count me as affiliated, because we use Fed rules only as a "byproduct" of Fed's ordinary service to their affiliated organiz'ns. We don't use Fed rules intact, but "current Fed...except" rules, and we're not members of a state HS ***'n, so we're not in any direct feedback loop.

On the "major problem" page, there were things that I thought are major problems if they occur, but are not frequent occurrences, so I interpreted "major problem" as requiring frequency. In particular, I would like the scrimmage rules to either newly specify or clarify that attempts by either team to drown out the other team's signals by yelling or noisemaking be treated as disconcerting signals; I've seen this problem reported.

During my pre-game instructions with the chain crew I will normally ask them to please refrain from calling, texting, or surfing while the game is in progress as we have a job to do. They are usually co-operative although many have the local area scores texted to them from newspaper or other media sources and I can hear them discussing scores from other games so its obvious they are checking their devices.

Players/students sent to me by the coach to work chains for JV games are the worst offenders.

Here is the biggest problem on IHC- if I ever flag the RB who lowers his head going for that last yard, A's coach will either have a stroke or I'll have to have him arrested so the game can continue. You can be as sanctimonious as you want about it but in your heart, you know I am right. The defensive IHC is usually pretty easy.

I voted in favor of limiting BBW to hand to hand snaps. Our state supervisor has told us that a BBW from a two point stance with A in shotgun can not legally take place with the ball still being in the zone. Yet, we have a few officials and many coaches who want to disagree. This would clear that up, at least for us here in NC.

But there are formations which call, or allow, for snaps which are thrown to a position which is still inside the FBZ. For instance, in Menominee HS's single wing formation there are usually 3 backs in position to take snaps, none of which can be hand-to-hand, yet all of them within the FBZ. The Wyatt wildcat formation uses 2 QBs (or one QB & one FB), each stationed just far back enough to qualify as in the backfield, but neither taking a hand to hand snap. Why disfavor them just because there are other formations with a thrown snap that leaves the FBZ? The Wyatt wildcat would suffer particularly because it uses plays where an end (the line uses 0 splits, so the ends are in the FBZ) shoeshine/superman blocks toward the center to cover for a guard & tackle pulling to the other side.

It would be less damaging to adopt any of various deemings to eliminate the judgment when the ball is actually snapped out of the FBZ, rather than simply ban BBW during or following any thrown snap.

You can even see this mentality if you watch the Aloha Clinic videos -- if the runner lowers his head and there's helmet-to-helmet contact, it's usually said that it's nothing because the heads came together. I agree that you certainly can't punish the defense -- he's lowering his head to *avoid* IHC. But why allow the runner to drop the head in that situation at all?

We have called IHC on runners, though -- usually when a runner lowers his helmet and tries to drive the crown through the defender's chest/torso. And you're right, the coach is usually apoplectic when we do so.

As for the IBBW, we simply don't allow any delayed or redirected low block on any snap that isn't hand-to-hand. If a BBW is immediate at the snap, it's legal, regardless of the formation. Personally, I think it's time to eliminate most low blocking at every level. The NCAA rule is 10X worse than the HS rule to enforce.

Why? That would be a huge strategic disadvantage to a lot of teams that don't match up size-wise with bigger teams.

What does that have to do with safety of the players, which is supposed to be the primary emphasis of NFHS rules?

Player safety, like other NFHS sports, is one of the emphasis. This is football though.

Cut blocking at the LOS is not inherently unsafe in my opinion. Our team cut on both sides of the ball and we didn't have an injury from being cut all season in 13 games. If officials would call other illegal acts that are unsafe that are already against the rules, like BBW that happens outside of the free blocking zone (Defenses would cut our lead blockers out of the backfield all the time and it was never called) and illegal helmet contact, I might take eliminating cut blocking more seriously.