NFHS Survey

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

It's not as if Texas & Mass. HS are playing football against institutions other than HS that also play by their rules,

That's actually not true for Texas. There are big name public schools playing early season games against out of state opponents and there are some private conferences that are made up of schools from multiple states.

I know of at least one anecdote where a team from Texas was playing a team from Oklahoma in Oklahoma (so they were playing NFHS rules). The Texas team had a TD called back on an illegal block below the waist that is legal in NCAA.

It's fairly rare but it happens. Texarkana is one place where this makes a difference also.

Truth be told, I really like officiating under NCAA rules (except for the craziness that is the blocking below the waist rules) but I think there are some strong arguments for Texas HS football to adopt NFHS rules.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Welpe

That's actually not true for Texas. There are big name public schools playing early season games against out of state opponents and there are some private conferences that are made up of schools from multiple states.

I know of at least one anecdote where a team from Texas was playing a team from Oklahoma in Oklahoma (so they were playing NFHS rules). The Texas team had a TD called back on an illegal block below the waist that is legal in NCAA.

It's fairly rare but it happens. Texarkana is one place where this makes a difference also.

Sorry I worded badly what I'd wanted to say. The team from Okla. was not playing under NCAA rules, so it's not a case of what I meant. A case of what I meant would be a team from one association playing a team from another ass'n, both of which ass'ns use NCAA rules but are independent of each other. So, for instance, if a Texas HS played a NAIA college team, both would be independently under NCAA rules. That would be the only case in which having a say in NCAA's rules would matter to either of their ass'ns.

Since the team from Okla. was not playing by NCAA rules, it would make no difference whether the Texas HS ass'n had a say in development of NCAA rules or not. Also, it matters not to the Texas HS ass'n whether it has a say in NCAA's rules to the extent those HS play games with other schools in the same ass'n, because they're playing under whatever rules their ass'n says; it happens to be NCAA with some modif'ns, but any year they want to, the Texas HS ass'n could change to whatever rules they want to use or make up.

[KWH]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Sorry I worded badly what I'd wanted to say. The team from Okla. was not playing under NCAA rules, so it's not a case of what I meant. A case of what I meant would be a team from one association playing a team from another ass'n, both of which ass'ns use NCAA rules but are independent of each other. So, for instance, if a Texas HS played a NAIA college team, both would be independently under NCAA rules. That would be the only case in which having a say in NCAA's rules would matter to either of their ass'ns.

Since the team from Okla. was not playing by NCAA rules, it would make no difference whether the Texas HS ass'n had a say in development of NCAA rules or not. Also, it matters not to the Texas HS ass'n whether it has a say in NCAA's rules to the extent those HS play games with other schools in the same ass'n, because they're playing under whatever rules their ass'n says; it happens to be NCAA with some modif'ns, but any year they want to, the Texas HS ass'n could change to whatever rules they want to use or make up.

I am sure glad you provided us with clarification and guidance?
My point was, unlike the 49 NFHS member states, each of which gets an equal opportunity to propose and vote on rules changes, each and every year, Texas and Massachusetts get no say, absolutely no input, and no vote on NCAA rules changes. Yes, TASO makes minor changes to NCAA rules for High school games, but nothing major...

[Texas Aggie]

Texas and Massachusetts get no say, no comments, no input, and no vote on NCAA rule changes.

This isn't actually true. Rogers Redding is the Secretary/Rules Editor and a former Texas HS official. The majority of football games played under NCAA rules are played in Texas high schools and jr. highs every year. While the rules are made primarily based on what the coaches on the rules committee think, there are changes Rogers has input on and he does most of the editorial changes himself. Rogers communicates with Texas HS officials -- heck, I've sent him an email. The input you speak of isn't substantial, but its a lot greater than none at all.

Honestly, how much input would a state that doesn't have a lot of football playing schools (I don't know of an example, but I'd venture somewhere between Washington state and the midwest) have in changes? To the extent this is an issue (and its not one at all), its so minor as to not worry anyone.

with only 5 officials working just about every varsity game and in many cases 3 or 2 officials working lower level games here. Too much blocking stuff would get missed

This isn't a problem, either. Not saying that there are no 2-man games being worked with any regularity in the state (it could exist in some parts), but its rare. Games with 3 officials are by and large jr. high games where the blocking isn't very complex. As far as 5 in most varsity games, I'd have to ask: specifically what blocking stuff are you referring to, and how does the addition of deep flanks help? The kicking game at the varsity level is the biggest issue with 5 or fewer officials and I don't see how Fed rules would make this any easier.

And NCAA rules are usually made for more advanced players

Give me an example of an NCAA rule that is intended for advanced players and not HS.

[HLin NC]

Honestly, how much input would a state that doesn't have a lot of football playing schools (I don't know of an example, but I'd venture somewhere between Washington state and the midwest) have in changes? To the extent this is an issue (and its not one at all), its so minor as to not worry anyone.

One state, one vote. Number of FB playing schools has nothing to do with it.

Give me an example of an NCAA rule that is intended for advanced players and not HS.

Most of the BBW rules, tackle box for QB, crack back block rule, "targeting", come to mind fairly fast.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Games with 3 officials are by and large jr. high games where the blocking isn't very complex. As far as 5 in most varsity games, I'd have to ask: specifically what blocking stuff are you referring to, and how does the addition of deep flanks help? The kicking game at the varsity level is the biggest issue with 5 or fewer officials and I don't see how Fed rules would make this any easier.

It's neither the blocking nor the kicking that calls for more officials. The more forward passing you have, the more officials you need.

[parepat]

The biggest thing that should be considered when deciding which code to use in high school is simplicity. The sad reality is that a large percentage of high school officials will not put in the rules study to learn a complex code. For every one of us on here working at our hobby there are five more that rarely pick up a rulebook. Thus, the more complex the code, the more errors we will see.

[Reffing Rev.]

AND unfortunately most of those officials get their rules knowledge from the same place most coaches do, tv games and commentators on Saturdays and Sunday's...so when coaches get to evaluating, those officials get high marks.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by KWH

I am sure glad you provided us with clarification and guidance?
My point was, unlike the 49 NFHS member states, each of which gets an equal opportunity to propose and vote on rules changes, each and every year, Texas and Massachusetts get no say, absolutely no input, and no vote on NCAA rules changes. Yes, TASO makes minor changes to NCAA rules for High school games, but nothing major...

Then explain to me what either of those states' scholastic athletic ass'ns would gain by having any such influence.

If my explanation wasn't good enough, I'll try again. Suppose there were 2 people who wanted to play checkers with each other in Texas, and 2 other people who wanted to play checkers with each other in Mass. By coincidence, each of those pairs of players agrees to play one of the many versions of that game rather than another -- i.e. the checker players in Texas wind up playing by the same rules as the checker players in Mass. The checkers players in Texas are never going to play against the checkers players in Mass. What good would it do for the checkers players in either state to have any influence on the choice of rules by the checkers players in the other state? What good would it do for the checkers players in either state to have any influence on the rules of other checkers players, in state or otherwise, that they're never going to play checkers with?