NFHS Survey
 

NFHS | NFHS Sport Questionnaires

Discussion starts with the next post! :D

They should have just said "Should we adopt X% of the NCAA rulebook as our own?"

:D

Wondering why they didn't ask about defensive fouls behind the LOS as well as offensive.

I was thinking the same thing.

To bad nothing addressed NFHS recommended mechanics...

BAHAHAHAHA! :D

I agree! :)

Hopefully they don't adopt any of them except I did say yes to eliminating face guarding.

I hope they adopt *all* of them.

Not that it matters to me too much, but I think more states should go NCAA. The Fed football rules are just bizarre in too many areas. States have all the ability they want to make their own modifications, unlike when using Fed.

States can, and do, modify NFHS rules as well.

There are some things I like about NFHS rules, including the simplicity of blocking below the waist. That's a jumbled mess in NCAA and doesn't seem it will be really fixed any time soon.

They have that "ability" because they can't be members of the NCAA!

By the same token, they have the ability to make their own modif'ns on Fed rules too. I know plenty of organiz'ns that do so. They just aren't members of the Federation.

Out of curiosity, do TX (and MA) allow blocking below the waist as NCAA does (obviously before a COP, not back toward the LOS, etc)? Or are there modifications to the NCAA ruleset?

I think one of the biggest barriers to states switching from Fed to NCAA is the blocking changes. There is already significant focus and emphasis on injuries (chop blocks have been heavily emphasized over the last several years). And the questions in the survey hint at this. Notice the question about "the free blocking zone and making blocking below the waist, clipping and blocking in the back illegal anywhere on the field".

Except for some administrative uniform things, timing and where to kick off from, the rules in Texas are exactly the same as NCAA. We are about 99% pure NCAA.

I wonder if there has been any study on injuries in TX/MA vs Fed states. If the Fed is considering eliminating the free blocking zone and focusing on other types of blocks, I would think they are doing it for safety reasons. And if they are concerned about illegal blocking (including blocks below the waist), then they must have a reason to consider it dangerous. And one would hope they have data to support such a conclusion.

It's been my experience (multiple sports) that rules designed to prevent injuries are not supported by data as much as they are supported by one-off anecdotal stories or "what-if" fears.

Is that by weight or volume?
:D

Volume...we are much louder here. :D

True. I was at the Katy game last weekend - as loud as any college game I've been to recently.

(Side note - both my alma mater (Cy Fair) and my son's school (Katy) are still going - only 8 teams left in each bracket. Going for the daily double this year!)

True, because getting the data is a major job. The rule that was based on research was the disallowance of BBW following CoP, or at least the one following a CoP via kick.

Actually modifications to NFHS rules, determined by individual States, is fairly common. NFHS rules seem a lot less complex and offer far fewer exceptions than NCAA rules, perhaps why 96% of the 50 State High School Administrations choose NFHS rules.

Just the Facts
 

NFHS states can and do make modifications to rules to makes the rule safer.

Additionally, all 98.94% (49 out of 51 which includes the District of Columbia)of states that belong to the NFHS each get one vote each year on each and every rule change.

Texas and Massachusetts get no say, no comments, no input, and no vote on NCAA rule changes. They never have, and they never will just as long as they choose to stay with NCAA. But then, that is there choice.

By the way, the talk around the water cooler is Massachusetts is seriously considering returning to the NFHS for football.

FYI - Texas and Massachusetts use NFHS rules for all sports except football

Math Fail.

But why would they want such a say? It's not as if Texas & Mass. HS are playing football against institutions other than HS that also play by their rules, so their ability to affect NCAA would mean nothing to them. It might be different if Texas & Mass. were adjoining states where the schools frequently played against each other, in which case each state ass'n would have a slight stake in the rules the other one played by.

I am sorry but I would never want to go to NCAA rules 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 and I think there would be a concern with safety of players. And NCAA rules are usually made for more advanced players as well in multiple sports. I do not see this necessary for HS kids. I get it that Texas uses these rules and probably deal with it well, but not everyone in other states is obsessed with football on the same level.

Peace

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.

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.

Jesus H Christ
 

Jesus H Christ - I actually agree with Rut!!! A very rare situation for me.:eek:

(I will probably go to hell for that one, aye Rich!)

Wtf???
 

I am sure glad you provided us with clarification and guidance? :confused:
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...

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.

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.

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

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

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

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?

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

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.

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.