Hear Ye, Hear Ye...Time to tell NFHS your opinion....

[Ralph Damren]

The NFHS website now has the football rules questionnaire up. Your opinions are valued on : (1) last year's rule changes; (2) problems in your area - for POEs ; (3) Potential rule changes....let your vote count and your voice be heard

[ALStripes17]

Here be 'da link': http://www.nfhs.org/questionnaire/

...and did not take me more than 5 minutes 

Of course, I am very strong in my opinions re: rule changes and POE's haha

'Merca! 

[Rulesman]

...Potential rule changes....let your vote count and your voice be heard...

How much weight do the results of the annual survey carry with the Rules Committee?

[Rich]

Some really great items there.  I'm hopeful after a few years of L-O-N-G-E-R games the NFHS will consider starting the clock after runs out of bounds outside of the last 2 minutes of the half.  And some of the other questions on the survey seemed appealing to me, as well.

[HLinNC]

I am interested in the game times as well.  One thought some of us have had is to run the clock on tries.  We do not have a mercy/slaughter/running clock rule in NC.  We estimate with the one minute interim between score to kickoff plus the try is probably close to another minute total real time, then a blowout game with seven TD's adds around 15 live minutes to a game's playing time.

I don't foresee coaches having much interest in making any changes to timing rules though.

[bama_stripes]

Thought it interesting that they asked about offensive fouls behind the LOS, but not defensive fouls, which is where the big inequity lies.

[Magician]

How much weight do the results of the annual survey carry with the Rules Committee?

The results are shared with the committee on any relevant rule changes. Some may have more influence than others.

[Ralph Damren]

How much weight do the results of the annual survey carry with the Rules Committee?

Good question - we are provided a breakdown of responses and it does hold clout with the sub-committee reviewing the change as it does need their approval for it to go to the floor for a final vote. officials & coaches responses weigh my opinion ( if I already don't have a strong one) and I feel is echoed by most in the committee.

[VALJ]

While I weighed in that I'd like the DPI auto first down back, I have to confess that we didn't have anywhere near as much of a problem with it in our area.  There were a few cries from the peanut gallery, but that was to be expected - I didn't hear a peep from the coaches.  (And I even remembered not to signal the first down, too!)

[Ralph Damren]

Thought it interesting that they asked about offensive fouls behind the LOS, but not defensive fouls, which is where the big inequity lies.

This has been there before, but never out of committee for a final vote. Anything involving exceptions is not a popular topic and you would need an exception to the exception as intentional grounding should always be a spot foul.

[Ralph Damren]

Some really great items there.  I'm hopeful after a few years of L-O-N-G-E-R games the NFHS will consider starting the clock after runs out of bounds outside of the last 2 minutes of the half.  And some of the other questions on the survey seemed appealing to me, as well.

This has been ran as an experimental rule by a couple of states on different occasions with the same results : (1) coaches thought it was great as long as we had the "last 2 minutes" exception ; (2) officials thought it was great as long as it DIDN'T have the "last 2 minutes" exception....so, there you have it ---gridlock

[Ralph Damren]

I am interested in the game times as well.  One thought some of us have had is to run the clock on tries.  We do not have a mercy/slaughter/running clock rule in NC.  We estimate with the one minute interim between score to kickoff plus the try is probably close to another minute total real time, then a blowout game with seven TD's adds around 15 live minutes to a game's playing time.

I don't foresee coaches having much interest in making any changes to timing rules though.

Prompted by the COP timing change in 1996, I spent a game with clipboard, stopwatch & coffee and found the following : (1) time from TD scored to ensuing kickoff = aprox. 4:30; (2) score of game was 35-28 = 40 minutes of "down time" while waiting for--- EZ congratulations---school's song plays --- kick team comes on --- kick sails into puckerbrush ---BJ or or designated ball fetcher digs it out ----- band plays again & cheerleaders prance ---- teams huddle on sidelines ------ U shares his  --- BJ gives kicker the ball....

[bama_stripes]

This has been there before, but never out of committee for a final vote. Anything involving exceptions is not a popular topic and you would need an exception to the exception as intentional grounding should always be a spot foul.

That would be the one exception to: "The basic spot is the previous spot for fouls which occur behind the LOS."

Doesn't seem that bad to me.

[Rulesman]

This has been ran as an experimental rule by a couple of states on different occasions with the same results : (1) coaches thought it was great as long as we had the "last 2 minutes" exception ; (2) officials thought it was great as long as it DIDN'T have the "last 2 minutes" exception....so, there you have it ---gridlock

I'll agree with the coaches on this one.

OMG... did I say that

[VALJ]

Prompted by the COP timing change in 1996, I spent a game with clipboard, stopwatch & coffee and found the following : (1) time from TD scored to ensuing kickoff = aprox. 4:30; (2) score of game was 35-28 = 40 minutes of "down time" while waiting for--- EZ congratulations---school's song plays --- kick team comes on --- kick sails into puckerbrush ---BJ or or designated ball fetcher digs it out ----- band plays again & cheerleaders prance ---- teams huddle on sidelines ------ U shares his  --- BJ gives kicker the ball....

Heck, there's your problem.  Tell Little Jethro the ballboy to leave one ball behind the goal posts while he chases down the one that Lil' Bubba kicked.  Get B to start yelling for Big Bubba once he gets to the 40.  Boom - you're down to a minute!   

[Atlanta Blue]

We pass the ball a good bit (and this year, we had PLENTY of incomplete passes).  We had one game all year that went longer than 2:20, and that was with the worst crew of the year (40 flags in a blowout game, and crew that acted like they didn't really want to be there).  And we have 23+ minute halftimes!

If the crew keeps the game moving, game times are not a problem.

[bama_stripes]

Timing rules + more passing + more scoring + longer halftime has added 30 minutes to my average game time.

[bbeagle]

Eliminate the clock stoppage after 1st down - that will speed up the game, plus eliminate most of the confusion with the clock operators.

I can't believe how many times someone is near the out-of-bounds, just got a first down, we wind our arms twice, then stop the clock. The clock stops. The referee then winds his arms after blowing the play in, the clock does not start. This is after a pre-game conference on this exact thing. This is pretty much every game.

There are numerous other situations as well.

At least every 5 games or so, near the end of a game, like :10 left, the clock is stopped after a running play in bounds, and the losing team is out of time-outs - the winning coach is going ballistic about 'Why is the clock stopped?'. 'Coach - your opponent got a first down. We will restart on the ready for play'.

I know there might be some people who like this - to get the chains reset, but this really does cause more harm than good. I like the NFL way over the NCAA way - adds more excitement to the end of the game.

[Atlanta Blue]

Except that most chain crews can't keep up, particularly in a hurry up situation.

There is nothing wrong with the length of games.  Leave the timing rules alone.

[Ralph Damren]

The removal of 3-5-7b (official's TO for 1st down) has never been proposed or discussed which would lead me to believe that there would be little support. The concern of an inept clock operator giving / taking away seconds late in a half would be magnified by an inept chain crew struggling to reset while the clock was running.

[zoom]

Our board has a mechanic for kickoffs that keeps the interval after tries to 1 minute. 

after the signal, BJ heads to scoring team's sideline and runs up to the 40, clearing as he goes and getting the ball on the way.
The wings head out to their sidelines at the goal line and then turn 90degrees and run up to the 25. 
The U gets to the 20, and once the BJ heads out, the wings move up to the 50, clearing along the way.
Finally BJ hands the ball to the kicker and hustles back to his spot. 

R blows the RFP when the BJ is ready and away we go.

[Ralph Damren]

Thanks for sharing this, Zoom. A myriad of suggestions appeared as to methods of shortening this "down time". One that we tried for a couple of years was to : (1) spot the ball @ the 40, as we would a scrimmage down; (2) whistle / signal ready for play; (3) flag K for DOG if ball not kicked w/I :25; (4)  flag R for DOG if not on field when K was ready to kick - some wanted to allow K to kick to an empty field - we didn't think that was a good idea. We returned to the ole' way after a couple of years as the "hustle up" on our part seemed to be more trouble than it was worth (plus it didn't give U time to digest his ). A few years ago this issue prompted a proposal to do away with the kick try and change the scoring. A TD would be worth 7 points unless a team chose to go for 2; TD then being 6. The proposal died quickly as the committee resigned to the fact that : Higher scores = longer games.

[Ralph Damren]

Thought it interesting that they asked about offensive fouls behind the LOS, but not defensive fouls, which is where the big inequity lies.

The 10 listed proposals are only a sampling of the full list which is usually 40-50. My guess is B fouls behind LOS will also be proposed to be enforced from previous spot IMHO, the "exception" issue is only part of the probable failure of these. A relevent question is always : "Do we need this change to repair the unbalance between the offense & defense?? " These would both benefit the offense and with the raise in scoring, one would question if the offense needs any help.

[Ralph Damren]

Heck, there's your problem.  Tell Little Jethro the ballboy to leave one ball behind the goal posts while he chases down the one that Lil' Bubba kicked.  Get B to start yelling for Big Bubba once he gets to the 40.  Boom - you're down to a minute!   

The problem, with your suggestion to our problem is : Sending Little Jethro into the puckerbrush for the football means he would return with burrs all over his spiffy overalls . Big Jethro would probably get  grumpy about it and request that our chapter's Treasury be used to reimburse. We usually send one of the polemen into the puckerbrush, as he knows what he is getting in to.!

[bama_stripes]

A relevent question is always : "Do we need this change to repair the unbalance between the offense & defense?"

Point taken.