A solution to the "no huddle"...do we need one???

[Ralph Damren]

The NCAA is proposing a rule change where it would be a delay of game foul if A snapped the ball prior to the 40 sec. play clock reaching 0 : 29 excepting in the last 2 minutes of a half. Do we need to be concerned by the "no huddle" in NFHS??? Opinions.......

[TampaSteve]

In my opinion, no.
I dont think it is needed in college either.
The NCAA teams that have been running more plays than anyone get plays off on average about 0:16 after the previous play.
Unless I'm missing something, I do not see the need for the rule.

[VALJ]

I don't see the need for it on the next level, and I surely don't see the need for it at this level.  Just my 2 cents.

[Rulesman]

What they said...

[bossman72]

NFHS doesn't need a rule change because they have the 25 sec play clock every down.  We can chop it in whenever we feel like, thus preventing teams from going super fast.

[bama_stripes]

NFHS doesn't need a rule change because they have the 25 sec play clock every down.  We can chop it in whenever we feel like, thus preventing teams from going super fast.

This.

Part of the NCAA discussion is that officials may not be able to get in position for the next play.  I'm never going to chop the RFP if my guys aren't ready.

[Ralph Damren]

Looks like we're all on the same page with this, guys; where we control the RFP which starts the  : 25 clock, we control the tempo of a no huddle team so that it doesn't get out of hand.

[Rulesman]

...the tempo of a no huddle team...

...an unintended consequence of the 40/25 clock.

[TampaSteve]

This.
Part of the NCAA discussion is that officials may not be able to get in position for the next play.  I'm never going to chop the RFP if my guys aren't ready.

If this is the "why" behind it, I understand.
Having worked several scrimmages at  Valdosta State where they run this offense you sometimes feel a bit like a chicken with his head cut off with the pace of play-after-play.

[Magician]

Looks like we're all on the same page with this, guys; where we control the RFP which starts the  : 25 clock, we control the tempo of a no huddle team so that it doesn't get out of hand.

We can do this in NCAA by deleting the U stepping back. The difference is as soon as he does they can snap so he could be in a tough spot. I'm liking forward to hearing guidance on this as the clinic season gets started.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk

[HLinNC]

NO

[Ralph Damren]

...an unintended consequence of the 40/25 clock.

In the years since adding the 40/25 play clock, I've failed to see it's advantage.  I do have a new "booth buddy" to run the play clock (before the SJ kept it on the field). Maybe it improves the tempo, but I felt that was already there with ballboys getting in new balls on every incomplete pass. It does allow A to run the clock out with fewer plays at the end of the game, but that sure isn't worth the price of the equipment and additional operator. IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.....I feel NFHS's is running fine.

[Johnponz]

The issue is that officials (Rs in particular) have an opportunity to "manipulate" time with the 25 second clock.  For example if you want a quarter to end it is very easy to look up at the clock and not declare the ball ready for play until the game clock goes  <25 which could allow A to run the clock out.

In a blow out this is not a big deal, but in a close game it could give the appearance of officials manipulating the timing rules.  The 25/40 takes this appearance out of the game as the play clock starts when the ball was ruled dead on the previous play.  There is no discretion.

[bossman72]

In the years since adding the 40/25 play clock, I've failed to see it's advantage.  I do have a new "booth buddy" to run the play clock (before the SJ kept it on the field). Maybe it improves the tempo, but I felt that was already there with ballboys getting in new balls on every incomplete pass. It does allow A to run the clock out with fewer plays at the end of the game, but that sure isn't worth the price of the equipment and additional operator. IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT.....I feel NFHS's is running fine.

Several advantages:

1) Consistency.  It doesn't matter who the R is for the game or how long it takes the crew to set the ball... the ready will always be at the same time.  Coaches can't complain to the R about chopping it in too quick.

2) Faster pace.  When the clock is stopped for a first down or the ball going out of bounds, the R can crank the clock up as soon as the ball is down without having to worry about short-changing the offense on time between plays.

3) Integrity of the play clock.  This kind of goes along with #2, but most guys say to the BJ or whoever keeps the play clock to "wait a second or two after the RFP to start your timer."  You don't have to do that with a 40 sec clock.

Overall, the 40 sec clock is far superior, IMO.  The only draw back now is the high octane teams going too fast.

[TampaSteve]

Several advantages:

1) Consistency.  It doesn't matter who the R is for the game or how long it takes the crew to set the ball... the ready will always be at the same time.  Coaches can't complain to the R about chopping it in too quick.

2) Faster pace.  When the clock is stopped for a first down or the ball going out of bounds, the R can crank the clock up as soon as the ball is down without having to worry about short-changing the offense on time between plays.

3) Integrity of the play clock.  This kind of goes along with #2, but most guys say to the BJ or whoever keeps the play clock to "wait a second or two after the RFP to start your timer."  You don't have to do that with a 40 sec clock.

Overall, the 40 sec clock is far superior, IMO.  The only draw back now is the high octane teams going too fast.

Agree with your points, but remember too, balls in HS are generally not only on 1 sideline, but also it's a 10 year old kid texting his friend too. - harder to get a ball in a timely manner.
Additionally, chains are generally guys that have been doing chains for 20 years ans were late to the sideline cause thay had to finish up their last beverage before kickoff.

In as far as "wait a second or two": I may be wrong, but I thought i read several years ago in ncaa instructions somewhere where the play clock operatior was to "take a breath" before starting the play clock.  i.e. not to start the play clock the instant the hand goes up.

In general about play clocks, they are fudged round these parts some.
i.e.:
1-BJ has 27 on his watch.
2-if A is getting beat bad in the 2nd half, let it go.
3-if QB is under center and the ball is being snapped very shortly, let it go.

Plus with all this, as mentioned before, R controlling the RFP - which also depends on balls and chains being able to keep up too.  Moving target.

[Atlanta Blue]

In general about play clocks, they are fudged round these parts some.
i.e.:
1-BJ has 27 on his watch.
2-if A is getting beat bad in the 2nd half, let it go.
3-if QB is under center and the ball is being snapped very shortly, let it go.

We added visible play clocks last year.  Our association "warned" us: if you do use them, you lose the fudge factor.  Despite that, we love them.  They help us know if we are behind getting to the line, if we need to call a time out, help with running out the clock, etc.  I'll give up the fudge factor in order to be better able to manage clock situations.

Perfect example:  We know we are late getting in the play for some reason.  But we don't know how late.  Was the R late blowing in the RFP as well?  Or conversely, did he get it blown in quickly, and now we are REALLY behind.

Before the visible play clocks, we probably would have called a time out in the first situation.  But with the clocks, we now know whether or not we need to, or if relative to the RFP, we are still OK.

[bama_stripes]

Most of our contracted schools have visible play clocks.  I always tell my 25/sec CO to "take a breath".  Never had a complaint.

[AlUpstateNY]

Admittedly, and I believe intentionally, officials and coaches view the game we both appreciate from necessary different perspectives each which provide value to the high School Football experience.  There are a variety of "fudge" factors exercised, by both officials and coaches, that are applied in the appropriate circumstance that serve to enhance the game.

It's wise to consistently remember that High School football is actually played by, and for the benefit of, High School age student athletes, most of whom will benefit from the experience in far more ways than directly related to the game itself.  Although precision and meeting specific standards are some of the most valuable lessons learned, expectations of rigidly accurate execution  can produce counterproductive results in certain circumstances.

Likewise, excessive relaxation of standards or ignoring precision requirements can have an enormously corrosive effect on the overall experience. As each High School level football game, despite all positive efforts to offer consistency, is a unique event capable of presenting it's own unique situations and circumstances.  Much like garlic, can serve to either enhance or corrupt any meal, dependent on the expertise of the application, flexibility inherent to "fudge factors" can serve as a critical adjunct to the objectives of a High School football contest, dependent on the skill and judgment of the application.

The result of eliminating that flexibility, arbitrarily, removes a tool that can be of value when needed, but should never be abused or excessively relied upon.    Sometimes the expectation and demand for absolute precision doesn'y measure up as high as anticipated.

[eprov]

As a WH, in the pregame I inform the crew I will not make ball RFP unless we're all in position. Don't want the ball snapped with my HL or BJ not in position. It puts them at a disadvantage. But I like to get into a good pace. The better we are setting the ball and getting to our positions the more plays teams will be able to run. So lets all be under control, and hustle. 

[TampaSteve]

ATL:
totally off topic, maybe a derivative of it.
Do yall always take a time out > taking a DOG?

[Atlanta Blue]

ATL:
totally off topic, maybe a derivative of it.
Do yall always take a time out > taking a DOG?

Always?  No.
Usually?  Yes.

But players are under strict orders they are NOT to call a time out unless we direct them to.  We don't want some QB taking it on himself to call it when we are trying to save them for certain situations.

And they are NEVER to take a time out on a try unless we are going for 2, or on any FG attempt snapped from inside the 15.  Five more yards in those cases mean nothing, take the foul.  I would MUCH rather add five yards to a kick like that than have them rush to get the snap off.  Rushing on a placekick is usually a recipe for disaster.

[TampaSteve]

Always?  No.
Usually?  Yes.

But players are under strict orders they are NOT to call a time out unless we direct them to.  We don't want some QB taking it on himself to call it when we are trying to save them for certain situations.

And they are NEVER to take a time out on a try unless we are going for 2, or on any FG attempt snapped from inside the 15.  Five more yards in those cases mean nothing, take the foul.  I would MUCH rather add five yards to a kick like that than have them rush to get the snap off.  Rushing on a placekick is usually a recipe for disaster.

Gotcha.  all too often I see a team call timeout like the 2nd play of the 2nd half. on 2nd and 8.  (scratching head)

[Rulesman]

all too often I see a team call timeout like the 2nd play of the 2nd half. on 2nd and 8.  (scratching head)

Worse yet, how about the TO coming out of a change of quarters before the first snap?

[bossman72]

Tampa Steve, in all fairness, even though I like the 40 sec clock better, I think k the 25 sec clock is better for high school. It's simple to use and administrate and works well with the high school game.

[prab]

I would like to see the play clock for different levels, NFL, NCAA, NFHS, be in direct proportion to the width of the officials stripes at those levels.  This would then require only one solution for two different problems that don't exist.