And now for the non-flippant version of my suggestions:
1. What can we do to make free kicks safer?
Given a choice between modifying kickoffs and eliminating them entirely, I would choose modifying them as the lesser of two unfortunate options.
My preferred choice:
What makes kickoffs more dangerous than punts? The collisions with running starts. So, let's force R to line up similarly to a punt play. Mandate 7 players within five yards of their restraining line (or whatever it's called, sorry, I'm new at this NFHS stuff) and an additional 2 players within fifteen yards. Allow only 2 deep players. Result: kickoff return coverage involves retreating and THEN blocking, rather than getting a full head of steam while ALSO letting K get a full head of steam. Only the return man and one lead blocker get to start off deep.
Alternate choice:
The Schiano rule. I think Schiano recommended 4th and 15. That sounds a tad too easy, though. I would do 4th and 20. But then again, the precise yard line and distance to go should depend on research. We should decide we want a certain touchback rate and a certain onside kick recovery rate, say 15-20%, and use some empirical research to figure out where the "kickoff punt" should be snapped from and where the LTG should be to achieve those percentages. I know this ain't the NFL and statistics for aggregate onside-kick success percentages across 49 states is hard to come by, but it's important not to imbalance the game by choosing the wrong numbers. We want onside kick attempts to be rare and surprising in non-desperation situations. We want the game to be such that it makes more sense to kick the ball *to* the other team after scoring. I would support an NFHS guideline that, if the number of "kickoff punts" that are onside kick attempts ever goes above 10% of total kickoffs, that's proof that the onside kick is too appealing, too powerful, and the distance to go should be lengthened for the next season. The danger of calibrating these numbers incorrectly is one reason why this is my second choice, not my first.
2. Should we allow QB to spike from the shotgun?
I think this is a very minor issue. I don't think either answer is superior to the other. Spikes only happen in the two-minute drill with no timeouts, when Team A is sprinting into position. The location of the QB when he received the snap is pretty irrelevant. I would say, sure, let him spike it.
3. No IG if QB outside tackle box & pass goes over LOS?
Not needed in HS. Reward the defense for making a good play. Legalizing IG would have the effect of giving coaches a stronger incentive to call rollout, mobile plays. There's already plenty of that; we don't need to tilt the scales even further in that direction.
4. A fouls behind LOS = previous spot enforcement?
Yes. 1st and 24 after a hold is excessive. You might think "but OLs will hold more if the penalty is less." But also consider, the harsh penalty leads to officials giving too much leeway because they don't want to call that many 13-18-yard penalties. Reduce the penalty and you'll increase the willingness to call those fouls. The two effects might offset each other.
5. 40 " clock?
Yes for reasons stated in an earlier comment. Stop the feedback loop of slower and slower RFPs and slower and slower coach-QB chats.
6. Foul for 5 backs , not 6 linesmen ?
YES. There is literally no drawback to this change.
7. Ask EITHER captain or coach on penalty acceptance?
YES. In general, whenever the rules fail to reflect the game's *universal practice,* one of those two should change. Here, nobody has any problem with coaches accepting penalties, so let's let the rules reflect reality.
Which reminds me, here are two additional cases where I'd like the rules to change to reflect reality:
Codify legal BBW on a shotgun snap. If the philosophy says that it's legal for a 3/4-point stance OL to cut a heads-up DL at the shotgun snap, then the rules should say so.
Moreover, I think such BBW should be legal even if the DL is lined up in a gap instead of heads-up. It's legal when the QB is under center, after all. NFHS likes to brag about having very few exceptions and special cases? Well, here's a special case they can fix to make simpler. A BBW at the snap, during an OL's initial charge, should be equally legal regardless of whether the QB is under center or in shotgun.
Secondly, although this one is nobody's high priority:
Allow encroaching players who are *lined up* in the NZ by accident to get moved back by the wing officials. After all, that is what we do in reality: "44, get back." Only if the snap is imminent do we blow and throw. I'm not gonna die on the "NCAA offside" hill - if B44 jumps into the NZ on a hard count, then sure, let's blow and throw. I'm just saying if B44 is in press coverage and he doesn't realize his WR is off the line and he wanders slowly into the NZ as he leaves the huddle, what the wing does in real life is tell him to get back, and therefore, the rules should agree with that.