Recent Posts

31

General Discussion / Re: Welcome to the shortest day of the year (23 hours)

« Last post by Ralph Damren on March 10, 2025, 06:56:56 AM »

KEEP THEM THERE VOTES A' COMING  . They say you can't teach an ole' dawg new tricks, and for me, I'm  happy with the current timing.  I've heard some say it them over a week for their bodies to accept the time change. IMHO, it doesn't differ than from traveling to another time zone. While "jet lag" may slow one down for a couple of hours, it quickly goes away. Our NFHS Rules meeting, prior to 2004, used to bounce from city to city. In 1996, our meeting was held in Anchorage, Alaska. We of the Eastern time zone needed to turn our watches back 5 hours. Jet lag disappeared as we had, IMHO, one of our most productive meetings with passage of.....
           Roughing the snapper rule
           Untimed down if inadvertent whistle to extend period
           Clock starts on snap after COP
           Removed requirement of 5 R players w/i 5 yds of their free kick line
           Changed basic spot from goal line to 20 on fouls on TB plays
The beer was cold but outside was colder. Sun rose at 10:30 and set at 2 PM. 

32

General Discussion / Re: Welcome to the shortest day of the year (23 hours)

« Last post by dammitbobby on March 09, 2025, 10:19:45 PM »

I can't ever tell which one is daylight saving and which one is standard, so I vote keep as it is, as of today.

33

General Discussion / Welcome to the shortest day of the year (23 hours)

« Last post by Ralph Damren on March 09, 2025, 03:26:49 PM »

There's always some grumbling by turning the clocks ahead or back. What say you

34

NCAA Discussion / Re: Scrimmage kicks

« Last post by Morningrise on March 06, 2025, 12:54:22 PM »

My guess is that a typical punt is returned whereas a typical failed FG attempt is not, and the return part is the one rules makers (rightly, IMO) want to minimize due to player safety.

That's surely part of it, maybe all of it. They might also not have wanted to give B both the 8-4-2-b-1 spot AND the penalty yardage on top. (Of course, they could have excepted *only* untouched FG attempts if they really wanted to)

35

NCAA Discussion / Re: 2025 NCAA Proposed Rule Changes

« Last post by Morningrise on March 06, 2025, 12:46:21 PM »

They've taken a smaller step so they can avoid suspending players for an entire drive. They want to avoid that because, as we know, they're very worried that legitimately injured players would try to stay in the game and risk further injury.

I appreciate this and I also like how this new rule will, at the very least, clean up the appalling optics of a Team B player spontaneously flopping to the ground all by his lonesome in open space as if he just got punched by Ant-Man.

But this rule, like the hypothetical "out for a drive" rule, could also prevent legitimately injured players from receiving the aid they need. I can envision a player trying to limp off the field while his coach holds the medical staff back from assisting him because they need all their timeouts.

36

NCAA Discussion / Re: 2025 NCAA Proposed Rule Changes

« Last post by Imperial Stout on March 05, 2025, 12:55:46 PM »

medical personnel entering the field "...after the ball is spotted" is an interesting caveat.
It would seem to reduce this ploy, but would not seem to all out eliminate it.
i.e. those that employ this strategy can tell the players: if they get 1/10 here, a db will go down as the play is being blown dead.
I heard a proposal that if a player goes down then he must sit out the remainder of that drive. - which seems an effective deterrent too. 

reminds me of a hockey player commenting after a player went down, game stoppage and medical personnel on the ice.  Opposing player said "I'll tell ya eh, they must have some remarkable doctors in MTL. this guy was on the ice and had to be helped off.  And he didn't even miss a shift."
(Subban was the guy who took a dive. somehow, he got what was coming to him the remainder if that game)

Curious why they added the "when medical team enters the field" caveat. So if a player goes down, gets the injury timeout, gets up and limps off the field, everything is ok?

37

Camps, Clinics and Training Videos / Re: 2025 Sioux Empire Football Officials Clinic - June 23-24, 2025

« Last post by lawdog on March 04, 2025, 02:47:38 PM »

Excellent Clinic.  Been several times!

38

NCAA Discussion / Re: 2025 NCAA Proposed Rule Changes

« Last post by chaoslord on March 04, 2025, 11:17:25 AM »

Pardon my ignorance, but what is this meant to prevent?

Few days late but it's meant to prevent the blow up from the South Carolina / Illinois Citrus bowl game where a SCAR returner did the T but then caught the ball and threw it to another returner. It caused a flash point with the coaches later in the game when Bielema, checking on an injured player near the SCAR sideline, did the T symbol toward Beamer before walking away iirc. So, in one word: gamesmanship. They dont want players having to decide "is it ok to let up or am I getting tricked" on kickoffs

39

NCAA Discussion / Re: Scrimmage kicks

« Last post by Kalle on March 03, 2025, 08:17:11 PM »

Why are carry over penaltes permitted for some Team A fouls on punts but not on FG attempts.  What is the logic behind that?

My guess is that a typical punt is returned whereas a typical failed FG attempt is not, and the return part is the one rules makers (rightly, IMO) want to minimize due to player safety.

40

Non-Officiating Discussion / Re: Blog....high school coaching.. "Did you win?"

« Last post by Rglodich on March 03, 2025, 03:50:28 PM »

Appreciate the feedback Ralph...thanks for the read