1
Texas Topics / Re: Proposal coming for home playoff games
« Last post by dammitbobby on Today at 09:17:09 AM »Have heard through the grapevine that this proposal did not pass/was not approved when the coaches voted on it.
Recent Posts
2
National Federation Discussion / Re: Subtle Change in Manual
« Last post by Ralph Damren on Today at 06:23:52 AM »While I've always been under the assumption that the referee was the crew chief and the other officials were equals, the new rank of 'head line judge' sounds like he/she/it now holds rank over the mere line judge on the opposite side of the field. 
My concern is the potental pride punchure of the poor line judge unless we also change his/her/its title 
My random suggestion is head border judge'.......
...AND YOURS....
My concern is the potental pride punchure of the poor line judge unless we also change his/her/its title My random suggestion is head border judge'..........AND YOURS....
3
National Federation Discussion / Re: Subtle Change in Manual
« Last post by UmpnRef on Yesterday at 02:51:20 PM »I agree, a lot can go on in the middle during field goals/PAT with the manual change. I see it as a potential player safety issue for the snapper. Time will tell.
The other item that will occur per the manual on kicks, (of course rarely) if after a fair catch or awarded fair catch and R decides to do a free kick, the manual says the U and R go under the goal. I assume, which I don't like to do, this leaves the BJ with the kickers and the LJ and HLJ at the goal line per the manual change on free kicks.
The other item that will occur per the manual on kicks, (of course rarely) if after a fair catch or awarded fair catch and R decides to do a free kick, the manual says the U and R go under the goal. I assume, which I don't like to do, this leaves the BJ with the kickers and the LJ and HLJ at the goal line per the manual change on free kicks.
4
National Federation Discussion / Re: 2026 NFHS Football Rules Interpretation Meeting
« Last post by sj on Yesterday at 10:21:00 AM »The NFHS football rules interpretation meeting is this Saturday.
What question(s) would you ask?
Is anybody here attending?
Can't seem to find the information but what is the time and access information? Thanks.
5
National Federation Discussion / Re: Down and distance after dead ball foul prior to overtime.
« Last post by Steely Dan on Yesterday at 09:02:26 AM »Is that correct? Found several CA OT rule sets posted and while all agree that start is the 25, none of them mention the chains will not be used and they also say series is over after 4th down "IF A DOES NOT ACHIEVE A 1ST DOWN".
By LA I mean Louisiana, not Los Angeles. We never have chains in OT down on the bayou.
6
National Federation Discussion / Re: Subtle Change in Manual
« Last post by ncwingman on Yesterday at 08:47:46 AM »I agree that the vast majority of scoring attempts from scrimmage kicks are tries and this is less of a concern for a try. However, FG attempts are non-zero and if a team has a kicker that can make kicks, they will use them often. I'll see maybe 5 FG attempts all year, and they're all in the same game.
On a long field goal, you're also more likely to see a serious block attempt which increase the risk of RTS but also jumping over the line/potential hurling/did they go through the a-gap, etc..
Once the kick is airborne, the U is watching the ball to judge the score. R has potential RTK and is watching the back field, the wings can see the ends, who is watching the middle of the pile? It's one of those things that won't be an issue - until it is. When it happens though, we're just going to miss it. If we're cool with that, then we're cool with that, I guess.
As an aside, I've recently been thinking about clinic topics/discussions that get glossed over. One of them that I keep coming back to is that we focus a lot on initial positions, keys at the snap... and then just stop having guidance. Partially that's because what happens after the snap is very unpredictable, but I've been trying to think about "What are you looking at 5 seconds after the snap?"
On a long field goal, you're also more likely to see a serious block attempt which increase the risk of RTS but also jumping over the line/potential hurling/did they go through the a-gap, etc..
Once the kick is airborne, the U is watching the ball to judge the score. R has potential RTK and is watching the back field, the wings can see the ends, who is watching the middle of the pile? It's one of those things that won't be an issue - until it is. When it happens though, we're just going to miss it. If we're cool with that, then we're cool with that, I guess.
As an aside, I've recently been thinking about clinic topics/discussions that get glossed over. One of them that I keep coming back to is that we focus a lot on initial positions, keys at the snap... and then just stop having guidance. Partially that's because what happens after the snap is very unpredictable, but I've been trying to think about "What are you looking at 5 seconds after the snap?"
7
National Federation Discussion / Re: 2026 NFHS Football Rules Interpretation Meeting
« Last post by Patrick E. on Yesterday at 07:57:14 AM »Ask if they'll let you kick the editorial committee in the nuts.
.8
National Federation Discussion / Re: Subtle Change in Manual
« Last post by bama_stripes on Yesterday at 06:53:30 AM »The odds are we are going to have a fire drill with a bad snap than the snapper is going to get roughed. Having the LJ under the upright leaves a big hole. I have no problem as a U looking at the snapper and judge an upright, particularly on tries. How many 40 yard FGs are even attempted?
This. Even in a football-crazy state such as mine, coaches are loathe to try long FGs except in an emergency situation — too many bad things can happen. They’d rather take a chance on converting the 4th down.
And, honestly, how many times do we actually see RTS? We’ve done a really good job of taking that out of the HS game. Since the wings are pinned to the LOS, they should be able to catch that foul on almost every occurrence.
9
Texas Topics / Re: Raise your hand….
« Last post by blindtxzebra on Yesterday at 06:17:21 AM »I have to admit that I was going to go until I looked at the agenda. This is a full day of a lot of nothing. I have heard Shaw talk already this year covering rule changes, don’t care about an hour long coaches panel, then 2 more speakers one of which I haven’t heard talk before so maybe he would be good. Then we get to one breakout room per position, so many officials work more than one spot in high school. What happened to sessions on BBW, RPS, kicks, etc.
Then to top it off when I looked at the host hotel cost for one night (because I live to far away to drive in Saturday morning and make it on time) it was almost $200. No thanks, I’ll drive to a regional clinic, be done at noon and still come out money ahead.
Then to top it off when I looked at the host hotel cost for one night (because I live to far away to drive in Saturday morning and make it on time) it was almost $200. No thanks, I’ll drive to a regional clinic, be done at noon and still come out money ahead.
10
National Federation Discussion / Re: Subtle Change in Manual
« Last post by riffraft on June 25, 2026, 09:52:44 PM »Were there changes on Free kicks too?
I think U under the upright on a FG is a good idea, but I would set a yardage limit. I've done this in youth football and you can still officiate the snapper just fine. This was almost exclusively on tries.
I think at a certain point, maybe the 15, the U should stay in the normal spot and the LJ should go back.
The odds are we are going to have a fire drill with a bad snap than the snapper is going to get roughed. Having the LJ under the upright leaves a big hole. I have no problem as a U looking at the snapper and judge an upright, particularly on tries. How many 40 yard FGs are even attempted?