WELCOME, COMMONWEALTH.......

[Tobes]

Why did Mass. make the change to NFHS rules?

According to the reports I saw last summer, the biggest reason was to avoid any potential liability issues. One AD told me that they were concerned that if someone was injured seriously, the fact that the MIAA used rules that were not written for high school-aged athletes could be used against them in court.

While I don't know that NFHS rules are necessarily safer than NCAA, I guess a lawyer could make that case in court.

[Kalle]

According to the reports I saw last summer, the biggest reason was to avoid any potential liability issues. One AD told me that they were concerned that if someone was injured seriously, the fact that the MIAA used rules that were not written for high school-aged athletes could be used against them in court.

Knowing that TX officials follow this discussion, too, a question for them: has this come up in Texas at all? And if it has, what was the reasoning in staying with the NCAA rules?

[JasonTX]

Knowing that TX officials follow this discussion, too, a question for them: has this come up in Texas at all? And if it has, what was the reasoning in staying with the NCAA rules?

I haven't heard that it has.  The coaches would not allow it.

[KWH]

From a person of knowledge in Massachusetts:

1) Uniformity!
2) They get the same one vote on the NFHS Rules Committee as all the other 49 NFHS Members receive. (They previously had ZERO input on NCAA Rules Changes)
3) All their bordering states use NFHS Playing Rules.
4) Learning two sets of codes is fairly routine for NFHS members! When NFHS officials move up they learn NCAA Rules and there are tons of cross training/differences material available.
5) Blocking Below the waist is much simpler in NFHS. It doesn't change every week! AND BBW IS ILLEGAL! (except in the free blocking zone up until the ball has left the zone)
6) Much, much less exceptions to rules making it simpler to learn and officiate.
7) The NFHS Blindside Block Rule seriously opened up some eyes in Massachusetts!
8) After discussion with many other NFHS members, they concluded the 49 NFHS members can not be all wrong and they voted to become member #50.

[Magician]

In the mammal kingdom, only human babies with soiled diapers want a change. I been in contact with several local officials that have moved to NCAA and they all felt the transmission from NFHS to NCAA was a bigger challenge than originally learning the NFHS rules.

Interesting perspective. I've always said it was much easier to transition because the basics are largely the same and basic rule knowledge and knowing when and how to apply them has already been learned. You already know how to officiate.

Most of the major changes that actually happen on a regular basis are in penalty enforcement when you can slow down and take your time. The biggest challenge I see MA having this first year or two is unlike college where a new person is likely working with at least a couple rules experts, these officials won't be working with many

The HS rules are generally simpler although they don't read as well and aren't always the most logical.

[toma]

 As we understand it, Bill Gaines head of the MIAA became a member of NFHS executive board on the condition he moved the remaining 3 sports not using NFHS rules; Football, Volleyball and Baseball to NFHS rules. MIAA also received $25K for each sport.
MIAA never spoke with AD's coaches or officials about the moves.
You would think a moves like this there would be a discussion with the all parties involved. 

[KWH]

And now, the rest of the story...

Karissa Niehoff of Connecticut was the Section 1 Representative on the NFHS Executive Board.
Karissa resigned her NFHS Executive board position with one year remaining on her term to accept the position of NFHS Executive Director.
Because of the vacancy, Bill Gaine, (not Gaines) executive director of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association (MIAA), was simply appointed to serve a one-year term representing Section 1, replacing Ms. Niehoff.

NFHS Section 1 consists of: Connecticut, Maine (Home of the Black Bears ), Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.

[Ralph Damren]

And now, the rest of the story...

Karissa Niehoff of Connecticut was the Section 1 Representative on the NFHS Executive Board.
Karissa resigned her NFHS Executive board position with one year remaining on her term to accept the position of  NFHS Executive Director.
Bill Gaine, (not Gaines) executive director of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association (MIAA), was simply appointed to serve a one-year term representing Section 1, replacing Ms. Niehoff.

NFHS Section 1 consists of: Connecticut, Maine (Home of the Black Bears ), Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.

.....AS THE WORLD TURNS.....

One should also note that three of the four states that begin with "New" are in Section 1. Maine is nearly as large as the other 5 NEW England states combined. The largest section (area wise) is Section 8. Having Alaska helps. That's enough information for one day.

 

[KWH]

For those of you playing along at home.....

Another NFHS trivia question...

Which of the 8 NFHS sections has the least number of voting members???

[markrischard]

8

[Ralph Damren]

By my count (fingers on one hand + thumb -which is a finger - on the other) , there is a tie between sections 4, 6 and 7 with 5 states each. There are some rumored future events
that could change that :

(1) If California became a stand-alone republic or became part of Mexico, section 7 would then have only 4.

(2) I believe that when Texas was granted statehood, an agreement was then made that they could later annex into 5 individual states. If that occurred section 6 would then have 9 states. This would pass section 1 , which has 8.

I'm unsure of the action that would be would be taken by NFHS if either occurred.....

Bonus question : The voting member from DC is in section 2, should the voting members from the coaches association and the officials association be considered in the section that they currently reside in??

 

[Tobes]

https://www.salemnews.com/sports/coaches-officials-say-football-changes-won-t-be-good-for/article_090ae3c4-77b4-5aca-907b-8a9f60a72977.html

More Mass. officials and coaches voice their displeasure.

I don't really understand the coaches' argument that the switch would mean that their players would not be as prepared to play in college for two reasons, first, states like Florida, Pennsylvania, California and Ohio use Federation rules, send many more players to the college ranks than Massachusetts and they do just fine.

Second, while it's great to help any kid who has the talent and interest to play in college be as prepared for that as possible, most high school football players will not be playing in college. Shouldn't a high school football program be run for the benefit of all of its athletes and not just the standouts who will play in college?

[scrounge]

https://www.salemnews.com/sports/coaches-officials-say-football-changes-won-t-be-good-for/article_090ae3c4-77b4-5aca-907b-8a9f60a72977.html

More Mass. officials and coaches voice their displeasure.

What a bunch of sanctimonious whining and sophistry. As mentioned, 48 states aren't preparing kids (at least the 5 to 10% that will actually go on to the next level) for college, only TX and MA are uniquely qualified to do so? Puh-leeze. And most of the points are laughable - safety is lessened because of differences in the leaping rules?!? How about the safety of low blocks outside the free blocking zone? And you can still eject for targeting, fellas, it's just not automatic.

After all the sound and fury of this nonsense, they'll see that it all signified nothing more than hysterical fear and unwillingness to tackle their own inertia.

[prab]

What a bunch of sanctimonious whining and sophistry. As mentioned, 48 states aren't preparing kids (at least the 5 to 10% that will actually go on to the next level) for college, only TX and MA are uniquely qualified to do so? Puh-leeze. And most of the points are laughable - safety is lessened because of differences in the leaping rules?!? How about the safety of low blocks outside the free blocking zone? And you can still eject for targeting, fellas, it's just not automatic.

After all the sound and fury of this nonsense, they'll see that it all signified nothing more than hysterical fear and unwillingness to tackle their own inertia.

+1 for the first use of both sanctimonious and sophistry on the forum!  Remember that accuracy is no defense against a charge of insensitivity.

[Tobes]

I was thinking about the idea that using NCAA rules helps high school players get ready for the next level. By that logic, shouldn't everyone at all levels use NFL rules?

[toma]

Puh-leeze! 
It's all about the money. Mass Interscholastic Athletic Association making money of the backs of the student athletes.
Oh schools get nice trophies anything else Championship jackets and the like schools have to raise the money for those extras.
MIAA collects from game officials $330,000, and the expenses for officials is $255,000 (tournament).
As a football and wrestling official, never had they offered any training for any sports officials.
MIAA Salaries for  big wigs $1,330,000 and they get pensions.
Now we have a seat at the football rules committee, is that person a football official no. is that person a coach no, is that person an AD no,
former band director from a HS.
And you wonder why we question their motives.

[AlUpstateNY]

I was thinking about the idea that using NCAA rules helps high school players get ready for the next level. By that logic, shouldn't everyone at all levels use NFL rules?

As suggested, only a relatively small percentage of the multitudes playing Football under NFHS rules (and supervision) progress to actually playing at higher levels of the sport.  Considering the significant differences in physical abilities, personal maturity and personal/professional objectives it seems appropriate, logical and even prudent that the rules of the game be somewhat specifically tailored to address the different needs, capabilities and objectives of young, and/or fully grown, uniquely talented adult men and pre-teen to High School age children.

Although when fully dressed and outfitted, players at different levels may appear similar, underneath the equipment there are significant differences. 

[Tobes]

As suggested, only a relatively small percentage of the multitudes playing Football under NFHS rules (and supervision) progress to actually playing at higher levels of the sport.  Considering the significant differences in physical abilities, personal maturity and personal/professional objectives it seems appropriate, logical and even prudent that the rules of the game be somewhat specifically tailored to address the different needs, capabilities and objectives of young, and/or fully grown, uniquely talented adult men and pre-teen to High School age children.

Although when fully dressed and outfitted, players at different levels may appear similar, underneath the equipment there are significant differences.

I was being facetious about using NFL rules at all levels.

My thoughts are pretty much the same as yours.

Though high school football is a farm system for college football (and college for the pros), that's not the main mission of the high school game and high school programs should be run for the benefit of everyone on the team, not just those who will play in college.

And obviously playing under NFHS rules doesn't hurt Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania or California kids when they move on to the next level.