Author Topic: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis  (Read 16198 times)

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1162
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-21
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #50 on: May 12, 2015, 02:38:02 PM »
I am vehemently opposed to eliminating low blocking.  The rule is fine the way it is.  If the only thing we have to argue about is what constitutes "immediate" from the shotgun, then I'm ok with that.

It's easy - if they stand up out of their stance, then low block - foul
If they fire straight out without getting up, no foul.

Offline AlUpstateNY

  • *
  • Posts: 3271
  • FAN REACTION: +252/-472
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #51 on: May 12, 2015, 04:34:52 PM »
While that may be true for the upper levels of NCAA or the NFL, unfortunately, the vast majority of high school officials do not.  That's why the rules are written to the lowest common denominator.

Although I've had the opportunity, and pleasure, to officiate in several States, I don't feel competent to speak for "the vast majority of high school officials", but those I have worked with, by and large, had a pretty solid grasp of NFHS rules and their application.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2469
  • FAN REACTION: +294/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #52 on: May 13, 2015, 09:17:01 AM »
I am vehemently opposed to eliminating low blocking.  The rule is fine the way it is.  If the only thing we have to argue about is what constitutes "immediate" from the shotgun, then I'm ok with that.

It's easy - if they stand up out of their stance, then low block - foul
If they fire straight out without getting up, no foul.
I'm in agreement with you, Bossman. To eliminate totally the FBZ would adversely impact the smaller O-linemen ,or so I'm told by many coaches. IMHO, the coaches are not well represented on the NFHS Football Rules Committee (only VT. & coaches assoc.) and have the most to lose. IMHO, it would make the job of officiating easier if we removed the FBZ. IMHO, it would hurt the game if we did.

Offline HLinNC

  • *
  • Posts: 2216
  • FAN REACTION: +63/-12
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #53 on: May 13, 2015, 09:40:16 AM »
Quote
To eliminate totally the FBZ would adversely impact the smaller O-linemen ,or so I'm told by many coaches.

Hear it all the time.    I also hear all the time about how the NFHS is ALL ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE STUDENT/ATHLETE, well except in this one little thing.

I understand the philosophies involved but serious knee injuries have long term health effects too.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1162
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-21
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #54 on: May 13, 2015, 11:15:42 AM »
Hear it all the time.    I also hear all the time about how the NFHS is ALL ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE STUDENT/ATHLETE, well except in this one little thing.

I understand the philosophies involved but serious knee injuries have long term health effects too.

I've said this many times on here - I've been around football my whole life and played OL / DL my whole career and I've never seen anybody get hurt with a LEGAL cut block in close line play. 

Offline Rulesman

  • The Keeper of the Keys
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 3835
  • FAN REACTION: +310/-238
  • Live like tomorrow never comes.
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #55 on: May 13, 2015, 12:07:06 PM »
"Never" is a very long time. Just saying...
"Gentlemen, we are going to relentlessly chase perfection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly chase it, because in the process we will catch excellence. I am not remotely interested in just being good."
- Vince Lombardi

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #56 on: May 13, 2015, 03:37:23 PM »
I've said this many times on here - I've been around football my whole life and played OL / DL my whole career and I've never seen anybody get hurt with a LEGAL cut block in close line play.
I see it EVERY year.  Unfortunately, some of them have been my kids.  If cut blocks were only allowed straight ahead, there might not be many injuries.  But the ones from the side are the ones that take out ligaments.

Offline bigjohn

  • *
  • Posts: 342
  • FAN REACTION: +21/-31
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #57 on: May 13, 2015, 09:33:10 PM »
When the POE says that it is nearly impossible It is saying most could never do it fast enough to beat the ball out of the zone. Initial charge means nothing in that light!

Offline VALJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2191
  • FAN REACTION: +79/-10
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #58 on: May 14, 2015, 07:16:06 AM »
It absolutely does when your state interpreter tells you that's how he wants it called.

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2469
  • FAN REACTION: +294/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #59 on: May 14, 2015, 08:49:54 AM »
IMHO, the FBZ may disappear in the near future for anything outside of hand-to-hand snaps. I haven't seen any medical results showing that more knee leg injuries occur in the FBZ then elsewhere on the field. In the split-second (unless the snapper snaps a pop-up :!#) it take a ball to leave the FBZ on a shotgun, it's a stretch to assume that the low block occurred before.

IMHO, not all of my "IMHOs" have been correct :
   The Red sox will win the World Series yEs:...now seems unlikely :'(
    Tom "Shady" Brady won't be suspended yEs:....now seems unlikely :'(
     Global warming will give Maine a warm, easy winter yEs:....NOT :'(

 ^good ^no ^TD

Offline bama_stripes

  • *
  • Posts: 2203
  • FAN REACTION: +69/-24
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #60 on: May 14, 2015, 09:49:50 AM »
In the split-second (unless the snapper snaps a pop-up) it take a ball to leave the FBZ on a shotgun, it's a stretch to assume that the low block occurred before.

I disagree, Ralph.  On a legal low block, the blocker will have likely made initial contact before the ball leaves the FBZ.  The lineman are only a yard (or less) apart.

In addition, the defensive linemen are expecting (or at least anticipating) such a block.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 09:52:19 AM by bama_stripes »

Offline Ralph Damren

  • *
  • Posts: 2469
  • FAN REACTION: +294/-27
  • Without officials... it is only recess.
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #61 on: May 14, 2015, 10:06:39 AM »
I disagree, Ralph.  On a legal low block, the blocker will have likely made initial contact before the ball leaves the FBZ.  The lineman are only a yard (or less) apart.

In addition, the defensive linemen are expecting (or at least anticipating) such a block.
Thanks for your opinion, 'Bama , I'm sure it'll be deeply discussed when it again appears on the docket. To me, coaches opinions should be weighed  as to the necessity of redoing blocking schemes that come with such rule changes. From an officiating perspective, eliminating the FBZ would make our job easier as we would then have one less thing to worry about. The impact it would have on the kids playing the sport, primarily the smaller O-linemen, is my major worry with any change.

The gravitational pull on snaps in Maine may be less that that in Alabama as per your closeness to the Equator :)

Offline Atlanta Blue

  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • FAN REACTION: +160/-71
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #62 on: May 14, 2015, 10:20:33 AM »
I disagree, Ralph.  On a legal low block, the blocker will have likely made initial contact before the ball leaves the FBZ.  The lineman are only a yard (or less) apart.

Sorry, bama, not even close.  By the time the offense reacts to the snap, the ball is out of the zone.  On a good snap, the ball leaves the zone in less than .25 second.  There isn't an NFL linemen, let alone a HS kid, that can react to the snap and make below the waist contact with a player across from him in that .25 second, particularly from a 2 point stance.

Quote
In addition, the defensive linemen are expecting (or at least anticipating) such a block.
Not if we make them illegal in a shotgun formation!

I'm not for eliminating the FBZ.  That would also mean that all contact from behind would be a foul, and that kind of contact is going to happen on run plays up the middle.  And as much as I don't like low blocks, I wouldn't even vote to eliminate them on plays where the QB is under center.

But if an offense wants the advantage of getting the QB further from the line (for numerous reasons), then I'm all for taking away the advantage they get with low blocks. If you want one, you should give up the other.

Offline bossman72

  • *
  • Posts: 1162
  • FAN REACTION: +52/-21
Re: 2015 NFHS Points of Emphasis
« Reply #63 on: May 14, 2015, 02:15:37 PM »
But the blocks don't hurt less if the QB is in a shotgun or under center...  They drew up the FBZ rule when 90% of plays were run from under center.  The rule wants linemen to block low on their initial block.  If they do that, I'm fine with it.

What I don't want is to eliminate the low block from shotgun for the sake of "ease of administration", which is exactly what this argument sounds like.