My responses:
Are these problems?
1. School bands playing when opponent’s offense is on the field.
No - I've not had a problem with this... maybe once.
2. Announcers announcing or playing amplified music when opponent’s offense is on the field.
No - I've not had a problem with this... maybe once.
3. Interpreting the free-blocking zone when the quarterback is not under center and the ball is immediately snapped out of the free-blocking zone.
Yes - We seem to be enforcing the BBW rule inconsistently when a player cuts from a shotgun formation.
4. Proper enforcement of targeting fouls.
Yes - Mainly because they're not called.
5. Enforcement options for “carryover fouls” when B fouls during scoring plays. (Are your game officials consistently and correctly giving the offended team the proper options?)
This is a very poorly worded question. If you answer based on the parenthesis, I'd say "Yes", however "Yes" is in response to "Is this a problem in your area?", which would be "No". To make this question better, maybe add "not" before "consistently".
6. Face guarding on passes not being called.
No - rarely see face guarding.
7. Increased use of tooth and mouth protectors with logo/pictures/words on them.
No - never seen any.
8. Inconsistent application of personal foul rules against potential tacklers in the vicinity of the runner by teammates of the runner.
Yes - sometimes these blow-up hits are getting flagged and sometimes they are not, and it's hard to give officials instruction when the NFHS doesn't clearly define what they want flagged.
9. A lack of clear direction from the NFHS Football Rules publications with regard to allowable blocks and potential differences in application of “excessive” and “unnecessary” contact.
Yes - see #8.
10. A light-colored home jersey being worn.
No - never seen it.
11. The shirt underneath the jersey not being tucked into the pants when a legal jersey just reaches the top of the pants.
No - don't recall seeing it.
Would you favor?
1. Clarifying that unless otherwise illegal by other rules (clipping, blocking in the back, spearing, illegal helmet contact) that blocks below the top of the shoulders and above the waist of a defender in the vicinity of the runner are legal and not to be considered excessive or unnecessary.
Yes - I think this would be a good clarification if the NFHS chose to go this route.
2. Providing specific guidance in the rules with a list of acts that should be considered excessive or unnecessary.
Yes - always good to be specific.
3. Establishing a new definition for blindside blocks, e.g., any block outside the free-blocking zone against an opponent who does not see the block coming.
Yes - works for me.
4. Requiring that blindside blocks be initiated with open hands.
Yes - Although seemingly in contradiction to my response to question 1, I would also favor this if this happens to be the new rule change. Hawaii has had great success with this as have other states.
5. Eliminating the free-blocking zone.
NOOOOOO - SAVE THE FREE BLOCKING ZONE!!!! You can't have goal line defense/offense without someone submarining and creating a pile. This would be an awful change.
6. Eliminating the free-blocking zone for players in a two-point stance.
No - I still think you can go immediate from a 2-point stance, despite other state's interpretations.
7. Starting a 40-second play count when the ball is ruled dead after a down.
Yes - I'm all for this, however if we never go away from the 25 sec clock, I won't complain.
8. Starting the game clock after B or R is awarded a new series.
No - this is dumb. NCAA tried this in 2006 and changed it the very next year.
9. Allowing a quarterback to spike the ball from the shotgun formation.
Yes - I see no issue with this. Plus everybody does shot gun now, so it would make sense.
10. Allowing a player to save a loss of yardage by throwing the ball so that it lands beyond the neutral zone, if the player is outside the tackle position.
No - I like the NFHS rule here. Defense made a good play, they should get the sack yardage.
