SANTA'S WISH LIST....2026 version

[ncwingman]

They don’t do it because they’re risking a major penalty.  Changing to a 5-yard penalty removes that deterrent.

Do you think that's really going to happen?

Honestly, coaches are going to draw up plays with 12 defenders as a strategic move because it's only a 5 yard and not 15 yard penalty? It's only 5 yards in NCAA and NFL rules, there's no 15 yard option there and you don't see Bill Belicheck drawing up that play.

[AlUpstateNY]

DELIBERATELY drawing up a play with 12 players is far less strategic than it is STUPID (and flagrantly annoying).  Mistakes occasionally happen and cost 5 yards. if they are repeated, after being penalized and corrected, repeated behavior could be considered intentional (and deliberately annoying), which could easily produce an USC, subject to it's own penalty of 15 yards.  Should ANY coach deem such a second penalty excessive, additional complaints could/should, earn a second USC, providing ample time to reward such behavior, the opportunity of taking an immediate, and private, shower.

None of this requires a rule adjustment. 

[Ralph Damren]

IMHO, if it was learned that a coach was intentionally running a play with 12 players he could qualify for a 9-9-1 USC and add another 15 to the 15 IP already flagged. 

NOTE: 9-8-1 begin a list of 'naughty' things a coach might do and ends with : "Examples are, but not limited to...." . I feel that gives us rule support for such a call.

[ElvisLives]

Do you think that's really going to happen?

Honestly, coaches are going to draw up plays with 12 defenders as a strategic move because it's only a 5 yard and not 15 yard penalty? It's only 5 yards in NCAA and NFL rules, there's no 15 yard option there and you don't see Bill Belicheck drawing up that play.

I guess you don’t remember Oregon vs Ohio State in 2024. Very late in the game, Oregon quite deliberately put a 12th player on defense, knowing it was only a 5-yard penalty from the previous spot (repeat the down), but allowing them a greatly improved chance to prevent a TD, and burning more time off the clock (which it did). For 2025, rule change, inside 2 mins in 2nd/4th periods, for 12 players participating, whether the distance penalty is accepted or not, Team A can have the game clock restored to the time it was at the start of the last down, and starts on the snap.
You know how it works. HS coaches (NCAA or NFHS) see what happens in NCAA and copy it, whether legal or not. If it helps them win a game, they’d trade their families for a first down.
Will the NFHS follow suit and make a rule change? I’ll stay tuned.

[bossman72]

I guess you don’t remember Oregon vs Ohio State in 2024. Very late in the game, Oregon quite deliberately put a 12th player on defense, knowing it was only a 5-yard penalty from the previous spot (repeat the down), but allowing them a greatly improved chance to prevent a TD, and burning more time off the clock (which it did). For 2025, rule change, inside 2 mins in 2nd/4th periods, for 12 players participating, whether the distance penalty is accepted or not, Team A can have the game clock restored to the time it was at the start of the last down, and starts on the snap.
You know how it works. HS coaches (NCAA or NFHS) see what happens in NCAA and copy it, whether legal or not. If it helps them win a game, they’d trade their families for a first down.
Will the NFHS follow suit and make a rule change? I’ll stay tuned.

Big difference is that in NCAA it's always a live ball foul.  You can't shut it down pre snap like you can in NFHS (which would still be the case with the new rule).  Shutting it down pre snap prevents any strategic advantage.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Big difference is that in NCAA it's always a live ball foul.  You can't shut it down pre snap like you can in NFHS (which would still be the case with the new rule).  Shutting it down pre snap prevents any strategic advantage.

Is that actually correct?  Are you saying that under NCAA rules that you cannot shutdown a play before the snap for IS (12 players on the field)?

[ElvisLives]

Is that actually correct?  Are you saying that under NCAA rules that you cannot shutdown a play before the snap for IS (12 players on the field)?

I’m sorry to interject NCAA into this NFHS discussion. In NCAA, for defense, yes, Illegal Substitution fouls are live-ball. If that is different in NFHS, then, yeah, the incentive to cheat is reduced. (Not eliminated, but reduced.)

[NVFOA_Ump]

I’m sorry to interject NCAA into this NFHS discussion. In NCAA, for defense, yes, Illegal Substitution fouls are live-ball. If that is different in NFHS, then, yeah, the incentive to cheat is reduced. (Not eliminated, but reduced.)

I believe that this was a 2020 change in NCAA.  IMHO under NFHS rules that we have been using since our "changeover" to NFHS rules still has all cases where there is 12 on the field with the snap imminent to be DB pre-snap fouls.  I never understood the rationale behind the NCAA change since the memo cited "consistency" which IMHO is opposite to what it actually did.  NFHS has always been "opposed" to the concept of a "free play" when the foul is clear and identifiable prior to the snap.  I really see no need to change that and still don't understand the NCAA rationale to consider this a "consistency" change.

[Ralph Damren]

Currently, here's our scorecard.....
(1) R protected on juggled fair catch untile he secures. 6-7
(2) Invalid fair catch = no penalty, but no fair catch.  7-4
(3) B or R can score on a PAT 1-13
(4) Leaping to block kick =  6-6
(5) No 5-yard facemask foul  7-4
(6) Must wear proper equipment during warm-ups  1-13
(7) Remove knee pad requirements 5-5
(8) head items extending below helmet illegal (ski masks etc.) 3-5
(9) can wear sweatbands anywhere  10-1
(10) IP with 12 = IS, 5 yards   7-5
(11) Feet-first slide kills play  7-5
(12) 2 DB/PFs =    1-13
(13) Full yardage on  all the way down to 1 ..4-8

While there was 14 responses, not everyone had an opinion on every proposal These and any further suggestions will go with me to the NFHS Football Committee meeting and I'll use your opinions to back up mine during the debates. The only disagreement I have with your majority is # 5 on removing the 5-yard facemask, as I have stated earlier.

Thanks, guys, for your imput. 


 

[Ralph Damren]

This is the Official Manual's print year.Some potential changes are...

The "Ain't got no clue" (non-Mainers may know it as "When in Question" ) chart will be back.

Place U along with BJ under the pipes on kick attempts on 5-man crew. I know several states currently use this. WHAT SAY YOU  (5-MAN CREW)

[Fatso]

Hi Ralph

For question 11, feet first slide.  I don't understand what is being proposed.  Can you elaborate on what would be different than the current rules?   

Thank You

[Ralph Damren]

Hi Ralph

For question 11, feet first slide.  I don't understand what is being proposed.  Can you elaborate on what would be different than the current rules?   

Thank You

Under the current rule, the runner becomes defenseless(2-32-16g) BUT by our current rule (4-2-2a) until something outher than his hands or feet touch the ground, the ball remains alive. We don't currently have rule support to place the ball where it was when he began his slide. With this rule we would, not where the ball was when his butt touched the ground.

[GoodScout]

This is the Official Manual's print year.Some potential changes are...

Place U along with BJ under the pipes on kick attempts on 5-man crew. I know several states currently use this. WHAT SAY YOU  (5-MAN CREW)

I've been fighting to get this made a part of our state's mechanic manual for several years. It works soooo much better. Would love to see this change in the NFHS manual.

[Ralph Damren]

I've been fighting to get this made a part of our state's mechanic manual for several years. It works soooo much better. Would love to see this change in the NFHS manual.

I like having both wings on the LOS. My only concern is with U back under the pipes, he also would need to focus on roughing the snapper. While he should have a good view on PAT kicks, on a long FGA it could be a challange.

[GoodScout]

Our proposed state mechanic is to have the U under the crossbar for PATs, but not FG's from outside the 15. Goal line can be threatened on PATs and short FG's, but if you have a broken play or fake FG starting from outside the 15, the wing under the bar has plenty of time to get back to the pylon.

[bossman72]

Our proposed state mechanic is to have the U under the crossbar for PATs, but not FG's from outside the 15. Goal line can be threatened on PATs and short FG's, but if you have a broken play or fake FG starting from outside the 15, the wing under the bar has plenty of time to get back to the pylon.

This makes sense to put a yard line delimiter and I think the 15 is a good one.

[Ralph Damren]

This makes sense to put a yard line delimiter and I think the 15 is a good one.

Back in the day of 4-man crews, I believe the LG (field judge in my day) when the LOS was outside the 15, was sent to the end line to rule on the cross bar. R would still call if the kick was between the pipes.

[NVFOA_Ump]

This makes sense to put a yard line delimiter and I think the 15 is a good one.

This is what most of our R's use for trys and short field goals.  We don't like leaving a wing uncovered with no one at the pylon in cases of a fake or bad snap circus.

[Ralph Damren]

This is what most of our R's use for trys and short field goals.  We don't like leaving a wing uncovered with no one at the pylon in cases of a fake or bad snap circus.

We see some of the "swinging gate" formations on PATs. We'll have our wing under the pipes move up to the goal line until they shift back into kick formation, he will return to his post as sentry under the pipes. Most of our wings are faster then the big ole'Bubba lineman waddling back to their spots.

[bossman72]

We see some of the "swinging gate" formations on PATs. We'll have our wing under the pipes move up to the goal line until they shift back into kick formation, he will return to his post as sentry under the pipes. Most of our wings are faster then the big ole'Bubba lineman waddling back to their spots.

Does everyone send the wing that's opposite the Referee to the posts or is it always the LJ in your area?

[Ralph Damren]

Does everyone send the wing that's opposite the Referee to the posts or is it always the LJ in your area?

We send the wing that sees R's backside and the holder's eyes. This can confuse as the next period , the other wing would have that duty. With U taking the pipes, it would never be confusing.

[NVFOA_Ump]

We send the wing that sees R's backside and the holder's eyes. This can confuse as the next period , the other wing would have that duty. With U taking the pipes, it would never be confusing.

It's a lot less confusing to just use the BJ and U.  Done & dusted.   

[riffraft]

This is the Official Manual's print year.Some potential changes are...

The "Ain't got no clue" (non-Mainers may know it as "When in Question" ) chart will be back.

Place U along with BJ under the pipes on kick attempts on 5-man crew. I know several states currently use this. WHAT SAY YOU  (5-MAN CREW)

Please, I have been arguing this in my state for years. 

[Ralph Damren]

Back from 'Windy Indy" after the NFHS Football Rules Committee meeting. As always, my lips are sealed until a NFHS press release announces the rule changes to the entire world. My prediction is that will occur somewhere between Ground Hog Day and Valentine's Day. I can share that a touchdown is still worth six points!

 

[lawdog]

Back from 'Windy Indy" after the NFHS Football Rules Committee meeting. As always, my lips are sealed until a NFHS press release announces the rule changes to the entire world. My prediction is that will occur somewhere between Ground Hog Day and Valentine's Day. I can share that a touchdown is still worth six points!

 

The whole super secret insider club BS with the NFHS Rules Committee is so stupid.  Black Box rule making goes a long way towards all the complete disasters they come up with for language...