Proposed 08 NF Rule Changes

Every state needs to go to the NCAA rules...it is ridiculous...let the running backs cut, let the linemen cut an LB who blitzes late, the wrs cut....I understand protection too, but come on. As for the taunting...it is ridiculous to even propose this as a rule change.....last year, week 1, our running back b reaks a 60 yard TD run because of a great block by our wr.....as he is running in, the wr who makes the key block and is hustling down the field behind the rb, puts his fist in the air and pumps it once.....out comes the flag...unsportsmanlinke taunting penalty....I thought it was on my running back (even though he didn't do anything), then the ref explains that it is on number 15, my WR for pumping his fist....unbeleivable...if this rule passes, that would have been called back....fed rules are ridiculous sometimes!!!

I emailed Rick Bowden at our state association, and he sent me a very informative reply on this whole situation:

"Greg
Responses included in the original text. The NFHS Football rules committee met in early January and some of the items were included on the proposals the committee considered.

I’d like to quickly review how the football rules committee works. There are 52 members of the rules committee. The committee is divided into four sub-committees. Each sub-committee has 12-14 members. Proposals are assigned to one of the sub-committees. The sub-committee discusses and reviews each of the proposals assigned to it. A proposal needs to have a major support of the committee to pass it on to the full committee. A “minority” report can be attached to a proposal that does not have majority support of a sub-committee.

Rick Bowden"




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2008 NFHS FB rule change proposals



-- Eliminate loss of down portion of the penalty for offensive pass interference [Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] That was proposed and considered by one of the standing sub-committees. There was not enough support in that committee to bring the proposal to the full committee.

-- Allowing Team B to score on change of possession during a Team A try after TD [Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Again there was a proposal to permit this. It came out of sub-committee as a minority report. The committee vote was split vote (6-6). The full committee vote was 13 in favor – 33 opposed. It was not adopted. There is not much support at this time to permit this.

-- Requiring coaches to leave the coach's box and retreat to the team box when the snap is imminent (implemented in 2007 in Florida on an experimental basis)[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] . Again there was a proposal to permit this – it did not have enough support to make it out of committee.

-- Fixing all of the gaps in last year's 8-2-2 change (opponent fouls on TD and try can both carry over to spot where ball is next put in play following the try, i.e. not just succeeding kickoff; dead ball fouls by opponent after TD, but before the ball is ready for play on the try can carry over to spot where ball is next put in play following the try; rules will apply to situations spanning 2nd and third quarters, and 4th quarter and OT)[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] There were a number of changes to address this that were adopted by the full committee.-

- Expand the limits of coaches and team boxes from goal line to goal line instead of between 25s (I can't believe this made it to a vote!)[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] It did not make it out of committee.

--Limit legal blocking below the waist in the free blocking zone to only situations where QB is in position to take hand-to-hand snap (i.e., no shotgun blocking below the waist)[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] That made it out of committee but failed when the full committee voted on it (9 in favor – 39 opposed).

-- Allow the receiving team to catch/recover kicks in their endzone and have the option of advancing[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Did not have the support of the sub-committee and did not come before the full committee.

-- Outlaw the "horse collar" tackle[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Passed out of committee after it was amended. It did not pass the full committee (14 for – 32 opposed). Most of the discussion in the full committee was on the challenges with the wording of the proposal and the variety of interpretations that could be given by officials based upon the way it was drafted and also amended.

-- Expand roughing the snapper coverage to all situations where QB is not in position to take hand-to-hand snap[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Did not receive support in sub-committee to come out of that sub-committee.

-- Have unsportsmanlike conduct foul by player scoring a TD (e.g. taunting) to be penalized according to all-but-one rather than as a dead ball foul, i.e., if the taunting occurs before the TD, you take away the TD and penalize from the spot of the foul and if it occurs after the score, penalize from the goal line.[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Did not come out of the sub-committee

-- Have penalties committed by offense enforced from previous spot when running play ends behind the neutral zone, e.g., QB sack (this is the currrent NCAA rule)[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Did not come out of sub-committee

-- Allow ball to remain live when runner momentarily touches a knee to the ground while catching/recovering a kick or snap[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] did not come out of sub-committe

-- Allow 'field' coach to call timeouts if for any reason the head coach is in the press box[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] Changes were made and will be discussed at the 2008 football rules meetings.-

- There was also, proposed as an 'editorial' change even though it's more substantive than editorial and should probably be proposed under 'rules' changes: Under rule 10-2-2, allowing the team not last in possession to accept or decline the penalty for its opponent's foul(s) after the team last in possession has made its choice of penalty options (currently, this is the only place under the rules where a team does not have the option to decline the penalty for an opponent's foul, other than double (offsetting) fouls).[Rick Bowden, Assistant Executive Director] There were also some changes in this rule that will be discussed at the 2008 football rules meetings.

^{Better yet, i am still curious WHY it's an issue? Is there some huge advantage for being able to block below the waist in the shotgun, that isnt available to those under center?}

Don't mean to answer for superpower... but there while there might not necessarily be an advantage, to NOT be able to cut in the gun (i.e. Single Wing), takes away the effectiveness of a few of our plays. We have the bsE cut/fill for the G/T. If we can't cut, this play would get chased down from the backside way too much to be a good play. A lot of the success on that play depends on the TEs ability to cut.

By the way, under the current Fed. ruling, we are OK at our TB (QB) depth, which is about 2.5 yds.


^{i understand that its in the current rules, but i still dont think that you can accurately make that call.}

Agreed.

I wish, wish, wish that the Fed would go away and everybody would use NCAA rules and play real football. Maybe we can get a 16,000 CHuey membership petition started....lol