|
|
Post by rcole on May 8, 2015 8:43:27 GMT -6
I'm posting something that was shared by a coach on a local board because I'm curious if any of you have heard about this. I know everyone is aware of concussion issues and we have discussed the future of our sport here many times. Many of your states, like mine, have done away with 8 quarter rules to minimize risk to head injury. This post (below) brings those two things together with new recommendations that are based on NFHS recommendations. This is interesting, and troubling. Curious to see what others around the country know, or think, about this.
"Then came the news that 8 quarter players were at extrodinary risk for significant injuries, and thus, we eliminated the 8th quarter rule. This Fall we will see the catastrophic effects this will have to A and AA programs across South Carolina, and quite a bit of AAA schools, as well.
Still... not TOO much of a problem, teams will have to adjust... we didn't have 8 quarter 12 years ago and somehow football survived, so we march on... so far...
Now word goes out in the form of an email that list a plethura of "recommendations" from the National High School Federation. Word is, the SCHSL will adopt these "recommendations" but not "require" schools to abide by them - thereby covering their own butts if anything were to happen. This will put ENORMOUS stress on ADs and head coaches across SC.
Their recommendations:
- no player should be allowed to play both defense and offense in the same game
- no defensive player should be allowed to play special teams in the same game
- no offensive player should be allowed to play special teams in the same game
- no more than 60-90 minutes of contact at practice per week
- no consecutive days of contact through practice or games should be allowed
Yep, meditate on that.... no A, AA or AAA team should use the same players on offense, defense and special teams. 33 kids playing a specific position, not multiple. That's 33 - not counting subs. Good thing all of our A and AA programs across the state have 50-60 varsity players on their sidelines ready to go.
Wait, what?
Let me continue.....
Since JV games are played on Thursday nights, AND you can't have contact on consecutive days... they would only be able to hit on Tuesdays. Friday night varsity games would mean they could hit Mondays and Wednesdays... are you following along? This means your varsity and JV could not hit on the same day, therefore they couldn't effective practice together - at any time! Two completely stand-alone teams on different schedules never hitting each other or being used to field a competitive practice.
Again... I do not expect the SCHSL make these requirements of our schools, but I feel VERY confident the executive committee will "highly recommend" them which they hope will protect them from any and all lawsuits that will occur if a player gets hurt! How totally simple would it be for a kid to get hurt in the 3rd quarter and his family sue the coach, AD and school because he played both WR and DB that night, and the SCHSL had "highly recommended" schools not do that. Why? Because the NFHS clearly said it puts kids at risk!"
When the 8 quarter rule was eliminated here, my first thought was that, at least for the best 15 or so players, it would increase head injuries because we would have more teams playing kids both ways. Couple that with these recommendation that they not play both ways and I believe we would have to eliminate JV to comply. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on May 8, 2015 9:06:11 GMT -6
That is not good for high school football, especially at the smaller school level. This is getting blown out of proportion and not really fixing a problem that really isn't there.
On a side note, just move the JV games to Monday nights like most schools in Alabama do.
|
|
|
|
Post by PIGSKIN11 on May 8, 2015 9:11:36 GMT -6
"thumbs down"
|
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on May 8, 2015 9:24:39 GMT -6
yep, sky is really falling!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on May 8, 2015 9:29:51 GMT -6
I'm posting something that was shared by a coach on a local board because I'm curious if any of you have heard about this. I know everyone is aware of concussion issues and we have discussed the future of our sport here many times. Many of your states, like mine, have done away with 8 quarter rules to minimize risk to head injury. This post (below) brings those two things together with new recommendations that are based on NFHS recommendations. This is interesting, and troubling. Curious to see what others around the country know, or think, about this. "Then came the news that 8 quarter players were at extrodinary risk for significant injuries, and thus, we eliminated the 8th quarter rule. This Fall we will see the catastrophic effects this will have to A and AA programs across South Carolina, and quite a bit of AAA schools, as well. Still... not TOO much of a problem, teams will have to adjust... we didn't have 8 quarter 12 years ago and somehow football survived, so we march on... so far... Now word goes out in the form of an email that list a plethura of "recommendations" from the National High School Federation. Word is, the SCHSL will adopt these "recommendations" but not "require" schools to abide by them - thereby covering their own butts if anything were to happen. This will put ENORMOUS stress on ADs and head coaches across SC. Their recommendations: - no player should be allowed to play both defense and offense in the same game - no defensive player should be allowed to play special teams in the same game - no offensive player should be allowed to play special teams in the same game - no more than 60-90 minutes of contact at practice per week - no consecutive days of contact through practice or games should be allowed Yep, meditate on that.... no A, AA or AAA team should use the same players on offense, defense and special teams. 33 kids playing a specific position, not multiple. That's 33 - not counting subs. Good thing all of our A and AA programs across the state have 50-60 varsity players on their sidelines ready to go. Wait, what? Let me continue..... Since JV games are played on Thursday nights, AND you can't have contact on consecutive days... they would only be able to hit on Tuesdays. Friday night varsity games would mean they could hit Mondays and Wednesdays... are you following along? This means your varsity and JV could not hit on the same day, therefore they couldn't effective practice together - at any time! Two completely stand-alone teams on different schedules never hitting each other or being used to field a competitive practice. Again... I do not expect the SCHSL make these requirements of our schools, but I feel VERY confident the executive committee will "highly recommend" them which they hope will protect them from any and all lawsuits that will occur if a player gets hurt! How totally simple would it be for a kid to get hurt in the 3rd quarter and his family sue the coach, AD and school because he played both WR and DB that night, and the SCHSL had "highly recommended" schools not do that. Why? Because the NFHS clearly said it puts kids at risk!" When the 8 quarter rule was eliminated here, my first thought was that, at least for the best 15 or so players, it would increase head injuries because we would have more teams playing kids both ways. Couple that with these recommendation that they not play both ways and I believe we would have to eliminate JV to comply. Thoughts? If these recommendations are quoted accurately I think that they could only been put together by people who know nothing about football. I said "If". I went to the NFHS site and looked for these recommendations. I found a document that had elements mentioned here but did not give hard and fast recommendations. In fact, it specifically stated that there are too many variables (two-way players, school size) to make hard and fast regulations possible. If there's a link to the original message from the South Carolina association, I'd love to see it. Until then I believe that the above email is based on a misreading of the NFHS position (God, I'm defending the NFHS. What is the world coming to?). |
|
|
|
Post by rcole on May 8, 2015 9:39:22 GMT -6
I did the same (going to the NFHS site) as soon as I read this. I will see if I can get a copy of the referenced email today. There are several SC coaches on this site. Maybe they have some insight as well. This was posted today by a coach in SC. By the way, our SCHSL also let us know this week they signed a deal with Rawlings and we will all be using their balls in the playoffs, so I suppose we will all need to make the switch in the regular season. Totally unrelated to concussions, but related to crazy stuff governing bodies do without researching or consulting with coaches.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on May 8, 2015 10:36:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on May 8, 2015 11:25:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by rcole on May 8, 2015 12:42:40 GMT -6
No luck on the email. Looks like this is based on the document John Knight linked to. Seems to be what our state league is doing in response to the NFHS document.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2015 12:46:27 GMT -6
its amazing how a sport defined by toughness, is lead by a bunch people who would rather surrender.
|
|
|
|
Post by freezeoption on May 8, 2015 14:02:39 GMT -6
i don't enough guys to two platoon let alone have a strict special teams, i have not heard this yet
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachM58 on May 8, 2015 23:17:42 GMT -6
I read the first of the "recommendations" and was done reading. Football will go extinct in some parts of the country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 18:16:47 GMT -6
And to think, this CTE hysteria is largely the result of one single researcher who is claiming that football at any level is too dangerous for any players to do.
No one has been able to duplicate her results in numerous attempts, but she's gotten the attention of the right people and gotten publicized, so this is the stuff we wind up with.
There was a much larger, more comprehensive peer reviewed study that basically found the longer a man plays football, the better off he is later in life. Nobody talks about that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on May 9, 2015 18:19:26 GMT -6
And to think, this CTE hysteria is largely the result of one single researcher who is claiming that football at any level is too dangerous for any players to do. No one has been able to duplicate her results in numerous attempts, but she's gotten the attention of the right people and gotten publicized, so this is the stuff we wind up with. There was a much larger, more comprehensive peer reviewed study that basically found the longer a man plays football, the better off he is later in life. Nobody talks about that one. Could I get some sources on those two studies? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 18:52:14 GMT -6
And to think, this CTE hysteria is largely the result of one single researcher who is claiming that football at any level is too dangerous for any players to do. No one has been able to duplicate her results in numerous attempts, but she's gotten the attention of the right people and gotten publicized, so this is the stuff we wind up with. There was a much larger, more comprehensive peer reviewed study that basically found the longer a man plays football, the better off he is later in life. Nobody talks about that one. Could I get some sources on those two studies? |
|
|
|
Post by tog on May 9, 2015 19:32:32 GMT -6
I despise the national federation and their "rules". Lawyerification of the game to a fault. Our society will slide into an absolute idiocracy due to stuff like this, and it makes me sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on May 9, 2015 19:33:34 GMT -6
It bothers me to no end that they don't allow cutting. So let's allow the talent gap to close tremendously over a rule that doesn't even actually protect anyone, and actually puts smaller players at risk? Ignorant fools.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on May 9, 2015 19:46:29 GMT -6
Every single football coach needs to share this with as many people/parents/players/administrators/media as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by tog on May 9, 2015 19:53:14 GMT -6
Most of the idiocracy's attention span won't get past the first paragraph.
|
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on May 9, 2015 19:59:18 GMT -6
Every single football coach needs to share this with as many people/parents/players/administrators/media as possible. Exactly my motivations for asking! Already sent out to our HC and our AD/OL coach and a few other HCs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 20:11:11 GMT -6
Most of the idiocracy's attention span won't get past the first paragraph. We need to replace the people running these organizations as a starting. |
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on May 10, 2015 6:15:33 GMT -6
The best thing to do is disband the NFHS and everyone play by NCAA rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on May 10, 2015 6:41:08 GMT -6
The best thing to do is disband the NFHS and everyone play by NCAA rules. Agreed!!! That helps everyone. Players, coaches, refs, fans, media. |
|
|
|
Post by coachjm on May 10, 2015 7:04:42 GMT -6
I just shared this on two facebook pages and my twitter account I hope others do as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by morris on May 10, 2015 7:12:13 GMT -6
If something like this goes through do you think we'll see schools go to 8 man football in lower classes? If you don't have the numbers to two platoon in 11 man.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 7:35:42 GMT -6
If something like this goes through do you think we'll see schools go to 8 man football in lower classes? If you don't have the numbers to two platoon in 11 man. it is going to be such a headache that the super majority of schools will just say screws. They are almost making it impossible to practice. And as anybody with real knowledge of how football MUST be taught, that is going to have consequences. And that will lead to HS football in some areas of the country being shut down. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on May 10, 2015 7:43:18 GMT -6
If something like this goes through do you think we'll see schools go to 8 man football in lower classes? If you don't have the numbers to two platoon in 11 man. If what passes? The email in the OP is basically a Facebook meme. If you read the Fed document it doesn't call for the measures mentioned in the email. Did the SC association misread the Fed position? Maybe and without seeing the original SC document we don't know. I think that it's more likely that SC passed along the NFHS position and the guy who sent the email misread it. R-E-L-A;X. |
|
