|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 4, 2021 19:47:24 GMT -6
1-College Hashes 2-Can throw ball away outside the box - college and NFL rule 3-minimum of 6 refs 4-Loss of down with ineligible downfield 5-I would have changed the cutting rule to immediate cutting in the box, but that is a new rule. 6-Offensive holding is 10 from LOS or downfield. 7-Maybe eliminate kickoff 8-Kickers can't advance a blocked punt or fg 9-If a ball is touched beyond the neutral zone by the returners and is recovered by the kickers (punt or fg), it has to get past the first down marker for the kickers to get a first down. Otherwise, it is still the returners ball. 4th and 30 and you kick a crappy punt that accidentally hits a returner 10 yards down field. Returners still get the ball. 10-Overtime from the 25. Much better than the 10 in high school. I would move the college ot back to the 40 or 50. 1 - hades no 2- oh hades no 3- agree, but we as coaches don't help this AT ALL. We need to actively recruit our graduating players to consider the profession. ANd on top of that quit being such arseholes to them during the games. OH and yeah get the hades out of the box and let them focus on the field. 4- okay that 1 I can get behind.... if they call it 5- as a defensive guy I'm all for cutting anywhere on the field... as long as you don't post&cut/double team 6- ehhh, it's a spot foul all over the field 7- ehhhh, I'm with the hoser from up north Chris Clement .... I would look for more ways to include kicking. It adds to the game. 8- not sure why you exclude the kicker from that situation 9- makes sense 10- to me it's a matter of semantics. If you're looking to make the OT more like the actual game go with the old NFL rule-ish. 1 extra period and then just settle for a tie. Starting at the 10/25/40/50/etc... yard line.... all you're doing is deciding on whether the offense or defense should decide a tie game. I like the list though... 8) By kickers, I mean the entire kicking team. Same for returners. The entire return team. You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Which reminds me of some more rules. 11) Offense can't advance a fumble. If you fumble, the best you can do is recover it. If you fumble, forward and recover or goes out of bounds, it should go back to the spot of the fumble. You should not gain an advantage by messing up - fumbling or getting a kick blocked. I would make an exception for non-contact fumble. Especially the qb dropping a snap or the rb dropping a handoff where the defense wasn't responsible. I guess the best way to describe it would be like catching a kick. Call a dropped a snap or handoff a "muff". Offense can advance a muff. This probably needs to be cleaned up. 12) Change the fumble out of the endzone from a touchback to the offense getting the ball on the 20 (instead of the defense). If it was 4th down, then the defense gets the ball on the 20. I just don't like the fact that if you have the ball on the 5 yard line going in and you fumble to the 1 inch yard line, the offense gets the ball on the 1 inch. But if they fumble and it goes 1 inch in the endzone and out of bounds, the DEFENSE gets it on the 20. Think of that difference, not only 20 yards, but also change of possession just based on a pylon and how the ball bounces. 13) I am actually not crazy about extra points. If you really think about it, those are weird. Not weird because we all grew up with it. TD's 7 points. I am iffy about this one. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Apr 4, 2021 20:00:44 GMT -6
1 - hades no 2- oh hades no 3- agree, but we as coaches don't help this AT ALL. We need to actively recruit our graduating players to consider the profession. ANd on top of that quit being such arseholes to them during the games. OH and yeah get the hades out of the box and let them focus on the field. 4- okay that 1 I can get behind.... if they call it 5- as a defensive guy I'm all for cutting anywhere on the field... as long as you don't post&cut/double team 6- ehhh, it's a spot foul all over the field 7- ehhhh, I'm with the hoser from up north Chris Clement .... I would look for more ways to include kicking. It adds to the game. 8- not sure why you exclude the kicker from that situation 9- makes sense 10- to me it's a matter of semantics. If you're looking to make the OT more like the actual game go with the old NFL rule-ish. 1 extra period and then just settle for a tie. Starting at the 10/25/40/50/etc... yard line.... all you're doing is deciding on whether the offense or defense should decide a tie game. I like the list though... 8) By kickers, I mean the entire kicking team. Same for returners. The entire return team. You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Which reminds me of some more rules. 11) Offense can't advance a fumble. If you fumble, the best you can do is recover it. If you fumble, forward and recover or goes out of bounds, it should go back to the spot of the fumble. You should not gain an advantage by messing up - fumbling or getting a kick blocked. I would make an exception for non-contact fumble. Especially the qb dropping a snap or the rb dropping a handoff where the defense wasn't responsible. I guess the best way to describe it would be like catching a kick. Call a dropped a snap or handoff a "muff". Offense can advance a muff. This probably needs to be cleaned up. 12) Change the fumble out of the endzone from a touchback to the offense getting the ball on the 20 (instead of the defense). If it was 4th down, then the defense gets the ball on the 20. I just don't like the fact that if you have the ball on the 5 yard line going in and you fumble to the 1 inch yard line, the offense gets the ball on the 1 inch. But if they fumble and it goes 1 inch in the endzone and out of bounds, the DEFENSE gets it on the 20. Think of that difference, not only 20 yards, but also change of possession just based on a pylon and how the ball bounces. 13) I am actually not crazy about extra points. If you really think about it, those are weird. Not weird because we all grew up with it. TD's 7 points. I am iffy about this one. * & 11 -I guess i get where you're going with the 'mishandle ball' .... IE keep it consistent. 12- what keeps the OFF from just 'fumbing' the ball through the endzone to get a new set of downs and another try from the 20? 13- what's wrong with a 'kick try'?? I'm all for allowing the 'try for point' to be advanced by the defense for a score. I'm kind of up in the air for whether that should be 2 or 6 for the defense..... I could go either way. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 4, 2021 20:15:33 GMT -6
8) By kickers, I mean the entire kicking team. Same for returners. The entire return team. You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Which reminds me of some more rules. 11) Offense can't advance a fumble. If you fumble, the best you can do is recover it. If you fumble, forward and recover or goes out of bounds, it should go back to the spot of the fumble. You should not gain an advantage by messing up - fumbling or getting a kick blocked. I would make an exception for non-contact fumble. Especially the qb dropping a snap or the rb dropping a handoff where the defense wasn't responsible. I guess the best way to describe it would be like catching a kick. Call a dropped a snap or handoff a "muff". Offense can advance a muff. This probably needs to be cleaned up. 12) Change the fumble out of the endzone from a touchback to the offense getting the ball on the 20 (instead of the defense). If it was 4th down, then the defense gets the ball on the 20. I just don't like the fact that if you have the ball on the 5 yard line going in and you fumble to the 1 inch yard line, the offense gets the ball on the 1 inch. But if they fumble and it goes 1 inch in the endzone and out of bounds, the DEFENSE gets it on the 20. Think of that difference, not only 20 yards, but also change of possession just based on a pylon and how the ball bounces. 13) I am actually not crazy about extra points. If you really think about it, those are weird. Not weird because we all grew up with it. TD's 7 points. I am iffy about this one. * & 11 -I guess i get where you're going with the 'mishandle ball' .... IE keep it consistent. 12- what keeps the OFF from just 'fumbing' the ball through the endzone to get a new set of downs and another try from the 20? 13- what's wrong with a 'kick try'?? I'm all for allowing the 'try for point' to be advanced by the defense for a score. I'm kind of up in the air for whether that should be 2 or 6 for the defense..... I could go either way. With regards to 13, I disagree. I have never thought the D should be able to benefit on a play created because they had just given up a score. I have always thought the idea of an extra point made sense when you look at it like this : If you drive the ball down a certain distance, and then kick it the rest of the distance through the goal post it is worth 3 points. But if you drive the ball ALL THE WAY, you get double the points, PLUS the opportunity for an extra point or two. Never thought the defense should be able to score on that play. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Apr 4, 2021 20:40:00 GMT -6
* & 11 -I guess i get where you're going with the 'mishandle ball' .... IE keep it consistent. 12- what keeps the OFF from just 'fumbing' the ball through the endzone to get a new set of downs and another try from the 20? 13- what's wrong with a 'kick try'?? I'm all for allowing the 'try for point' to be advanced by the defense for a score. I'm kind of up in the air for whether that should be 2 or 6 for the defense..... I could go either way. With regards to 13, I disagree. I have never thought the D should be able to benefit on a play created because they had just given up a score. I have always thought the idea of an extra point made sense when you look at it like this : If you drive the ball down a certain distance, and then kick it the rest of the distance through the goal post it is worth 3 points. But if you drive the ball ALL THE WAY, you get double the points, PLUS the opportunity for an extra point or two. Never thought the defense should be able to score on that play. it just makes the chance for points the same for any play just like every other..... except for KO and I'd be in favor of allowing the KO team a chance to advance the ball I'm all for making each play and each infraction being balanced between the OFF and the DEG |
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 4, 2021 20:41:17 GMT -6
8) By kickers, I mean the entire kicking team. Same for returners. The entire return team. You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Which reminds me of some more rules. 11) Offense can't advance a fumble. If you fumble, the best you can do is recover it. If you fumble, forward and recover or goes out of bounds, it should go back to the spot of the fumble. You should not gain an advantage by messing up - fumbling or getting a kick blocked. I would make an exception for non-contact fumble. Especially the qb dropping a snap or the rb dropping a handoff where the defense wasn't responsible. I guess the best way to describe it would be like catching a kick. Call a dropped a snap or handoff a "muff". Offense can advance a muff. This probably needs to be cleaned up. 12) Change the fumble out of the endzone from a touchback to the offense getting the ball on the 20 (instead of the defense). If it was 4th down, then the defense gets the ball on the 20. I just don't like the fact that if you have the ball on the 5 yard line going in and you fumble to the 1 inch yard line, the offense gets the ball on the 1 inch. But if they fumble and it goes 1 inch in the endzone and out of bounds, the DEFENSE gets it on the 20. Think of that difference, not only 20 yards, but also change of possession just based on a pylon and how the ball bounces. 13) I am actually not crazy about extra points. If you really think about it, those are weird. Not weird because we all grew up with it. TD's 7 points. I am iffy about this one. * & 11 -I guess i get where you're going with the 'mishandle ball' .... IE keep it consistent. 12- what keeps the OFF from just 'fumbing' the ball through the endzone to get a new set of downs and another try from the 20? 13- what's wrong with a 'kick try'?? I'm all for allowing the 'try for point' to be advanced by the defense for a score. I'm kind of up in the air for whether that should be 2 or 6 for the defense..... I could go either way. 12) The down stays the same with my rule. 2nd and goal from the 4. You fumble through the endzone or out the side of the endzone, 3rd and goal from the 20. If you do it on 4th down, the defense now has the ball at the 20 and 1st down. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 4, 2021 20:56:14 GMT -6
With regards to 13, I disagree. I have never thought the D should be able to benefit on a play created because they had just given up a score. I have always thought the idea of an extra point made sense when you look at it like this : If you drive the ball down a certain distance, and then kick it the rest of the distance through the goal post it is worth 3 points. But if you drive the ball ALL THE WAY, you get double the points, PLUS the opportunity for an extra point or two. Never thought the defense should be able to score on that play. it just makes the chance for points the same for any play just like every other..... except for KO and I'd be in favor of allowing the KO team a chance to advance the ball I'm all for making each play and each infraction being balanced between the OFF and the DEG But it isn't a play just like every other. It is a singular untimed play in which the offense even gets to choose aspects of where the ball is spotted that was created because the offense scored. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Apr 4, 2021 21:08:04 GMT -6
it just makes the chance for points the same for any play just like every other..... except for KO and I'd be in favor of allowing the KO team a chance to advance the ball I'm all for making each play and each infraction being balanced between the OFF and the DEG But it isn't a play just like every other. It is a singular untimed play in which the offense even gets to choose aspects of where the ball is spotted that was created because the offense scored. other than the untimed down.... the rest is just semantics of the game |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Apr 4, 2021 21:08:57 GMT -6
it just makes the chance for points the same for any play just like every other..... except for KO and I'd be in favor of allowing the KO team a chance to advance the ball I'm all for making each play and each infraction being balanced between the OFF and the DEG But it isn't a play just like every other. It is a singular untimed play in which the offense even gets to choose aspects of where the ball is spotted that was created because the offense scored. I'd be fine with the hash for the try is determined by where there score of made |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 4, 2021 21:17:26 GMT -6
But it isn't a play just like every other. It is a singular untimed play in which the offense even gets to choose aspects of where the ball is spotted that was created because the offense scored. other than the untimed down.... the rest is just semantics of the game  I would suggest that in this case, those distinguishing factors ARE important. A "try for point" only occurs when the offense scores. It is treated differently than a normal play from scrimmage in several ways. It is NOT "every other play". Just never thought given those details that the Defense should be allowed to score. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Apr 4, 2021 21:32:38 GMT -6
To answer the question, I don't know if I want to totally get rid of the offseason, but I would prefer a "dead week" to be turned into a dead month. Iowa offers baseball as a summer sport and if we did June as a dead month for other sports, a lot of conflict would be eliminated. In Southern California we have a dead period of 3 weeks, during which all that is allowed is weight training (no running, no sport specific work) plenty of coaches find ways around it. Its one of those things that officials just dont enforce. |
|
|
|
Post by tog on Apr 5, 2021 7:22:06 GMT -6
I would ban , gloves, "wristbands", "fumblesleeves" and enforce uniform rules instead of this kind of idiocy  |
|
|
|
Post by Sonofahitch on Apr 5, 2021 12:03:29 GMT -6
College Hashes Can throw ball away outside the box - college and NFL rule minimum of 6 refs Loss of down with ineligible downfield I would have changed the cutting rule to immediate cutting in the box, but that is a new rule. Offensive holding is 10 from LOS or downfield. Maybe eliminate kickoff Kickers can't advance a blocked punt or fg If a ball is touched beyond the neutral zone by the returners and is recovered by the kickers (punt or fg), it has to get past the first down marker for the kickers to get a first down. Otherwise, it is still the returners ball. 4th and 30 and you kick a crappy punt that accidentally hits a returner 10 yards down field. Returners still get the ball. Overtime from the 25. Much better than the 10 in high school. I would move the college ot back to the 40 or 50. Offensive Holding being a 10 yd penalty from the LOS when it's committed in the backfield is the one I was going to add to the list. I've seen too many ticky-tack calls behind the play take us from 3rd & 7 to 2nd & 25. It's an absolute drive killer. |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 6, 2021 20:51:21 GMT -6
You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Couldn't you say that if the receiving team blocks a kick, that is muffing it? I mean, if you make no distinction as to the side of the neutral zone where touching occurs, a blocked kick is a touch without possession, right? If you don't want it that way, then you'd have to include an understanding as in Rugby Union (kick "charged down") or Rugby League ("rebound" from an opposing kick) with some criterion such as that the ball would have to be rising from the opponent's foot at the time of contact, or that it be a low ball in level flight with no attempt to catch it. I've been saying this since the last century, but don't seem to get any traction with it, and even you are iffy. |
|
|
|
Post by bluedevil4 on Apr 7, 2021 5:59:54 GMT -6
I would ban , gloves, "wristbands", "fumblesleeves" and enforce uniform rules instead of this kind of idiocy Eric Dickerson is lawyering up as we speak. |
|
|
|
Post by bluedevil4 on Apr 7, 2021 6:04:28 GMT -6
I'm a rugby guy and one thing I always loved about that game over football is kicking from width-point where the ball was scored. Maybe even eliminate the whole "field goal" play of the PAT and just let the kicker do their thing. Still keep field goals as-is, but for PAT's, let the kicker just line up and kick from wherever it was scored, regardless of hash mark. Score the ball on a fade route to the left corner? Kicker kicks from just inside the left sideline. It's an extremely impressive, pay-to-watch skill when a kicker who's right footed can put a ball through the uprights all the way from the right sideline (or a left footed kicker from the left sideline). Kickers would probably get a lot more love/fame too (I was a kicker, so I'm biased).
For semantics, I think if we actually had to "touch" the ball "down" like rugby, our scoring system would make much more sense verbally haha. We certainly wouldn't have to deal with players celebrating early and dropping the ball before it gets into the endzone too.
I'm still torn on helmets. I think the game would be safer if we removed them, but I'm nervous if it's worth the risk for that first year, because there'd likely be a lot of injuries out of the gate...that, and the helmet is such an iconic piece of the sport.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Apr 7, 2021 8:07:59 GMT -6
I would make off-season programs illegal. Judging by the quality of play I've seen the past couple years, and the physique of the players, they're not accomplishing anything anyway. I wouldn't want to do away with S&C but it wouldn't have bothered me a bit if they did away with off-season practice.
Absolutely. I love working with the kids 3-4 days per week in the weight room but I can live without everything else.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 7, 2021 8:18:07 GMT -6
You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Couldn't you say that if the receiving team blocks a kick, that is muffing it? I mean, if you make no distinction as to the side of the neutral zone where touching occurs, a blocked kick is a touch without possession, right? If you don't want it that way, then you'd have to include an understanding as in Rugby Union (kick "charged down") or Rugby League ("rebound" from an opposing kick) with some criterion such as that the ball would have to be rising from the opponent's foot at the time of contact, or that it be a low ball in level flight with no attempt to catch it. I've been saying this since the last century, but don't seem to get any traction with it, and even you are iffy. I think I would make the rule that the kicking team cannot advance a ball behind the neutral zone once they kick or punt it. I would leave the rule past the neutral zone the same with one addition. If the kickers recover a muffed kick past the neutral zone, it has to be beyond the line to gain (first down marker) to get a first down. |
|
|
|
Post by tog on Apr 7, 2021 8:25:45 GMT -6
I'm a rugby guy and one thing I always loved about that game over football is kicking from width-point where the ball was scored. Maybe even eliminate the whole "field goal" play of the PAT and just let the kicker do their thing. Still keep field goals as-is, but for PAT's, let the kicker just line up and kick from wherever it was scored, regardless of hash mark. Score the ball on a fade route to the left corner? Kicker kicks from just inside the left sideline. It's an extremely impressive, pay-to-watch skill when a kicker who's right footed can put a ball through the uprights all the way from the right sideline (or a left footed kicker from the left sideline). Kickers would probably get a lot more love/fame too (I was a kicker, so I'm biased). For semantics, I think if we actually had to "touch" the ball "down" like rugby, our scoring system would make much more sense verbally haha. We certainly wouldn't have to deal with players celebrating early and dropping the ball before it gets into the endzone too. those two are great ideas helmets? football is played with helmets |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 7, 2021 9:23:47 GMT -6
I think if we actually had to "touch" the ball "down" like rugby, our scoring system would make much more sense verbally haha. We certainly wouldn't have to deal with players celebrating early and dropping the ball before it gets into the endzone too. I can explain why the actual touching down of the ball was eliminated: the simple fact that the ball was put down where it was to be scrimmaged for the next down. When the ball was declared dead in the field of play or goal, the side entitled to put it in play was given the ball to put on the ground. (The referee's role in spotting the ball had not been instituted yet, but for some years in the meantime a linesman marked the spot for the player to put the ball down.) When it became dead out of bounds, one of the options to return it to play was to walk it into the field 5 to 15 yards or paces and put it down. Either way, if it was the attacking team beyond the goal line, and they hadn't made it dead by grounding it there, then a touchdown was scored. This could produce some different results from now; for instance, if you kicked the ball out of bounds behind your own goal line, you gave up a touchdown, not a safety; and if time expired for either half and the play became dead without your being able to ground the ball past the opposing goal line, you didn't score. Among other reasons, these results were considered contrary to the spirit of the game, so eventually the requirement to literally touch the ball down for a score was eliminated. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Apr 7, 2021 9:53:52 GMT -6
I would ban , gloves, "wristbands", "fumblesleeves" and enforce uniform rules instead of this kind of idiocy Agreed. I went to an 8 man game last weekend and the OL were wearing receiver gloves and sleeves on one team. The marketing by manufacturers has made kids more concerned with how they look than with the game. I know that's always been the case with some kids, but I knew I was past my prime when one of my OL asked me if we could get white pants with an alternative jersey. |
|
|
|
Post by cwaltsmith on Apr 7, 2021 9:57:30 GMT -6
I love the holding 10 yds from LOS or spot if downfield.. 10 yds from spot 7 yds in backfield is too harsh.
Also I am an offensive guy but I hate he THROW AWAY RULES. In college there is no penalty for trying to get away with it... it is the same as a sack. Offense has enough advantages without being able to just run 15 yds back and swing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 7, 2021 9:58:59 GMT -6
Here's the way I'd like possession and down to be determined after a kick from scrimmage is touched or recovered by players of the kicking team:
If the recovering player is onside, they retain possession and the down counts; downs and line-to-gain continue, regardless of where on the field recovery occurred.
If the recovering player is offside, possession at that spot goes to the opposing team, regardless of where on the field recovery occurred.
If the recovering player is offside and touches the ball beyond the neutral zone, the opposing team could choose to take possession at that spot, even if the opposing team subsequently committed a foul whose penalty is enforced.
The kicker would personally be onside, and any player who was level (on the same yard line) with or behind any onside player would be onside, and remain so until the kick ended. All other players of the kicking team would be offside. Touching of the ball by a receiving team player, regardless of where on the field, would not put anybody onside. There would be no "forced touching" provision.
Together these provisions would substitute for the "first touching" (or "illegal touch" as related to kicks) provisions and would encourage both sides to play the ball. Receiving team players would not have to fear making a kicking team player eligible by muffing the ball; rather, they would fear leaving the ball untouched in the field where an onside player could catch up to it. The kicking team could not get a cheap first down. However, in long yardage situations, the defense would have to cover against a quick kick's turning into an onside recovery. The difficult judgment of "forced touching" (on which possession of the ball sometimes turns) would be eliminated.
But I would make one sort-of-allied change in Federation rules to go with this: If the receiving team touches a kick that then crosses the plane of their goal line, the kicking team could choose to let them have it at the spot of touching rather than the touchback. OK, so that'd be an exception in the "encourage them to play the ball" principle, but it just strikes me as a swindle that they can benefit by muffing the ball into their own end zone.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolverine55 on Apr 7, 2021 10:12:27 GMT -6
I thought a QB could throw the ball away outside the pocket...is that something just Iowa adopted? Or am I having a moment here?
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Apr 7, 2021 10:33:46 GMT -6
I would ban , gloves, "wristbands", "fumblesleeves" and enforce uniform rules instead of this kind of idiocy Agreed. I went to an 8 man game last weekend and the OL were wearing receiver gloves and sleeves on one team. The marketing by manufacturers has made kids more concerned with how they look than with the game. I know that's always been the case with some kids, but I knew I was past my prime when one of my OL asked me if we could get white pants with an alternative jersey. you are correct it has turned many of them soft imho I can't stand it when OL kids ask to run the ball |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Apr 7, 2021 10:42:27 GMT -6
Agreed. I went to an 8 man game last weekend and the OL were wearing receiver gloves and sleeves on one team. The marketing by manufacturers has made kids more concerned with how they look than with the game. I know that's always been the case with some kids, but I knew I was past my prime when one of my OL asked me if we could get white pants with an alternative jersey. you are correct it has turned many of them soft imho I can't stand it when OL kids ask to run the ball I will admit I asked to be a FB in college. I was a DL my last couple years and played OL my first 2 years. I never invisioned being more than a blocking back. I figured at best I could be a Jim Flanigan type and at best get thrown a play action pass in the flat. But, I did have a 20yd per touch average in HS... |
|
|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Apr 7, 2021 11:29:16 GMT -6
My “one change” is all encompassing. Make the hs, college, and pro rules all the same. It would be so much simpler...
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Apr 7, 2021 11:49:12 GMT -6
My “one change” is all encompassing. Make the hs, college, and pro rules all the same. It would be so much simpler... ewwww having to use the nfl rules? that would stink |
|
|
|
Post by pvogel on Apr 7, 2021 11:53:19 GMT -6
1. Hashes moved to college. The wide hashes are absolutely awful.
2. Allow cutting like in college. Inside out - must be between the ball and the defender to cut.
3. I think the 3 yards for illegal man downfield wouldn't be so bad if they enforced it better. But I would really worry about moving it to 1. It creates so much gray area and makes it more subjective. Also, does it mean that OL must pass set on any pass? That's not right IMO and would honestly be devastating for the protection of HS QBs. I would agree that loss of down is a very fair addition here. I would say keep it at 3, enforce it, and add a loss of down.
4. Agree on overtime from the 20 or 25.
5. My biggest gripe tends to just be officials allowing stuff to happen because they don't think it is a big deal. I see WAAAAAAY too many illegal shifts and formations. Enforce the dang rules.
Also I have seen less than 50% of too many men on the field penalties actually be called. They are ok with the kid on the numbers essentially. That's BS. Why have the rule then? Enforce the rules. Make them be better.
|
|
|
|
Post by pvogel on Apr 7, 2021 11:54:45 GMT -6
I thought a QB could throw the ball away outside the pocket...is that something just Iowa adopted? Or am I having a moment here? Just has to be in the area of a WR. Throw it at the feet of the RB and you're good. Great teaching point. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Apr 7, 2021 12:03:02 GMT -6
I will say this about the OL downfield call- it doesn't matter what the yardage is, they don't call it.
I realized this my last few years as an OC and we just started run blocking on our play action. Never got called.
|
|
I would suggest that in this case, those distinguishing factors ARE important. A "try for point" only occurs when the offense scores. It is treated differently than a normal play from scrimmage in several ways. It is NOT "every other play". Just never thought given those details that the Defense should be allowed to score. 
