• Announcements

    • Coach Nowlin

      HEAD COACH OPENING 2018   11/01/2017

      CONFIRMED HEAD COACH CHANGES IN 2018 Lafayette Central Catholic;  Don Collier  Kankakee Valley:  Zack Prairie  Valparaiso:  Dave Coyle  Evansville North:  Brett Szabo  Hamilton Southeastern:  Scott May Peru:  Bob Prescott  North Daviees:  Scott Helms  Evansville Central:  Andy Owens  River Forest: Austen Robison  Shelbyville:  Pat Parks 
Sign in to follow this  
The TW

Suggested rule change

Recommended Posts

There may be something I’m missing here, but I wanted to offer the following as food for thought: change the JV eligibility rule from 5 quarters to 3 halves. The current rule is often sighted as to why starters have remained in the game late into blowouts. This would easily solve that issue at seemingly no cost. Thoughts?

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with most JV games now on Saturdays you have to make sure you keep your kids for that game also

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this. I feel like half of my job coaching the JV is juggling quarters. It gets ridiculous. This rule would simplify a lot of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you play 2 halves of Varsity you would be ineligible for any lower level game I would assume in this model?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Thought Coach, one of your better ones, haha.  I agree.  Send to the IFCA and let the board work on this with the IHSAA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Coach Nowlin said:

If you play 2 halves of Varsity you would be ineligible for any lower level game I would assume in this model?  

I would say you would still have one half of JV eligibility left if for no other reason that to simply keep the rule clean.  The concern with time played (whether it be quarters or halves) should be with wear and tear on the players.  A kid that subs in for a handful of varsity plays in each half shouldn't be lost for an entire JV game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honest question.  Why do we care how many quarters a "JV" player plays over a given week?

I, admittedly, am an id!ot.  Is it the potential for injuries?

Surely no one really cares about some advantage in JV games.  Do they?

That said, I've seen lots of reports here on Freshman scores (which I admit to chuckling with regards to....and giving some a bit of grief about....PBJ).  I just can't believe that is the reason.

No doubt, most all of you are smarter than me and will tell the obvious fact/consideration that I am missing.

I'm sure I am going to regret asking this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Safety and over use issues is the reason or merit behind the rule along with those teams/coaches who want to stack teams, which I don't think is really an issue in the modern day game, may have been back in the day, not sure.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if a kid plays 2 plays in the first quarter and 3 plays in the 4th, does this constitute 2 halves? I like the idea, but it might be better to just expand it to 6 quarters, rather then 3 halves.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a player participates in three quarters of a varsity game (disregarding special teams play) they would then be ineligible to participate in any lower level play for the remainder of that week. 
However, if a player does not participate in more than two quarters of varsity playing time, they would then be allowed to participate in the lower level contest in its entirety. This rule would then place a cap on the total quarters that a player could participate in at 6 per week.
 
*The same regulation would apply with regard to a player who participates in both JV and Freshman games.
 
I have been thinking about this for a while.  I think that I have a really feasible solution here. Thoughts...
Edited by eschnur66
Correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Patch33 said:

So if a kid plays 2 plays in the first quarter and 3 plays in the 4th, does this constitute 2 halves? I like the idea, but it might be better to just expand it to 6 quarters, rather then 3 halves.

I like the 6 quarters better,  keep it at 4 and 0, if a kid plays all 4 varsity quarter, he has no quarters left.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We beat our heads against the wall as softball coaches trying to come up with something along these lines. I think everyone is on board about doing the right thing as far as kid is concerned. The problem was always the coach was willing to do the right thing...but no one trusted the guy down the road and knew he would cheat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, WCGrad92 said:

I like the 6 quarters better,  keep it at 4 and 0, if a kid plays all 4 varsity quarter, he has no quarters left.

My thought is that if a kid is good enough to "play" in three varsity quarters, he must be a varsity player.  So if he plays in three, why not in four?  The six quarter stipulation is just to cap the rule so that people cannot abuse the rule.  However, the key would be the struggle for programs on the far ends of the spectrum winning by a lot or losing by a lot, they can now sub in the third quarter without jeopardizing their younger players opportunity in the next JV/Frosh game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A thought to the above two posts:

If someone wants to cheat to win JV games, have at.

My only thought is using halves accomplishes the exact same goal and is far easier to manage.  That said, the goal behind my suggestion is first and foremost to make it easier for teams to respond appropriately in blowout situations.  I am not really married to any of the specifics.

Edited by The TW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The TW said:

A thought to the above two posts:

If someone wants to cheat to win JV games, have at.

My only thought is using halves accomplishes the exact same goal and is far easier to manage.  That said, the goal behind my suggestion is first and foremost to make it easier for teams to respond appropriately in blowout situations.  I am not really married to any of the specifics.

I think that you are correct in your suggestion.  Really we are only splitting hairs on this topic, and the semantics of it are what we will discuss as a coaches association.

Thank you for your views and suggestions.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.