Jump to content
Head Coach Opening 2019 Read more... ×

bobref

Booster 2018-19
  • Content Count

    16,289
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    130

Everything posted by bobref

  1. Every year the NFHS sends out a survey to some officials, coaches and administrators about possible football rules changes. Just got mine, and I’d like to hear from folks on the GID, since they are among the most passionate and knowledgeable observers of high school football anywhere. Here are the topics covered in this year’s survey: Changing the penalty for an improperly equipped player to elimination of the distance penalty and merely removing the player for at least one play. Clarification of the defenseless player rule to state that it only applies to the passer after he has thrown a legal forward pass. Adding an option for fouls by K during a free or scrimmage kick that adds any distance penalty to the spot where the down ends. A new rule that addresses multiple personal fouls by the same player leading to ejection. Moving the K free kick line from the K 40 to the K 45 yd. line. Change the rule so that it is now illegal to trip the ball carrier. Add a rule that, by state association adoption, instant replay can be used for the “championship series.” Change intentional grounding to the college rule, i.e., allow it if the QB is outside the tackles and the pass goes beyond the neutral zone. Do away with the kickoff. What say ye, GID brethren?
  2. I’l state the obvious. It is not a coincidence that the states that have these extremely well-compensated coaches are also the states that seem to produce the best teams and the most talented players.
  3. bobref

    NFHS Rules Changes

    This is especially true at the high school level with a 5 man crew, since the wing officials are not nailed to the line of scrimmage on pass plays, but should be floating downfield after a suitable interval.
  4. bobref

    NFHS Rules Changes

    And I'd vote yes ... because it potentially provides something for "retired" officials to do on championship weekend.
  5. bobref

    Bears 2016/2017 and Now 2018

    There’s a new “Beast of the North!”
  6. Now that I have your attention ... 🤣 Seriously, this is a remarkable feat and, once again, proves that big time college athletics and academic success don’t have to be incompatible. Kudos to the Irish for keeping the “student” in “student athlete.” https://und.com/news/2018/11/15/general-notre-dame-wins-12th-straight-national-title-in-graduation-based-on-2018-ncaa-graduation-success-rate-numbers.aspx
  7. bobref

    Sideline Plays

    The purpose in putting a bag down at the spot where possession was lost is to mark that spot as a potential penalty enforcement spot. For example, if the runner goes past the neutral zone and fumbles the ball, and someone commits a foul while the ball is loose, the end of the run, i.e., the spot where player possession was lost, is a potential spot for enforcement of the penalty. However, if the ball is loose behind the neutral zone as a result of a fumble, any foul occurring while the ball is loose is a foul during a loose ball play, and any penalty will be enforced from the previous spot or the spot of the foul — never the spot of the fumble. So there is no need to mark the spot with a beanbag. Some people, including some officials, might say “what’s the harm in bagging the spot?” This play is a good example of why you don’t do that. When an official bags the spot of a loose ball, he is announcing to the world “I saw a live ball come out of player possession.” That’s what the referee is saying here. What if the wing official did have the runner’s FP stopped before the ball came out. Now, if you go with the wing official’s call, someone has to answer the defensive team’s coach when he says “What do you mean the runner was down? The guy in the white hat says the ball was still alive when it came out?” And he’s got a legitimate gripe. If you go with the Referee’s call and say it was a fumble, the wing official has already blown the whistle, and now what have you got? That’s right, an inadvertent whistle, the bane of every official’s existence. If the Referee just holds the bag, like he’s supposed to, you avoid those controversies. There’s enough trouble out there on the field. No need to manufacture more.
  8. bobref

    Sideline Plays

    Thanks for providing the video. I think the video supports the ruling of a fumble. While the runner was initially knocked back, he was still on his feet and moving forward when the ball came out. You want to give the runner the benefit of every inch he can gain on such a play, so I would have held the whistle. Incidentally, the Referee gets a downgrade on this play for dropping a beanbag on a fumble that occurred behind the neutral zone. Ask me why. 😉
  9. I’m sure job security for lawyers was uppermost in the minds of Madison, Jefferson, et al., (no disrespect D & C).
  10. bobref

    Sideline Plays

    I heard about the play, but didn’t see it. Anybody have video? Having said that, my understanding is that the two plays were not at all similar. In the Colts’ play, the runner was knocked off his feet. The question was whether his forward progress was stopped before he landed out of bounds, so the clock should not have stopped. In the 1A game, I understand the runner was stood up, and didn’t go down. Frankly, that call has a lot more officiating judgment involved,
  11. The honors keep on coming for this year’s Irish squad. Brian Kelly wins the Stallings Award. https://www.stallingsaward.org/ Named in honor of Gene Stalling, this unique award is presented annually to an exceptional NCAA Division I college head football coach in recognition of humanitarian contributions in addition to achievements on the field. and the Home Depot national Coach of the Year Head Football Coach Brian Kelly has been named the 2018 Home Depot Coach of the Year. It marks the third time that Kelly has received the award (2009, 2012). Kelly is the only coach to ever capture the award twice, let alone three times. https://und.com/news/2018/12/5/football-kelly-only-three-time-winner-of-the-home-depot-coach-of-the-year-award.aspx
  12. I’m sure you’re right. The Founders were a pretty homogeneous group. While they were brilliant and visionary, we know it’s pretty hard to predict what’s going to happen just a couple of years down the road. No chance that they had any grasp of what America would be like in the 21st Century. That’s why the Constitution is best (IMO) interpreted as a “framework,” around which we have to construct laws and rules that are consistent with it, but which don’t specifically appear in the document itself.
  13. SCOTUS ruled a voucher program legal against a 1st Amendment challenge in a 2001 case, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, which addresses Cleveland’s voucher system. In a 5-4 opinion, the Court held that because vouchers were given to parents, not schools, and they were able to use the vouchers at any participating schools, whether the school was faith-based or not, the program did not amount to state support of religion. The really important factor was that the criteria for participation were “religion-neutral,” i.e., neither favored nor discriminated against religious schools. Chief Justice Rehnquist ‘s majority opinion summed it up: This is still good law.
  14. The founders of our republic were very sensitive to the entanglement of church and state. Remember where they came from ... and why. Almost to a man ... and they were all men, of course ... they were themselves religious. Which makes it all the more remarkable that they recognized the danger to society that the unification of church and state presented. Some could argue that they went too far in the other direction. But some of the thoughts expressed in this thread show why they felt it necessary to build a margin of safety into the guarantees of the First Amendment. Brilliant, actually.
  15. Perhaps I should have issued this disclaimer earlier. Please don’t construe anything I’ve said as indicative of my personal religious beliefs, or lack thereof. I’m simply participating in a discussion which has a significant legal component to it, something about which I have some degree of expertise to contribute.
  16. You’re cracking me up. But, of course, this doesn’t do anything to advance our discourse.
  17. You clearly don’t understand the issue. It doesn’t matter whether anyone is actually offended. It is the fact that the kid is put to a choice that offends the Constitution.
  18. It’s great that you can see into the mind of a 16 yr. old girl and tell what she’s thinking. As I said, “never in doubt.”
  19. Sounds like the way many people have described me: “Often wrong, but never in doubt.” A dangerous attitude when it comes to the constitutional rights of others. Let me ask you this. Suppose one of those kids was raised in an atheistic family. How do you think that kid would react if she really felt it was against her beliefs to pray like this? Would she have the courage to possibly offend her teammates, their parents, the people in the stands -some of whom may be teachers and administrators- and just go to the bench and sit down? How would she feel about being forced to make such a choice?
  20. Exactly right. And that explains, in a nutshell, why the First Amendments prohibits it under the circumstances described.
  21. bobref

    Sideline Plays

    I’m a Patriots fan.
  22. bobref

    Sideline Plays

    Was the runner’s forward progress stopped as a result of contact with the defender? End of story. Don’t make it more complicated than it is.
  23. bobref

    Sideline Plays

    So you would be unwilling to give the guy who made a great defensive play the benefit of his effort? That hardly seems fair. You’re looking at this with your “fan goggles” on. The play was called correctly, and the fact that some HS officials wouldn’t have gotten it correct doesn’t change that.
  24. You’re certainly allowed to have an opinion. I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. But the law is pretty clear.
  25. Another guy who just doesn’t get it. When you’re talking about kids and coaches, there’s no such thing as truly voluntary. Even if the coach sincerely believes that a student’s choice to participate or not is truly voluntary, and that there will be no adverse consequences if the student chooses not to participate, that doesn’t mean the student believes it. The “chilling effect” the coaches’presence can have on the student’s freedom of choice keeps that choice from being truly voluntary. And that’s why even so-called voluntary prayer sessions that include coaches, on school property, in connection with a school-sponsored event, run afoul of the Constitution.
×