JustRules

Using your analogies I only need 1 of each of those (assuming 1 teacher per class). If I only demand the best/most qualified then I need only the #1 best anywhere in the world. That's obviously not logical. I want someone who is good and qualified and loves what they do. There could be other teachers or mechanics or financial advisors better than mine, but they may not be available or in my school or in my city/state. Are they qualified? If women are minorities are under-represented in any of those areas, I'm perfectly fine with their companies hiring/promoting them if they are qualified.

Absolutely. But again, all of those are subjective qualifications. In our D3 conference there are 42-45 staff officials. I would say at least 20-25 of them are eligible and qualified to work in D2. Some maybe a little more than others but any of them could do the job. And in the footprint of the GLVC there are 4 or 5 other NAIA/D3 conferences that have similar numbers of eligible and qualified people. That means there could be 1000 people with similar qualifications that be hired for the 3-4 spots available. As with any job there are going to be things that help put your name near the top of the list. Right now trying to have more minorities and more women and more fit officials are goals so the similarly or equally qualified people from those groups will be more likely to get the opportunities. There are situations where someone does advance well before they should, but they either rise to the situation and do well or struggle and are removed. It happens every year at all levels.

The officials who are advancing quickly have the merits and hard work as those who feel slighted. As with anything, the people who are hiring are basing it a lot on trust and the little they can observe. It's not unlike recruiting. Are the 2500 best athletes getting recruited to FBS and the next 2500 to FBS, etc.? Absolutely not. The recruiters are relying heavily on the information given to them by the HS coaches they trust, their individual meetings with people, and observing them either in person or on film. Is a coach's son or the younger brother of a current player going to get an advantage over someone else? Absolutely. Because you are taking less of a risk when someone you know and trust can vouch for them. Doesn't mean you always made the right decision, but that is human nature. Being the son of a current NFL/D1 official is a huge help. Being a former NFL/D1 player is a huge help. One of the biggest helps right now is appearance and physical fitness. Is that fair? Does it make you a better official to be fit? Marginally maybe because you may be in better shape. But thinner doesn't always mean better shape. But perception is reality. If you see a heavy guy out there officiating and he makes a potentially bad call, your first thought is going to be "he was out of position or he's too fat to do this." I have known several very good officials who didn't advance entirely because of their weight. Supervisors would pick other officials who were also qualified but not as good as the heavy official. Is that fair? No, but they are all honest about it. And fans don't want to see old or heavy officials on the court/field/pitch.

The levels aren't completely linear. It's not like the top NAIA program is below the bottom DII program and so forth. If you were to draw a graph of the teams top to bottom in each division there would be overlap. We are a little skewed here because of the success of Marian and St. Francis. They are like LSU and Oklahoma in FBS. They don't win it every year, but they are in the top 10 and capable of winning. UIndy has had a very good team for several years and would compete with many FCS schools. But they aren't top 10 in DII and thus very competitive with Marian and St. Francis. Mount Union, Whitewater and some of the top DIII schools would definitely compete with these teams as well but in general the NAIA teams are above DIII teams and below DII.

The issue there (similar to advancing certain officials) is the evaluation is subjective. There isn't a huge difference between the 5th best crew and the 20th best crew and maybe even the 50th best crew. Polling and tournament selection for the NCAA tournament are no different. Set up a process and use that process. That's what the IHSAA does. Their process is not intended to find the best crews. It's intended to assign a ranking number to each crew to make it easier to assign. In general the better crews rank higher and the really bad crews rank low. But the big pile in the middle get figured out by "popularity". Not necessarily those who intentionally create popularity but those who are the most involved. Officiate multiple sports, current or former coach or administrator, played college sports with a lot of coaches or administrators, lots of years of experience are all examples. And having that recognizable person as your referee makes a huge difference because that's the person on the ballot. But the IHSAA created the process and they follow the process and most of the crews working the last 2 rounds are good crews. They aren't necessarily the best 6-12 crews, but they are good crews that are well respected by a larger number of schools. The same thing is true of hiring and advancing officials. If a D2 conference has 4 openings there are many factors at play. There are probably 50 strong candidates to take those 4 spots. If a woman or minority is selected for one of those spots over someone who has been in that queue longer it's not that they aren't qualified or better/worse than others in the pool. They maybe just go the invitation sooner than they would have if they weren't a minority or male. There are plenty of examples of people who have benefitted from that for a variety of reasons. Some have definitely advanced before they were ready, but they almost always struggle. Some will rise up though and make sure they are successful. A former Colts player got into officiating a few years ago and LOVED it! He got on to a high school crew his first year. He was working toward getting into D3 college when he got a call inviting him to join the MVFC (D1-FCS). He had never worked a college game and they wanted him in D1! Is that fair to others? Probably not. But you have to understand why. He called me to ask what I thought he should do. He was afraid he wasn't ready for that level and may fail. I told him they feel he's ready and because of who he was they would probably give him a little more rope than others. He was an avid learner and very humble and he worked really hard at it! By all accounts he did well but did make some mistakes due to his limited experience. Unfortunately knee issues from his playing days caused him to retire, but I have no doubt he would have made it to the NFL as an official. Keep this in mind. Sarah Thomas advance a little quicker than others (especially that jump to D1). Yet it still took her 25 years of officiating to get to this point. It's not like she just started 5 years ago. There is no reason woman can't be just as good at officiating as men and getting more women involved will go a long way to alleviate our officiating shortage. We should be celebrating her accomplishments!

Correct but schools like Valpo and Butler don't offer athletic scholarships so they are closer to D3 schools. It would not be an upset if a decent NAIA team beat Butler or Valpo. NAIA football is Indiana is some of the best in the country. St. Francis and Marian have both won national championships in the last 10 years. Indiana Wesleyan is catching up. Taylor is generally competitive with those teams but hasn't become a consistent winner yet. St. Xavier, Sienna Heights, and Concordia have all been highly ranked out of that conference as well.

The block below the waist is called very differently across the country. Many other states have rules interpreters that give additional guidance on this to make it more consistent in their state. Some examples include: If QB is in shot gun can only block low in FBZ if starting in a 3-point stance If QB is in shot gun can only block low in FBA if defender is lined up head up or in an adjacent gap If QB is in shot gun can't low block at all Every year there are rules proposals to match those interpretations or adjust the definition of the FBZ or eliminate it altogether. What this change addresses is to remove the need to know if the ball is still in the FBZ when the block occurs when the QB takes the snap under center. There usually is very little time the ball stays in the FBZ as the QB drops back toward the back. He only has to go back about 2 yards from where he starts behind center to leave the FBZ. This makes it easier to be consistent with whatever interpretation your state uses and makes it the same regardless of under center or shot gun. No more delays before cutting allowed. I've had situations where there was a slight delay, but I couldn't remember if the QB was under center or in shot gun on that play.

Sarah has risen quickly in NFL terms to the Super Bowl in only 6 seasons. One of the other officials is only in his 7th season so it's not that unique. Most have more experience because it often takes that long to get to the top 2 or 3 spots in ranking to earn the Super Bowl spot. There are 17 crews so 17 people at each position. There are many NFL officials who never get the Super Bowl call just from a numbers perspective. #1 probably isn't rated that much higher than #6 so it's entirely possible she was #4 or #5 but not significantly different than #1. I would assume she's very possibly #1 though. She had worked several years at lower levels before reaching the NFL. She started officiating in 1999 so this is her 22nd year as an official. She went from HS to Conference USA in only her 10th season which is fairly quick. I'm not sure if she worked small college before that, but it's very likely. She spent 6 years in FBS which is not uncommon before being hired by the NFL. That overall progression isn't significantly faster than others. Most NFL officials probably have 15-20 years of experience before making that level. She's just on the bottom end of that group. Another group that is advancing even faster than she did is former NFL players. That's a great pool of people to pull from because they know what the NFL is about and usually still in good shape and athletic. One example is Terry Killens former Penn State and NFL LB. Terry started officiating in 2013 and was hired by the NFL in 2019. That is crazy fast. I met him at a college clinic probably in 2014 or 2015. Great guy and very humble about becoming an official. By all accounts he's doing a good job even with the limited experience. But most officials feel the risk to move someone that quickly is too high. Like many things experience and muscle memory are critical to being prepared for anything and the more you work the more likely you are to see more things.

Thanks for the mini-clinic Bob. Great job! I was expecting something different when I read all the comments before watching the video. The action the receiver makes here would definitely warrant an illegal motion if it's done before the snap and he's still moving forward at the snap (he could do this and level off again parallel before the snap). If you have this action strictly as turning up field before the snap you have a false start. If it's just him bending/curving forward at the snap then it's illegal motion. I thought it was close when I saw it the first time not expecting him to do this, but I agree with Bob it wasn't obvious enough to flag it. When I watched again and tried to stop it when he makes the first move, it's entirely possible the ball has already started moving. Adams should be careful on this because he could easily turn forward before the snap because he can't see behind him to know exactly when the snapper starts moving his hand. He's playing with fire and could easily get burned on this.

What you know as spearing is targeting in NCAA. That was an easy call on video but tougher to get in person as quickly as it happened and how it happened. The back judge is probably the only one would see the helmet contact and he's more focused on blocks in front of the runner at that point. The wings wouldn't have an angle and the umpire is straight lined from the other side and don't see the proximity of the defender's helmet. If the defender keeps his head up there is no foul there. The NCAA keeps that foul and keeps it punitive with the ejection because they still want to see that behavior change. Overall I believe the data has shown it has improved. This kind of hit is much more dangerous for the player initiating the hit than the one receiving the hit. Neck injuries and concussions are very common when using the crown of your helmet.

That is NCAA only and how it was handled in the Clemson game because he did not step out of bounds before catching the ball. But if he had signaled and not completed the catch before stepping out of bounds it would either be the return team's ball at the out of bounds spot if he touched it before stepping out of bounds (i.e. muffed or bobbled briefly before touching) or a kick out of bounds with all the options for that foul if he's already out of bounds when he touched it.

Thanks. That is definitely caught behind the LOS as most screen passes are. No chance for OPI on a play like this. It's possible a deep official would flag blocking downfield on a play like this because he has no idea where the ball is caught. He will check with the LOS officials and ask them where the ball was touched. That's why you see officials to huddle after a play. Each person is providing facts that build to the determination of what needs to be ruled or different officials have completely different angles on the same play. Angles are often much more important than distance.

Yes, it would have been a kick out of bounds if his foot happened to touch OOB before he caught it. In NFHS it's now a foul by the receiving team if the receiver INTENTIONALLY touches out of bounds and then does that. It needs to be very obvious he stepped out intentionally for the purpose of creating a kick OOB. NCAA doesn't have a similar rule, and I'm not sure if the NFL does now.

The IHSAA has told officials to not use the "Find the line" mechanic because it's a college mechanic. They don't realize it's not a college mechanic. It's a solid officiating mechanic at any level. It's going to be first and 10 whether you start at the 23 or 23.5 so why not start on the 23 or 24? Statistically they are going to put it on the next year line anyway. If it can allow the officials to use the lines on the field to determine the LTG it makes so much sense. A very wise coach told me he doesn't understand why we use the chains as the official determination of first downs. First, the location of the back stake is an estimation by a volunteer at least 20 yards away from the ball which was placed at an estimated spot by the wing official in the first place. Then you have another volunteer trying to eyeball where the clip goes. If you have a measurement you are bringing the chains out to a ball that was often placed by an umpire who was eyeballing a somewhat estimated spot by the wing official (good crews will have the wing official place the ball). If you use the lines on the field to start each series and it's a well marked field, then use the lines. You can then use the yard lines similar to a goal line to determine if the runner reached the LTG. There will always be exceptions to doing this, but if you do it 90% of the time you are able to much better manage the flow of the game.

John is as good as they get so if he said it was behind the LOS I would tend to believe him. On plays like this there are so many different aspect at play and there is no one official who would have all the information needed. Where was the potential OPI in relation to the LOS? Was it the offensive player initiating contact or the defensive player? When is the ball released in relation to the contact? It what direction was the ball thrown? Where was the ball first touched in relation to the neutral zone? Each of those will impact if there was or wasn't a foul for OPI. If the ball was first touched in or behind the neutral zone (and don't be too technical on that especially if it's an intended screen pass caught very close to the LOS) then everything else doesn't matter for OPI.

Did the referee announce that or was that speculation from the announcers? They will often give the block a healthy yard beyond the LOS so they aren't too technical on that aspect of the foul. The location of the defender in relation to the receiver is not relevant if the offensive player was blocking downfield before the pass ends. The only exception would be if the block happened on one side of the field as the ball is going to the other side. That doesn't sound like this situation though.

I believe the coach thought there was contact which is why he went crazy. Video obviously showed that wasn't the case. There was a close targeting call very early in the game that cost him one of his best defenders, so he was probably still hot about that. This probably should have been flagged for UNS even in an NCAA game. Yes he is on the field, but he's mostly in the team huddle where he is allowed to be. You want to make sure he earns it, so it often has a lot to do with what he's saying as well.

One thing I'll disagree with Bob on is whether we would consider this IP under HS rules. I definitely would. Having that many substitutes (definition of the people who came on during the play) on the field very much could influenced the play. At that point the officials have no idea who the original 11 players were for either team. Similar to BD/WC in 2019 when WC players ran on to the field after a blocked FG they thought ended the game. The crew ruled IP rather than IS because of this very reason (I agreed with their call). I would only go with IS if they came on the field but were nowhere near the play as it happened (say 5-10 yards on and stopped and ran back). I would have IP on both sides and along with the IFP offset and replay the down. The LOD aspect of the IFP doesn't matter at this point. I had heard the ruling on the field was the IFP ended the play. They ruled UNS for the players being on the field but treated it similar to IS in HS (which is entirely in their judgement). Most college officials I've talked to thought it probably should have been treated as an egregious act and ruled it as a double foul and replay the down because they had so many players from both teams on the field. If I hear anything from any training videos I'll try to share it here. Neither call would be "wrong" but one may be more right than another and ultimately decided by the grader in this case. A good friend of mine told me once, some calls aren't right or wrong. They are just calls.

We worked one of their games this year. Both of those players were incredibly impressive. They seemed every bit as good as MIC players and were definitely big enough to play in the MIC. I figured they would do well in the 2A tournament because they didn't seem like your typical 2A program.

The ones I worked this year were. Two of them came down to the last drive and the coaches were all treating it like their jobs depended on it. Lots of talent at the MIC schools I saw.

I've officiated several MIC freshman and JV games over my career. I would say many of them would beat a lot of 3A and 4A varsity teams. We like to have newer officials help at these games because they get more prepared for the varsity games they will eventually work. This year was one of the best I've seen. Teams like LC and Warren were very sophomore/junior heavy on varsity. They mostly kept their freshmen on the freshman team so the JV were the sophomores and juniors that didn't get to play varsity. If the freshmen at those schools played the JV the freshmen could probably win.

I would say both had excellent seasons/careers, both were very deserving of the honor, and you couldn't go wrong with either choice. Picking one over the other is not a slight on the other. I wouldn't have been shocked with either choice.

Covenant did play and beat Heritage Christian this year who was 8-3 and ranked #8 in the last poll. HC lost to WeBo in the regional final by a similar score. I think CC-WeBo could be a very good game. There often isn't a huge difference between the top teams of one class and the top teams of the next class. It depends entirely on the year of course because sometimes there are dominating teams regardless of class.

Unsportsmanlike conduct fouls in NFHS are treated as dead ball fouls even if they are live. So the result is the same. In NCAA you would be correct though. They changed that several years ago to cut down on the number of high stepping or taunting plays that were happening on TDs. They made it a live ball foul so it would take the TD off the board and enforce from the spot. It seems to have worked because you don't see that very often any more. It isn't a major problem in HS football so the rules committee hasn't felt a need to change the rule.

He would have to sell it to the entire rules committee. And the last thing they like to approve is something based on "it works in NCAA." That usually is a kiss of death for a rules change proposal.