Bobref

My understanding is that he has impingement of the fat pad of his knee. The prognosis for full recovery without any surgery for such injuries is virtually 100%. But, depending on the degree of impingement and the response to treatment, could be up to 8 weeks. Of course, that’s for you or me. He might well be different.

They were clearly the more physical team. And I was mightily impressed by their QB and two very sure-handed receivers.

There are not 12 observers in the Region. There are 4. And we may have 18 observers on the roster, but only about 14 are working any particular week.

I was there Friday night, and came away impressed with the Raiders.

The shortage of officials is mirrored at the observer level, undoubtedly. It’s hard to “recruit” new observers because it doesn’t seem right to be encouraging people to leave the ranks of active officials and become observers at this particular time.

A really good question … and one without a clear cut answer. Strictly speaking, the observer rating counts the same as any single coaches’ vote. In other words, if you get 50 total votes, and 5 of them are observer ratings, then it’s obviously 10%. … BUT, always keep in mind that the selection criteria also clearly states that the IHSAA reserves the right to select any officials it wants, regardless of the published selection criteria. So, if a crew is borderline, does the IHSAA weight observer votes more than coaches’ votes? You’ll have to ask them that question. I don’t know the answer.

The short answer is some do, and some don’t. But I will tell you that many years ago I was very publicly criticized by a very influential coach who was appalled that I, as a crew chief, was trying to acquire information about the teams I was seeing that week. He felt that it was unprofessional, in that if I got information about the teams ahead of time, I would enter the game with a bias, or “looking” for certain things. He’s still a very respected coach, mentioned often in these pages.

I enjoy abstract discussions. I participate in a lot of them. Let’s all recognize this for what it is: an abstract discussion. Because all offensive systems are designed to succeed. The best one is the one the players you have are best capable of executing against the opponent. And that is not something that can be decided in the abstract.

I don’t believe so. The offense is based primarily on misdirection. As players move up in levels, the defenses become more disciplined and rely more on reading keys and playing assignment football — all of which makes an offense based on misdirection less effective. The Wing-T is also not as conducive to throwing the ball as some other schemes. And offense today at the college and pro levels is all about throwing the ball.

“Slamming?” I didn’t get that at all. I think all he was doing was pointing out that Indianapolis Lutheran and Adams Central were, according to Sagarin, about 15 points better than everyone else in 1A.

I’m not ordinarily prone to hero worship or man crushes … but c’mon. Brady threw his 600th regular season TD pass today. One runs out of adjectives.

Drew Pyne from Notre Dame would look good in red. Barring injury to Tyler Buchner, he’s not going to play next year. What I don’t know is whether he’ll have to sit a year, or whether the COVID exception is still in effect.

WHME Ch. 46 is reporting that Lake Station has forfeited its 1st round sectional game to North Judson due to an insufficient number of available players.

Probably not very well. … All the turds would be offended. 😂

In light of the thoughtful comments by @JustRulesand @Yuccaguy, the obvious question is: Does the current “regulatory” component of the process favor “more experienced” officials in a way that is contrary to the goals we’ve identified?

So, as we can see from the above, fully 50% of the “score” an officiating crew accumulates toward tournament selection and advancement comes from “regulatory” items, i.e., requirements or tasks that must be accomplished. In practice, most of these items are easily accomplished, with the result that this portion of the “score” does not provide much differentiation between crews. It is weighted somewhat toward experience, providing a few more points for length of licensure, tournament experience, and past tournament success. Again, those few points do not provide much differentiation between crews, and the potential differentiation is even mitigated by the fact that these points are calculated with respect to the 3 most experienced officials of the crew. So a crew having a couple of less experienced officials is not penalized. Measuring the current system against the goals we’ve articulated yields, IMO, a mixed grade: 1. Make sure the best officials are working the upper levels of the playoffs. 2. Provide appropriate incentives for officials to develop and improve. 3. Insure that growth in officiating proficiency is directly linked to playoff advancement. 4. Provide all stakeholders with appropriately weighted input into the process. 5. Serve as part of an officials’ retention strategy. The “regulatory” component of the process does little to directly advance these goals, but that does not mean it isn’t an important part of the process. Because the component is slightly weighted toward experience, you could say it advances goal #1 slightly, if you accept the assumption that more experienced officials, especially those with experience in the upper levels of the tournament, are more likely to represent the “best” officials. It may also provide some assistance in achieving goal #5 in that it does promise a slightly easier path to advancement for the officials that “stick it out.” But to the extent the goals are intended to identify the most proficient officials and advance them accordingly, this part of the process does little to accomplish that, since it does not actually measure officiating proficiency, nor does it differentiate between crews in any significant way. In practice, of the 140 or so crews that apply for the playoffs, the range of points generated by this component of the process is very narrow. So, the differences between many, many crews in this component of the scoring system are measured in very small fractions, if any. Rather, this component simply attempts to establish a minimum level of competency by creating milestone tasks that must be accomplished to increase the chances of advancing. That’s not to say that establishing that level of competency is not important – it is. We just can’t look to this part of the process to satisfy most of the goals we’ve identified for the system. For that, I believe we have to look at the "evaluative" component of the process: the 50% that is supposed to be based on officiating proficiency. Let's hear some thoughts on this part of the process, and then we'll move on to the other 50% of the system: the school or coaches' vote.

It’s not just that. It’s the fact that they haven’t yet put a whole game together, quarterback position unsettled, close escapes against mediocre teams. They’re just not a playoff team, even if they somehow go 11-1.

Unfortunately, I think their history of lopsided defeats from that position is finally going to start to work against them, unconsciously, of course.

Ditto.

Evidently, you’re not much of a lawyer, either. 🤣😂

Did I just see that Elkhart set a home & home series with Carmel, starting next season? Kudos to Elkhart. Seems like they have decided to be a player.

Perhaps a moderator could excise the officials’ name from that first post. You are correct that this is not something an official can take upon himself, and impose on the teams without their agreement. The proper recourse is to report this to Asst. Commissioner Faulkens at the IHSAA, as opposed to calling out the official by name on a public forum.

See Bishop Noll.

Good for these two sets of kids? No doubt. Good for Indiana high school football in general? Not so much.

This goes back to the definitions in the rule book, as most interpretations do. A player doesn’t become a kicker until he kicks the ball. Therefore, until there’s a kick, he’s just like any other player. The fact that he’s only 5 yds. deep has several implications, but none of them pertain to the kicker, as he’s always entitled to special protection regardless of the formation. The roughing the kicker rule excuses contact on the kicker when it is “unavoidable” because it is not reasonably certain a kick will be made. Does the player do anything that is “un-kickerlike?” Is the player contacting the kicker attempting to block a kick, or tackle a ball carrier (which is what the kicker is before he kicks the ball)? These are factors that go into the judgment process. But ultimately, the burden is always on the defense to avoid contact if possible.