Bobref

Last night in the Seahawks - Rams game, a punt was blocked, recovered by the kicker, who then kicked it again — a 68 yd. punt! What if that happens tonight? Is it legal? You make the call!

An excellent point that many gloss over. Seeding not only makes the tournament better, but it’s primary value is in making the 9 week exhibition season relevant to the playoffs.

It occurs to me that we have an awful lot of smart athletic directors in this state. If changing the system by seeding were likely to result in significantly increased revenue, in these times of tight budgets somebody would be out there beating the drum for it. I don’t get that sense. I’m not saying there aren’t changes to be made that would be revenue positive. Just saying it’s apparently not “obvious” to a lot of people who should be paying attention to it.

I am in the process of preparing an initial post for a thread that explores this subject in great detail. Let me just preview that here by saying that it is impossible to design a system that works well, if at all, unless you can clearly articulate the goals you want the system to achieve. So, when assessing the present system, you first have to ask “what are we trying to accomplish here?” The answers may not be as obvious as you might think.

There are also people who believe the earth is flat.

Do you see yourself as a typical fan? How many like you are out there?

It’s not more football. The number of games doesn’t change. But it’s better football when seeding makes it more likely that the matchups get better as the tournament goes along.

One thing I used to love about sectional championships was when it worked out that two good teams were in the finals and you could see all the different schools’ letter jackets in attendance.

I was very impressed with Mishawaka’s offensive line. They absolutely took Northwood to the woodshed.

In some cases it works that way. But be aware of the difference between an official IHSAA interpretation, and anyone else’s interpretation of a rule. If I am passing on an official interpretation from the IHSAA, it’s going to very clearly say that, and its distribution is cleared in advance at 9150 N. Meridian. If it doesn’t say that, then it’s an opinion.

Makes far too much sense.

Won by Elder 59-58!

I suggest you communicate your concern to IHSAA Asst. Commissioner Robert Faulkens. He’s the one who decides whether an official interpretation needs to go out to the officials.

Forced sportsmanship is no sportsmanship at all. If the kids want to walk across and shake some hands, more power to them. But that single file line stuff belongs in tee-ball.

I played QB a million years ago. There was a product called Tuf Skin which was sprayed on your ankles before they were taped. It was incredibly sticky. I had that stuff all over my hands all game. I don’t get the sense that this is much of a problem. Never heard of it happening before. It would be especially ironic, in that Wilson’s agreement with the IHSAA requires the use of Wilson footballs throughout the tournament.

Here’s the Rule: “Illegal equipment shall always include but is not limited to: “2. Slippery or sticky substance of a foreign nature on equipment, towel, uniform, opponent or on an exposed part of the body which affects the ball or an opponent.” I have never heard an official interpretation of this situation. But for me, a leather treatment that is recommended and provided by the manufacturer is not “foreign.”

WTF??? 🤬

I hate the postgame handshake.

Change my mind. 😂

I have a question about the use of the product. Is it applied when you take the ball out of the box? Is it applied periodically, on some sort of a schedule, e.g., before and after the season, or is it used before each game?

It certainly smacks of a conspiracy. I say follow the trail to the ends of the earth. No theory is too fanciful or paranoid to justify follow-up where the reputation of the the Boilers’ football prowess is at stake.

What? Disagreement over holding no-calls in a football game? Egad, man, you may be on to something!

This comes straight from Mr. Faulkens this morning. Context is included, so all will understand. When the Mercy Rule was first implemented in 2019, the directive to the officials was that it constituted the only manner in which normal timing could be altered. Agreements of the teams to the contrary notwithstanding. The idea was to take the decision out of the hands of the coaches, who often had competing motivations. Then the pandemic came and the thinking changed a little bit. It was thought that with lower numbers, quarantines, abrupt cancellations and reschedulings becoming commonplace, it was best to give the local authorities, i.e., game management and the coaches, some additional flexibility when mismatches occur. @Irishman and @SoIndRef are correct, the statements in the video about Mercy Rule timing starting in the 1st half were just part of a larger discussion and not pronouncements of a change in the application of the Rule. So that there can be no doubt, this is the official IHSAA interpretation of the Mercy Rule and the role of coaches' agreement to alter timing: Teams are allowed to shorten periods by agreement in the first half, meaning a period would be less than 12 minutes, and normal timing rules are applied during that shortened period. But they can’t implement Mercy Rule timing until the 2nd half. Once the 2nd half begins, Mercy Rule timing is the exclusive way in which the timing rules can be altered. Thanks to everyone for bringing this situation to light so we could get clarification. I know it got a bit acrimonious at times, and that was regrettable. But on behalf of the officials in Indiana, thanks for helping us make sure what we're doing is right going forward.

Thank you. I will report back.

Can you share the vintage of this particular video?