Huge Football Fan

15 minutes ago, WJUBunimportant said:

An anonymous source tells me that Marian will be taking Mishawaka's place in the NIC's North division come 2020. Is this the case?

Known fact not a secret

8 minutes ago, Hornetcoach said:

The refs confirmed three weeks ago.  Not assuming this, heard it directly from the Athletic Director on the field as we were trying to figure out what to do.  He also told me that he had confirmed with one of them last Monday.  How does one confirm and not show up?   

That’s a great question!!!!! Still sounds strange all around. Bad situation for all involved. Was it a crew or individuals?

47 minutes ago, JustRules said:

The biggest gap we have in 5-man is downfield. Pylons aren't covered well during long plays. Goal line is hard to cover when the ball is snapped between the 10 and 15. FG and tries lose a wing. The C could take the other upright so the wings stay on the LOS, but it would make more sense for the deep officials to take the uprights. On punts you would already have 2 deep officials ready. Free kicks wouldn't be different regardless of C/deep because everyone goes to a spot to start.

I agree with Ohio and would only want 6 man with the center judge. 2 deep wings with no one in the middle is for a better word “stupid”. With all that said its absolutely ridiculous we don’t goto 7 or even 8 man mechanics after week 2 of the tournament and work that way to the state finals. 

16 minutes ago, Bobref said:

You guys should invest a few $$ in a field mike.

Also another reason to give the clock operators/announcers a radio and you can tell them what you have in an unusual play so they can announce what is going on

18 minutes ago, ts32 said:

All due respect Bobref, I wasn’t “assuming” anything... merely questioning how this even happened?

The original post said “due to IHSAA Officials double booking a game.” What am I supposed to infer?

I have no knowledge of it but it sounds suspicious to me. Booked and confirmed? If someone were to double book they wouldn’t confirm to a school they were coming and then not show up. If there were double booked then they had the tell them before hand or how would they release that they were double booked? It doesn’t add up. Either way hopefully they get the game In tomorrow 

The coaches can still agree to end or shorten any period, with or without a mercy rule. 

The mercy rule provision is just to allow the state to provide a "forced" shortening even without coach consent.

from bob’s Facebook post. This is how I see it just like the rest of the world. If the coaches agree to run the clock in the first half of a 63-0 game, run the clock if they both want to. In the second half they don’t have a choice. That’s what the rule says why does meridian or where they are want to make it more difficult then what it is. No where does it say you can’t run the clock in the first half if they agree. Totally wrong interpretation 

59 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Actually, they can’t under the current rule. The IHSAA has been very clear: adoption of the Mercy Rule trumps Rule 3-1-3, meaning it is the only alteration of the timing rules permitted.

Very clear to who? And with the way it’s written use your lawyer powers I read that coaches can’t over ride the implementation of the rule in the second half but I don’t see where that means they can’t use it in the first. How about this. ITS THE COACHE’S RULE! And if it’s 41-0 int he first and the coach says get me outta here you should be able to and I don’t see where you can’t. Coaches not being able to override the implementation of the rule to me means they can’t say no. I don’t see where it says they can’t say yes

I read it as they can’t override it being implemented. It’s absolutely stupid if it’s 41-0 in the 1st q and the losing coach asks for a running clock and we don’t give it to them. Another nonsense application of a rule that shouldn’t be that difficult 

4 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:

We had a running clock in this game, so the coach is already in trouble;)

The play had 0 impact on the game, but more to my point, this is why film is so valuable to us. We had two of these plays in the game that were not covered, one was worse than the other. This spurred conversation among the crew how do we get this covered. I realize most people think we just meet up before the game and go wing it, but there is a fair amount of preparation that goes into  it. Our goal every Friday night is to be the best team on the field, I didn't think we were very sharp Friday night, working hard towards this week. I doubt anyone in the stands knew we were there Friday, but you know as an official when you walk off the field, we just weren't sharp. 

On your play I think it’s the wing on the right side that should see it. B could help depending on what category of dpi you have

9 hours ago, Bobref said:

I congratulate you if you find illegal use of the hands tougher to officiate than DPI.

In this case it’s a no brainer. Anyone who has officiated that would be reading this has called dpi. How many people have called the defense for blocking a wr who is no longer a potential blocker? I bet almost 0. He asked a specific question about a specific route but wouldn’t say if the ball was in the air or not. I know it’s easier to call dpi on this play when the ball is coming then to call the defense for a foul while the qb still has the ball and is the question that I find interesting as to who would see it but it wouldn’t be dpi 

1 minute ago, Bobref said:

This is not an illegal block. It's illegal use of the hands. 15 yds,. vs. 10 yds.

As in ibb the block in the back signal. The point is his original question needs to be clarified. What he is asking about dpi or an illegal block? Dpi is way easier to call and isn’t gonna be such a guess. The illegal block is much tougher to see to the whole thing not just 1 or 2 guys falling

2 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:

Kinda my thoughts. I was hoping someone had a magic bullet.

Not having this discussion on this thread. 

What does that even mean? You asked about DPI. DPI on this play vs an illegal block (defense blocking a player that can no longer be a potential blocker) is 2 totally different senerios. The dpi is easier to call in this situation so to me the question is who would see the illegal block

14 minutes ago, Impartial_Observer said:

5 man mechanics, back slips out of the back field and is about 5 yards beyond the LOS. The U has slid up towards the LOS and LB takes a shot at back out of the backfield, just behind the U as he has moved forward. Who's responsible for this call? This is from spread, twins both sides, and single back. 

 

 

Is the ball in the air?

3 minutes ago, GOLDRUSH1985 said:

It was just 2015  at LOS when Penn gave what many to believe was the best Center Grove team of all time a very good game . It was 21-16 in the fourth quarter before CG scored again . It was a very competitive game and probably the closest game CG had all year . 

I’m not sure if it was the best center groove team of all time or not but

week 1 they beat WC by 4

week 3 they beat Carmel by 3

Beat LC 17-7

beat Catherdral 7-0

Beat Avon in double ot 

18 minutes ago, Impartial_Observer said:

I know them well. It cost them a sectional final. 

Without naming names explain the play situation 

23 hours ago, Bobref said:

Since we seem to be on the topic of overtime, here’s an interesting play.

Team A starts the OT procedure at the B 10 yd. line, 1st and goal. On 1st down they get a holding penalty that pushes them back to the B 26. They then throw 3 straight incompletions. On 4th and goal from the B 26, they attempt a long field goal. The kick is blocked at the LOS and goes to the B 23 where it is muffed by B19 back across the LOS and recovered at the B 28 by A4. He then (a) advances for an apparent TD, or (b) runs it down to the B 5, where he is tackled. Ruling?

I think c) needs to be added in as it’s a much stranger situation then b. k Player is tackled at the  21 instead of the 5

13 hours ago, 1984 said:

I guess what I'm more inclined to want to know, is can a defensive player continue to be disruptive to a receivers route as long as ball is NOT in the air, he is NOT holding, arm baring, pushing from behind, kind of stuff. 

But playing what I prefer to think of as basketball type defense with a little more physicality. 

He can block the wr as long as the wr is a potential blocker to him and the ball is not in the air 

1 hour ago, BDGiant93 said:

And I saw that game! 

I believe 42-14 in the 2nd q

4 hours ago, starbacker said:

To me the easy fix (that shouldn’t have to wait until next year) if a team goes go by 35+ run the clock and if a team cuts it to under 35 start stopping it again. That way the 2/100 that is possible can still happen. 

I think is numbers were just made up I think it’s more like 1/10,000

csn anyone come up with a game where a team was down 35 in the second half and won? I still have yet to hear of a game like that 

7 hours ago, Olympian06 said:

And I understand the mentality of “everyone gets a trophy”   The pussifcation of the nation runs strong. 

Again sheep mentality! Typical blah blah. 49-0 at the half the second half is terrible. The winning team doesn’t want to do anything with the back ups cuz they want the clock to run. I Believe this opens up the second/third team to play football. If your throw a incomplete pass on third down who cares. This is way better in the long run. Closed minded people will complain just to complain without really looking at the benefits. Which is typical 

1 minute ago, BTF said:

The coaches came up with this? That is what is so perplexing. I just don't know how the number 35 makes any sense. I don't know how it makes any sense to keep the clock running when the team coming back is mounting a comeback? I don't care who came up with it. It's a disappointing rule to say the least. It's almost as if the rule was created during a one hour meeting. Not enough time to think things through. Is what it is I guess. 

Do we have record of a game where someone was down 35 in the second half and won?

19 minutes ago, Olympian06 said:

Something needed to be done? How about get better... I know I know, in 2019 that comment might be offensive. 

I understand sheep mentality and “get better is the typical response “. What’s the point of 50-0 at the half and the winning team running full back dive up the middle 3 times and punt while the losing team throws 3 incompletions and punts. Who is getting better at that point. With the running clock you can bring in the jv run/throw the ball like normal of its incomplete clock keeps running and you can have a better game for the back ups

1 minute ago, BTF said:

Snider was up on New Pal 42-14 in the second quarter before the Dragon's started chipping away. 

It's a lousy rule, plain and simple. 

I’m glad I have the right to disagree. I think the coaches did a great job of coming up with something. Seems to be working out very well so far. With the avg margin of victory getting more and more out of hand something needed to be changed. Week 1 had the lowest avg margin of victory since 9/9/2011 21.9. 

17 minutes ago, Coach Nowlin said:

I believe the either school would report the infraction to the IHSAA 

If it is determined that the quarter rule was broken, the team that broke the rule would forfeit the game where the quarter limits were exceeded.  In your scenario would be the Freshman game.   

Special Team Downs do not count toward quarters.   You can play every special team on Friday night and not use any quarter.  

I know you can play all the special teams q. My point was the kid played every q of the freshman game every q of the jv game and every q of the varsity q(on special teams)

so so last night if you had played one of these kids that you needed to okaybwhat would of happened? Can you play a high school game with 13 as center?

2 hours ago, Coach Nowlin said:

Played a JV game last night with 13 players and had another 14 standing on the sidelines for emergency only and Special teams.     I had 5 lineman, Center hurt shoulder, so with 8 mins left of the game, I put a kid who snapped before at center wearing #13 so not to burn a Freshman quarter since he has 4 quarters to play on Thursday.   Thanks DUMB 4 quarter SUB VARSITY rule.  Appreciate ya      

Now if this was 2018, I would had 14 players to use at least 1 quarter and designate each one which quarter they would play and they still would of been able to play all 4 on this Thursday's Freshman game.  

Again, new quarter rule is far more an issue than the 35 point running clock for teams like our who still want to run 3 teams to maximize reps and progress thru the program.   

 

I’ve seen teams use the same kid for all freshman game (starter played all 4 quarters) jv game (starter played all 4 quarters) and on special teams on varsity. What’s the punishment? You forfeit the jv and freshman games? Who cares?