wabashalwaysfights

Seriously, another one of thes topics? I know we all miss sports in general and are anxious to find out what's gonna happen, but these "should we go back on time" topics have proven time and again to be counter productive. No disrespect to the initial poster here (looking at you @Football Guru 25) but come on...

I'm not entirely sure, but this is a great question. May be best answered by looking at what the last sport the IHSAA added.

This is only true at your bigger schools. Most 1A, 2A, and 3A schools carry freshmen through seniors on their varsity rosters. Also, to think that most staffs aren't going to fight for at least JV games (even if only a couple) is fantasy. Those reps are seen by most small schools as crucial (and they are). You would even see a push for a Jr. H8gh season in most cases.

Still one heckuva thing to go through. Think about it, even if you play a 6 game spring season before starting the tournament and then held a normal season in the fall, at minimum that's 17 games in what, roughly 9 months? If you play 2 full seasons that would be a minimum of 20 games in 9 months? If you play even a shortened season in the spring of 2021 you about have to play a shortened fall season in 2021.

That's what I said when this was brought up before. To my mind, that "grind" would be worse for high school age student-athletes than the threat posed to them by Covid. And I get it, the fear surrounding Covid isn't necessarily just the student-athletes, but still...

I see that now... every lineman's dream... except for us centers, we're pretty much out of luck unless you have some wacky unbalanced stuff floating out there.

As with any other conflict, both sides shared in a little of the blame...

Now at least I know where to set the number on the next topic of this kind...

I said this three months ago when this possibility got brought up; the issue is not this spring, but the next fall.

Who had the over? I should have set it at about 5-6, but I also didn't consult Vegas so... I saw this circulating on social media a while back. The problem with this logic has to do with the perception of danger. If I'm being honest, the "no shirt, no shoes, no service" thing never made any sense to me other than, well, we don't all need to see that... Traffic laws: unfortunately, I think we probably have all seen the effects of people not following traffic laws. Without really even thinking about it, I can think of at least 3-4 instances from my 4 years of high school alone where I have friends either killed or nearly killed because they were not obeying the rules of the road. This includes speed limits. Does this mean that I do not speed? Come on. But when I am written a ticket for breaking those rules? I do accept that because I can readily conjure up an image of what happens, or could happen if I don't OSHA safety regulations: if you work in an occupation which sees heavy OSHA regulation (my assumption is "blue collar" work) you are probably also trained very early on in your carrier as to the dangers of what happens if you do not follow those regulations. This likely includes images or video of some pretty graphic stuff and or seeing other individuals you work with who suffered the consequences of not following those regulations. The example that comes most to mind is if you are working with someone who is missing a digit. Airlines: again, we can conjure images of what may happen if we do not abide by the safety standards in an airplane because air travel is general considered more dangerous than conventional ground travel. Here, we are influenced by anything from personal experience (bad turbulence) or movies. TSA: 9/11. Moving on... With Covid-19, there is a break from that perception. We can look at charts and graphs and "data" or anything else we want, but ultimately if an individual does not perceive danger, it is not seen as being dangerous and therefore not that big a deal.

So clearly, without knowing @Fan90's experience with 8 man, is a slight difference in rules. Perhaps linked to state/region?

Some of the best offensive linemen I've played against and coached weren't much bigger than that, regardless of class.

This is interesting. Coach, I am unfamiliar with the overall geography of the Wheeler area, but appears from looking at a map that it is in the middle of a few larger urban/suburban areas. If you are able, can you disclose the specific location of your hospital? You may have done so elsewhere, but I'm just curious.

Unlikely anytime within about the next calendar year at this point. If we, as a collective society, wait for a vaccine to begin moving away from this thing we have bigger problems than football, or any sport, at any level.

Good for you all. I am for any solution to expand any sport, including the game of football in its various derivatives, to communities where they deem it a) necessary for the improvement of the experience of the student-athlete, b) the body of student-athletes shows enough interest over a sustained number of cohorts, and c) the community as a whole is able to support such expansions. As it pertains to football, that could be the 11, 9, 8, or 6 man derivatives or the form of a co-operative program. I am further in favor of the inclusion of any such sport, or football derivative, under the governing body of the IHSAA should enough member schools show interest, and in some way commit, in participating in such sport. I would leave the establishment of threshold of what is considered "enough" to the IHSAA. Enjoy your conversation lads.

It could quite literally come down to a couple of kids per class through a school system. It also does depend on what else is currently offered in terms of extracurriculars. I would venture that small schools that already offer sports like soccer (see Rossville) probably aren't even interested based on the number of kids you need to field a soccer team. But if the current offerings are primarily the more "individual" sports like cross country and tennis for boys, that's a situation where something like 8 man football may be considered. Another consideration that hasn't even been talked about is Title IX. I don't know the intricacies of that, but it could hurt (meaning to offer 8 man means you have to offer an additional sport for girls) or help (maybe you already have, say, volleyball and have "offered" 11 man in the past just to save legal face). How likely is either scenario? The second one is probably FAR less likely than the first, but still something to think about. Damn.

That sounds frustrating to say the least. What about scheme then? I assume there is a "spread" versus a "power" different offensively? I looked up some highlights from the Michigan state championships and it looked like each school differed quite a bit. Like I said in my first post, as a former offensive and defensive lineman, that thought kind of hurts. My understanding is that you are correct in terms of the elimination of positions for players on the field for each team. However, if you are dealing with smaller roster sizes, you would look at this as a net gain because you would now have built in depth. Secondly, and @DanteEstonia could probably correct me here, but my understanding is that in 8 man football ALL players are eligible to catch passes, run the ball, etc. which is a lineman's dream. So in terms of raw opportunities to get on the field, yes, linemen would get shorted, but once you get on the field, if I am correct, you get more opportunities to touch the ball. That is, if that matters to you. It would also stand to reason that schools would have the ability, if their numbers allowed, to have JV and Junior High levels of 8 man football as well.

Ditto.

@DanteEstonia, you said you coached an 8-man team last year, I'm curious about x's and o's, what is the same what is different? @cw13, you said you have coached in a co-op program before, how does that work in terms of facility usage, revenue sharing between the two schools, etc. I've lived near the Illinois state line my whole life and am familiar with the basics of co-op programs, but don't know much beyond, essentially, two or more schools field a team together...

Hey, if a school shows enough long term interest to support a soccer program and a community is willing to support it, I say go for it. That doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences though. Covington is a great example of this. They were never really a "football juggernaut" before they started their soccer program, but their football participation took a big hit when that started (I was a kid btw, so the details are a bit fuzzy). Things have balanced out now, Covington's football teams have steadily gotten better and their participation has also gone up, I don't know what their soccer participation is, but I continually hear that they are competitive. The key there is that, I assume, the Covington community did their research, saw that there was long term interest in soccer, and decided that it was worth it. Good for them, but it's not for everybody. As to co-ops, that to me is also an option, but there are some thorny issues to work through there as well. How does the revenue get split? How do you get student-athletes to facilities? Which facilities do you use? That doesn't even start to touch the "cultural" (if that is the right term) issues inherent with joining up two fierce rivals. It is a different situation, slightly, but one of the big hangups with the Turkey Run/Rockville consolidation was that there were folks on both sides, young and old, who could not stand the thought of playing with the other side instead of against them. Not that these obstacles can't be overcome, but it just takes some doing. And geographically speaking, Indiana is very similar to Illinois and Michigan in the same regard. See the above numbers. Fine, great, I support your right to have an opinion. Having seen gate numbers at small schools for years I can tell you that you are wrong, but you will never believe me, but as the text in bold indicates, it doesn't matter. Multiple athletic directors from multiple schools around the state could show you their books, you could see the numbers in black and white, and it won't matter. So again, I would respectfully ask that you start a new thread to discuss contraction issues and let this thread be for discussion about the mechanics of 8-man football, it's prevalence and structure in other states, and schools in this state who may potentially either show interest or be willing to engage in conversation around it. We all know where you stand, that is clear, so please, just leave those of us who would like to have some kind of productive discussion on this topic in peace...

*pokes head out* Which scientists though? *ducks to avoid shrapnel* In all seriousness though, I think @Raven67was one of the first to float this months ago, but I find myself contemplating spring high school football more and more. Still don't like it, still don't want it to happen, but whereas I was 100% sure it wouldn't happen 12 weeks ago, I'm only like 95% sure it won't happen today. But it's also July 10, 2020 at 8:27am.

I would say this is a fair point. Ohio is a state known for it's high school football. Let's look back at the chart @gahoosierfan posted and focus on some other states that are known for their football. How many 8 man teams does... California have? 108 Florida have? 15 Georgia have? 21 Michigan have? 64 Mississippi have? 21 Nebraska have? 113 Texas have? 0 Now let's remember what @DT said early on in this conversation: So yes, several of those states that are "known for football" have a large rural population, yet 8-man is allowed to exist, and in some cases thrive. But, you know, these are states who have "generally unsophisticated sports fan(s)." But wait, you say, Texas has zero 8-man teams and they are the gold standard for rabidness over high school football. You would be correct. They have an alternative though.... Let's look at how many 6-man teams those same states have... California 0 Florida 32 Georgia 0 Michigan 0 Mississippi 0 Nebraska 25 Texas 234 If 8-man is a "neanderthal version of the regular game," I would hate to know what the 6-man version would be. Yet the 6-man game is incredibly prominent in football rabid Texas. But sure, alternatives to the 11 man game like 8 and 6 man football are for us "neanderthals." Why don't you leave this possibility to those of us who are not "modern, sophisticated and educated Hoosiers" and pay attention to more pressing issues for you more intellectual types. P.S.: As a Wabash College graduate, I take offense to the term "neanderthal." If you must insult my intelligence, please use the term "caveman."