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...

12 hours ago, JQWL said:

I apologize for my ignorance in the matter but how do proposals work? Who has to approve and if it is approved, then what?

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.

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

Keep in mind, the Class of 2021 would graduate.....and freshman wouldnt have played in the spring because they were not in school yet

Most sophomores would not have played either. 

Spring football would only be for varsity, not JV and freshman teams.

 

Only the junior class would go through the 20 games in 9 month scenario you point out...and they would have the choice to skip one season or the other. 

The nightmare scenario is to start the season and then have to cancel due to positive virus cases. 

 

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.

34 minutes ago, cw13 said:

If we play in the spring and end in May..................to eliminate the grind.................no summer workouts until August........just weights/conditioning

it is workable

more importantly........if we want football it may be our only option

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.

42 minutes ago, Temptation said:

How do you justify coming back and playing again in the fall if 2021?  That’s one hell of a grind.

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...

14 hours ago, Fan90 said:

No...it is Rule 7 part C....each player (REGARDLESS OF JERSEY NUMBER" is pass eligible if aligned as end man on LOS.

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.

55 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

Everything seems fine up until that Darrell Enwood guy starts commenting.

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

10 minutes ago, DannEllenwood said:

About that time isn’t it?

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

19 minutes ago, cw13 said:

If the season is pushed to the spring.....I really see nothing wrong with it........in the fall we start in warm weather and end in cold......just be the reverse in the spring......the real advantage will be with the spread offenses getting to play in the warmer spring weather during the play-offs, as a opposed to the terrible late October and November weather......that can hinder that style of attack

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

On 7/5/2020 at 8:19 AM, wabashalwaysfights said:

Over/under on this thread: 3 pages

Who had the over? I should have set it at about 5-6, but I also didn't consult Vegas so...

1 hour ago, Plymouthfan91 said:

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.

14 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

If you're wearing the right numbers...

17 minutes ago, Fan90 said:

Not in 8 man...jersey numbers do not matter foe pass eligibility

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.

3 minutes ago, bombkicker said:

This is what I do know, we have a covid unit in the ER I work at. Nurses fight over taking that unit cause its the easiest one. We have been barely getting  patients there for WEEKS. Currently my hospital has 3 patients admitted for covid.  3! We are now 7 days post a holiday that included 0 social distancing. Shouldnt that number be way higher???

 

-Adam Hudak

Head Coach Wheeler High School

15 years ER Nurse

 

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.

6 minutes ago, Gipper said:

Covid is a disease with many faces.  I just pray the medical researchers get their act together and find a vaccine.

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.

3 minutes ago, JustRules said:

Not quite. It only says the ends are eligible which is true of 11-man football. What they are saying is the end can be #56 and still be eligible. That's not true in 11-man.

As for the big uglies losing opportunities, from my experience there are players in 1A/2A playing OL who are smaller than skill players at larger schools. 

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.

36 minutes ago, FarmerFran said:

From a funding standpoint, how does the 8 man differ from 11 man? Same equipment/supply costs, still have to pay coaches, refs,etc. I would assume most of these schools have a field of some sort inside of their track, but who knows what upgrades or updates are needed.

Logistically, I just don't see how schools that have made the choice not to play 11 man football for years can make the financial commitment for 8 man when it clearly hasn't been important to them. Remember, expressing interest is not the same as actually signing up and playing.

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. 

2 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

Linemen aren’t eligible, but that’s only 3 kids.

Damn. 

17 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

Narrower field, for one thing. 80 yard fields and 100 yard fields are both in use in Nevada, but 100 yard fields have an “inner line” for 8 man boundaries. That cost me a touchdown once 😖

Here’s an example: Tonopah has an 80 yard field; Laughlin and Beatty have 100 yard fields. Tonopah lacks the added markings; Beatty and Laughlin have them.

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.

12 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Don't the "big uglies" of a school,  aka the offensive and defensive lineman, get short shrift in a 8-man system? Are not 2 out of the 3 positions eliminated in 8-man football those "non-skill" positions?

I guess those players can just go play soccer or run cross country?

 

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.

8 minutes ago, DannEllenwood said:

Yes sir. If my bosses say wear a mask, I’ll wear a mask. Just as I did on the airplane to Florida. 

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...

26 minutes ago, DT said:

Understood.  Enjoy your conversation.

3 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

*cough* soccer *cough*

The bane of small school football programs almost everywhere.

Which is why in the aforementioned list I don't see a small school like Rossville ever having football, 8-man or otherwise.  Their existing soccer program is enough for that community, a place where basketball and to a lesser extent, baseball, is king and always will be.

 

An Attica-Seeger co-op 11-man football team would be a mighty beast.  Just saying..........................

 

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.

1 minute ago, DT said:

I know a few Wabash grads, including Mike Crnkovich, younger brother of my high school QB Tim Crnkovich.

Geography plays a huge roll in 6/8/9 man football as well.  Indiana , KY and OH are similar in terms that they each have major cities scattered throughout the state, mitigating the travel issues that rural or mega size states must deal with.  

And geographically speaking, Indiana is very similar to Illinois and Michigan in the same regard.  See the above numbers. 

18 minutes ago, DT said:

I truly find it hard to believe that some of the gate receipts for these failing 11 man football programs generate nearly enough income to support a full sports menu 

Failing programs suffer from two common factors, amongst many others :

 

Low participation

Low community support

 

That translates to moribund attendance numbers.  

I wont be convinced otherwise

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...

6 minutes ago, Plymouthfan91 said:

All I want to do is listen to the scientists. 

 

*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.

8 hours ago, DT said:

You clearly dont understand Ohio high school football.  

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:

On 7/8/2020 at 6:02 PM, DT said:

Terrible idea   

Eight man football is for rugged rural outpost communities and for the generally unsophisticated sports fan.

Modern, sophisticated and educated Hoosiers will not support this neanderthal version of the regular game.

117 Indiana High Schools, or 25% of the total in the state, have already said NO to high school football.  We need to cull the 40 bottom feeders in 11 man and fine tune and elevate the remaining 280 go forward schools to catch up with our neighboring states who are playing at a higher overall level and produce significantly more next level talent.

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."