Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Mercy Rule Adpoted


Recommended Posts

While I agree with some sentiments, I would honestly like someone to find a game where a team trailing by 35 points in the second half came back to win.  There might be one or two, but they are far from the norm.  

And if your argument is that it prevents a "chance" at a comeback, I have to ask, what about the 8 - 10 chances you had in the first half to either 1) Stop your opponent or 2) Score yourself.  We claim it's a 48 minute game, so what makes 1-2 extra possessions in the 4th quarter more valuable than the ones in the first half?

I could be talked into a 42 point/35 point running clock for 3rd and 4th quarters.  If a team trails 35-0 at half and receives the kickoff, I would like to see them get one more bona fide chance to score.

And once it starts running - let it run with the exceptions given - score, timeout, injury.  Team A is up 41-0 with 6 minutes to go in the game.  Do you really want to see them throw in their starting defense for a goal-line stand against Team B to protect the running clock?  That's just ridiculous, IMO.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, FarmerFran said:

Rule was changed to allow kids to play a total of 6 quarters as opposed to 5 in the past. Once halftime hits jv guys can sub in freely without penalty of missing time in the JV game. 

When did this happen?  I recall people talking about this just last year on quarters. Have some of us missed the memo completely? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, itiswhatitis said:

I want to clarify something I said when I started this topic.  When I said I'd miss an extra point on purpose, I wasn't talking about being able to run up the score in the second half.  I was going with being able to play a full game (no running clock) so your backups and JV could get more snaps of playing time.  I've seen games when there was a running clock in the second half.  I've also seen coaches refuse to use a running clock even though they were down by 50+ and the other coach offered it to them.  I guess now it isn't a decision any more, it is a rule and will happen regardless.  So what does that coach that doesn't want to give up on his team say now?  How does he keep them motivated to play?  I have always admired the old Dugger teams.  Coach Gamble's teams ALWAYS played to the whistle and to the end of the game.  Even though they were down by 8 - 10 touchdowns, they'd never quit playing.  That is coaching your boys. 

From an "outsiders" viewpoint.....

Texas has a 45 point mercy rule for 6-man, no mercy rule for 11-man (yet).  If both coaches agree at halftime, they can have a running clock in 11-man.  In watching 9 years of HS football down here, while my kids were participating, I only saw opponents go to a running clock twice.  Been to games where we were ahead 35, 42, and a couple times even 50-something at the half and opposing coach refused a running clock when our coach brought it up.  We still ran simple plays and threw all the subs in.  Come to think of it, on the flip side, I can't remember our coach EVER accepting a running clock but we weren't in that situation but maybe 4 or 5 games.

I realize one school over 9 seasons is a small sample size, but we never allowed a team anywhere close to coming back on us if the score was 35+ at half.  By that same token, the few "woodsheddings" we took were the same way, never had a prayer of getting back in the game. 2 - 4 TD gap, I can see a comeback.  35+ probably not, for one just due to the limited time on the clock.  You have to score more than 35 points, plus hold the opposition to zero.  Even 28 points may be a stretch for a lot of teams.

I can def see a mercy rule for 42, and 35 seems reasonable to me.  If it's "over" that early, run the clock, reduce chances for injury, get everyone home a little earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Irishman said:

My perspective as a coach where numbers can be an issue is this is based on quarters more than lack of compete from one team or another. We have been in games where some of our JV guys get half a game in, leaving them with just two quarters for the JV game. If the clock is running, then it could, in some cases, save the quarters for those kids. I have coached JV many times over the years, and keeping track of quarters can become a pain; especially if a key player has to sit the 4th quarter. 

 

3 hours ago, btownqbcoach said:

Not sure how you some of you think this is a dumb rule? It's a fantastic rule. The best part is the whole 6 quarter thing so teams can allow JV players to go in in the 3rd q. Great rule!!

Here is the By Law from the press release:    

54-3.1 Interschool football participation by a player shall be limited to a maximum of: a. 36 Varsity season quarters, limited to 4 Varsity quarters per week; or b. 45 season quarters limited to five quarters during a week with no more than Two (2) Varsity quarters included. It shall not count as a Varsity quarter if a player participates only in a kicking down. A kicking down is defined as a kickoff, kick-off return, punt, punt return, field goal and kicked extra point.

However:  I was in the Spring IFCA meeting this spring and what I have heard from admins which is 2 different versions, but same results

I have heard 6 quarters now not 5 but at the meeting IFCA in Spring, I asked this same question, I was told at the meeting that if Running Clock has been instituted in the 2nd half then you can play your JV/Frosh players the 2nd half and it would only count for 1 quarter and not 2. 

I will get more clarification today

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the by-law change for quarters:

 

Interschool football participation by a player shall be limited to a maximum of: a. Thirty‐ Six (36) Varsity season quarters, limited to Four (4) Varsity quarters per week; or b.  Fifty Four (54) total season quarters limited to six (6) quarters during a week with no more than Two (2) Varsity quarters included.  No player can participate in more than Four (4) sub‐Varsity quarters per week. It shall not count as a Varsity quarter if a player participates only in a kicking down. A kicking down is defined as a kickoff, kick‐off return, punt, punt return, field goal and kicked extra point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Coach_K said:

I believe the referees can still take control of the game and "influence" the clock.  Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that happened a few times for teams I was coaching.

This used to be the case. I heard that some referees would manipulate the clock by being very deliberate about marking the ball ready for play and thus delaying the start of the 25 second play clock ... although I never did that myself. 😉 But that’s no longer possible with the advent of the 40 second clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Former Coach said:

Here is the by-law change for quarters:

 

Interschool football participation by a player shall be limited to a maximum of: a. Thirty‐ Six (36) Varsity season quarters, limited to Four (4) Varsity quarters per week; or b.  Fifty Four (54) total season quarters limited to six (6) quarters during a week with no more than Two (2) Varsity quarters included.  No player can participate in more than Four (4) sub‐Varsity quarters per week. It shall not count as a Varsity quarter if a player participates only in a kicking down. A kicking down is defined as a kickoff, kick‐off return, punt, punt return, field goal and kicked extra point.

Thanks the link I clicked off the press release was wrong and still had 5 listed not 6 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaveMosbey said:

Gibson Southern was behind Charlestown 49-21  at halftime in the 2012 sectional and came back to win 57-49, Not 35 points but real close.   

If I recall correctly, at the time it was the largest comeback in Indiana history. That was until I believe center grove made a 35 point swing in 2016 or something. 

 

As for Gibson Southern comeback....we started off the 2nd half stupid lucky. A squib kick blasted a kid in the head and bounced right back to us on the opening 2nd half kickoff. We also were coming off of back to back overtime wins and facing a team who had not played a competitive game all year and rested their starters in every 2nd half.  Crazy game.  

 

Still remember telling their diehard “the side lion” his team wasn’t conditioned for 4 Qtrs of play and he scoffed at the idea that it mattered lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even with the "mercy rule" now taking effect once the 35 point differential threshold has been reached, the 40 seconds play clock will still run normally.  So, besides running the game clock between a touchdown being scored and the kickoff how much time are we really eliminating since you still have to snap the ball every 40 seconds? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, oldtimeqb said:

While I agree with some sentiments, I would honestly like someone to find a game where a team trailing by 35 points in the second half came back to win.  There might be one or two, but they are far from the norm.  

Last year in our regular season game against Batesville we were down by 30 at half, I know it's not 35 but less than a score away. We came back in the second half of the game. Batesville didn't score and our offense tied us up at 30. We lost in OT on a FG. I know this isn't the norm but these situations do occur.  

20 hours ago, oldtimeqb said:

And once it starts running - let it run with the exceptions given - score, timeout, injury.  Team A is up 41-0 with 6 minutes to go in the game.  Do you really want to see them throw in their starting defense for a goal-line stand against Team B to protect the running clock?  That's just ridiculous, IMO.   

I understand what you're saying here and agree that would be ridiculous, I'd like to think common sense would prevail in that situation but we all know how that works out sometimes.

My worry is when a team is down 35-0 to start the second half and runs the opening kickoff back to make it 35-7 but will still have to attempt to make a 4 score comeback with a running clock. I think the issues with the rule are not in how we play the last half of the 4th quarter like the scenario you listed above. The issue is how we play the 3rd quarter.

I understand wanting to end blowouts quicker, preventing injuries and everything else. I agree with the overall intentions of the rule. But the way the rule is written there is no incentive for a team to attempt a comeback.    

5 minutes ago, InTheMuddyTrenches said:

Even with the "mercy rule" now taking effect once the 35 point differential threshold has been reached, the 40 seconds play clock will still run normally.  So, besides running the game clock between a touchdown being scored and the kickoff how much time are we really eliminating since you still have to snap the ball every 40 seconds? 

This is a great point. I remember coaching a game before the 40 second play clock where we had a running clock going in the second half. The white hat would sometimes wait a good extra 10 to 15 seconds to start the old 25 second clock. Can't do that anymore. The only thing the running clock will eliminate is stopping the clock after an incomplete pass. 

This kind of creates a new strategy for coaches too. If you on the positive side of a running clock won't you just wait until the play clock goes to 1 second every play? You could launch a fade out of bounds for three plays and still run the clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, InTheMuddyTrenches said:

Even with the "mercy rule" now taking effect once the 35 point differential threshold has been reached, the 40 seconds play clock will still run normally.  So, besides running the game clock between a touchdown being scored and the kickoff how much time are we really eliminating since you still have to snap the ball every 40 seconds? 

You can really eat up a lot of time  If I had to guess it would be anywhere from 30 minutes to a little bit over an hour in time saved for a game.  Which doesn’t seem like much but the difference for families/teams driving back home at 8:30/9:00 and 9:30/10:00 is a worthwhile goal for games like this.  

 

Ultimately it just depends on the game though. Some JV teams can come in and still score with ease and will bust off huge runs while others will purposely run plays geared at 4 yards a play and just try to get out of there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, InTheMuddyTrenches said:

Even with the "mercy rule" now taking effect once the 35 point differential threshold has been reached, the 40 seconds play clock will still run normally.  So, besides running the game clock between a touchdown being scored and the kickoff how much time are we really eliminating since you still have to snap the ball every 40 seconds? 

Other instances would be after a punt or any other change of possession or a runner going out of bounds. The clock will continue to run during those times as I understand the rule. Most states include COP in their mercy rule, but it's not listed here. The acronym is often TIPS (time outs, injury, possession, score). It's not as efficient as a pure running clock but it will still reduce the number of plays and get everyone out of there at least 15-20 minutes quicker. When a game time is only 2:15 on average anyway that's a pretty significant cut especially the second half (40 minutes instead of 60 minutes is a 33% reduction).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In soccer, the teams can agree to a running clock or the referees will tell you to run it.  Usually, it happens when the score is 8 or more.  Typically, the coach with the lead will play more stall ball, rotate players or change positions.

I watched way to many soccer games when I was an AD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see sports go to a more points based ending. Like HS basketball is first team to score 67 points or 32 minute time limit. Whichever comes first. It would make for some frantic endings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎5‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 1:17 PM, JustRules said:

Other instances would be after a punt or any other change of possession or a runner going out of bounds. The clock will continue to run during those times as I understand the rule. Most states include COP in their mercy rule, but it's not listed here. The acronym is often TIPS (time outs, injury, possession, score). It's not as efficient as a pure running clock but it will still reduce the number of plays and get everyone out of there at least 15-20 minutes quicker. When a game time is only 2:15 on average anyway that's a pretty significant cut especially the second half (40 minutes instead of 60 minutes is a 33% reduction).

And the clock continues to run on incomplete passes, players going out of bounds, fair catches.  It is amazing how fast a half can be with a running clock.  I've been to several.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 5/2/2019 at 8:07 AM, CoachJackson said:

Last year in our regular season game against Batesville we were down by 30 at half, I know it's not 35 but less than a score away. We came back in the second half of the game. Batesville didn't score and our offense tied us up at 30. We lost in OT on a FG. I know this isn't the norm but these situations do occur.  

I understand what you're saying here and agree that would be ridiculous, I'd like to think common sense would prevail in that situation but we all know how that works out sometimes.

My worry is when a team is down 35-0 to start the second half and runs the opening kickoff back to make it 35-7 but will still have to attempt to make a 4 score comeback with a running clock. I think the issues with the rule are not in how we play the last half of the 4th quarter like the scenario you listed above. The issue is how we play the 3rd quarter.

I understand wanting to end blowouts quicker, preventing injuries and everything else. I agree with the overall intentions of the rule. But the way the rule is written there is no incentive for a team to attempt a comeback.    

This is a great point. I remember coaching a game before the 40 second play clock where we had a running clock going in the second half. The white hat would sometimes wait a good extra 10 to 15 seconds to start the old 25 second clock. Can't do that anymore. The only thing the running clock will eliminate is stopping the clock after an incomplete pass. 

This kind of creates a new strategy for coaches too. If you on the positive side of a running clock won't you just wait until the play clock goes to 1 second every play? You could launch a fade out of bounds for three plays and still run the clock.

One of my main bones of contention with the implementation of a 40 second clock. But as we've implemented it, I think the pluses way outweigh the minuses. I always contended if I had a QB that would work with me, I could burn about a minute a play. What I have found with the 40 second clock, in blowout games it seems like the clock operator isn't quite as efficient as he was earlier in the game. I have no idea why that is, it just seems to be the case.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TrojanDad said:

Are there any real statistics that demonstrate more injuries are occurring during the 2nd half of large spread games?

I hate to see seniors and other players that work hard and just don't get playing time to lose more opportunity to play in games.

Sometimes in life, we get our "hats handed to us"....there is something to learn through this.

I get in Indiana basketball is still considered king by the IHSAA.  Should we expect to see a mercy rule in roundball soon????? 

Just my opinion, but I believe the rule was adopted so as to make life easier for coaches. When his team is getting manhandled, it’s hard for a coach to tell his players, on the one hand, to keep playing hard, but then turn around and agree to a running clock or shortening of the periods. ... even if they wanted to.  This takes such decisions out of the coaches’ hands ... meaning, he doesn’t have to answer to his staff, players, administration or fans.

I certainly understand the point of view about opportunities for players who otherwise wouldn’t see the field. I think that is more of a concern for very large schools that have big numbers. Most schools in Indiana would not have that concern, IMO.

Edited by Bobref
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...