FBMan

I am not familiar with any of these teams, but I would like to set the record straight concerning some of the rules. It is important to understand that some of the rules regarding fumbles are different at the high school, college and professional levels. Under National Federation rules (which Tennessee schools play), there are no restrictions on when a player can recover a fumble. As long as it is a fumble (and not a forward pass or illegal batting of the ball), a fumble forward on fourth down can be recovered by a member of the offense for a first down and/or advanced by either team. The rule is different at the college and professional levels. An illegal forward pass or illegal batting of the ball would be a penalty. An illegal forward pass is a loss of down penalty; illegal batting does not result in a loss of down. I would not comment on specific play situations without seeing them, but this is the rule in high school.

I attended the portion of the TSSAA Legislative Council session where the vote on the Collinwood split proposal was taken, and I think I can give an objective view of what happened. No one other than Mr. Carter and the members of the Legislative Council were permitted to speak. This was not an open forum and this should not have surprised anyone. Mr. Carter acknowledged that the proposal had been under review for a year and had been the subject of a great deal of debate. He stated that the only proposal under consideration was the split--the multiplier concept was simply an idea that the Board of Control could consider when developing a new classification formula. (I believe that the Collinwood proposal required a Legislative Council vote because it invovled a change to the TSSAA by-laws.) One of the members of the Legislative Council asked him to review the implications of approving the proposal. On the positive side, he indicated that it would significantly strengthen Division II by expanding the number of teams and helping the Division II teams on travel. He really did not address the competition issues in any current classification. (I do not believe that it his job, as a paid staff member, to elevate the interests of one or more schools over others, although I know that people may see this issue differently.) On the negative side, he said that travel time and costs would increase significantly, particularly in West Tennessee. He provided some information to the Legislative Council concerning a hypothetical regional breakdown that assumed a split. This was not displayed to the audience. He also said that the TSSAA operating expenses would increase because of the greater duplication and that the member schools should expect the TSSAA to increase its share of revenue from play-offs and tournaments. He said he did not think the TSSAA could take any more from football, but that its share of other TSSAA events (e.g., basketball tournaments) would increase. There also seemed to be an assumption that the greater geographic dispersion of the schools in the event of a split would hurt attendance at some of these events, although I do not believe this was stated. With respect to the vote taken by the TSSAA, he said that virtually all of the Division II schools had voted in favor of a change, which obviously significantly affected the 62% of the member schools that voted for a change of some kind in the TSSAA's poll. The Division II schools then were more divided among what type of change they would like to see. He also reported that Kentucky has a similar and, in some ways, more severe public-private issue than Tennessee. There was not much comment from the members of the Legislative Council. At least one of the members alluded to the question about whether this is a public-private issue or an urban-rural one. From that standpoint at least, it appears the lengthy debate on this topic is causing people to try to determine the true nature of the issue. The bottom line: I got the sense that everyone believes a change of some kind is coming, although not everyone will agree on what the change should be. The TSSAA appears to be searching for a common ground that will help preserve geographic proximity of opponents to lessen travel time and costs but will provide some kind of accommodation to the wishes of a large number of its members.