Cross Post: Captains’ Club
Written by Lucas Salinas:
Rule Proposal: Shot Clock Officials should only count up. i.e. 1 to 15 or 1 to 10
Tag: 2017 Captains’ Meeting
Rule Proposal – Shot Clock Burden Ball
Cross Post: Captains’ Club
Written by Sean Smith:
The team receiving all balls after a balls over must make 3 (I’m flexibile to making this just 2) legitimate throws on the ensuing shot clock unless said team is on a 10 second shot clock in its own right.
Rationale: Continue reading “Rule Proposal – Shot Clock Burden Ball”
Rule Proposal – Blood Rule
Cross Post: Captains’ Club
Written by Brandon Meisel:
If at any time a player has blood on their clothes or person, they will receive 30 seconds to remove any and all traces of blood from their clothes and/or person. If the player cannot remove the blood in the allotted time, the team will be forced to take a time out, and sub the player out. If the team doesn’t have any timeouts left, the player will be taken out of the game, and will ineligible for the remainder of the point (not match). The clocks will then be reset according to the team timeouts rule. (The team that has the player with the blood will act as the team that is calling the timeout.) However, if the team with the bloodied player has a throw clock that is above 10 (for the 15 count) or above 5 (for the 10 count) their shot clock will be reset down to that number (10 or 5) in order to allow them enough time to throw.
Policy Proposal – Remove Executive Board Override
Cross Post: Captains’ Club
Written by Kenny Mize:
Removing the E-board override. And going to a strict majority vote 1 team 1 vote and the eboard gets to only spilt ties. No overrides.
Reasoning: Continue reading “Policy Proposal – Remove Executive Board Override”
Rule Proposal – # of Captains
Cross Post: Captain’s Club
Written by Wesley Peters:
Teams are allowed a combination of 4 captains & assistant captains (any combination you’d like). Ex – 1C, 3A. Or 2C, 2A
Rationale: We’ve had 2C & 2A for a while at CMU, starting my 2nd to last year there, and at MSU we’ve had 1C, 3A this year and 4A last year (lol). And I know many teams also have more than 3 captains though 7 is too many (shout out to SVSU 
😄).
I believe having 4 captains allows for promotion of more younger players to prominent roles within the “on-court” portion of teams and furthers their development as leaders greatly. This also encourages more active involvement and makes more players feel like they have an active voice within their organization on and off the court.
Rule Proposal – Captain Markings
Cross Post – Captains’ Club
Written by Caleb Arnold:
Teams shouldn’t have to have any markings for captains on their jerseys if they don’t want too.
Reasoning: I don’t see the point except to allow the referees to know who can have a voice on the team when it comes to disagreements and such. Continue reading “Rule Proposal – Captain Markings”
Policy Proposal – Nationals Scheduling
Cross Post – Captains’ Club
Nationals is two things: the National Tournament (Section 4.3.4.6) and the extra-strength Non-Bracket Matches (Section 4.3.4.5). Rule 4.3.4.5 is purposely written broadly, but for the time being we’ll refer to it as Saturday and Sunday. Currently, it defines that each team gets three unique opponents to play on Saturday.
I propose a less stringent definition of Saturday’s required games, a minimum of two. This will guarantee that each team receives at least three matches over the Nationals Event weekend.
This is not an explicit drop to two games, we Need to be broader with our written policy. For smaller events (teams number 16 and smaller) we can fit three games in. The point is, requiring 3 matches is too stringent. Adding more teams to Nationals but keeping 3 matches going in will likely require that Friday matches are mandatory. Continue reading “Policy Proposal – Nationals Scheduling”
Rule Proposal – Revisit Roster Size
Reducing Roster Sizes
For the 5th year in a row, I am proposing reducing the active player count on the court from 15v15 to 12v12. Before you blow this off, and have the mentality of “change isn’t good”, I urge you to just take a few minutes to read my rationale below:
Currently, we play a VERY large scale game with roster sizes ranging from 10-20 players with 10-15 active players on the court at the beginning of each point.
Proposed Rule Change: Change Throw Line Distance to 27 ft
The following rule proposal was co-authored by Kevin Bailey and Colin O’Brien
Cross post – Captains’ Club
Kevin Bailey:
Alright everyone, pay attention. This is important:
What is the biggest issue with the NCDA’s current gameplay format? Simple. It’s too slow-paced. Not enough points are scored, and teams often decide to play “stall-ball” because it is strategically their best option in certain situations. So, as we go through all of the rule proposals for the upcoming year, we need to keep in mind that this aspect of the game needs to be fixed.
We need to put rules in place that will make our game more fast-paced and exciting. Sure, there are countless ways to go about fixing the slow-paced style that plagues our league right now, but in my opinion, no rule change will be as beneficial as this one: The throw line (attack line) needs to decrease from 30 ft. to 27 ft. in the rulebook.
*Note: I’d prefer it go all the way down to 25 ft., but 27 is a less drastic change that more people will be on board with. If it works well, we can consider moving it to 25 the following season!
Anyway, in the current NCDA ruleset, the throw line is designated as 30 ft. from the back line:
(2.2.2.2 Attack Line – A line clearly marked 30′ from each baseline. Players may cross Halfcourt and move up to the opposite Attack Line. Blue painters tape may be used to mark as it is least likely to ruin the finish on the court.)
We propose that this “Attack Line” be changed from 30 ft. to 27 ft. and there is quite a bit of rationale behind this proposition: Continue reading “Proposed Rule Change: Change Throw Line Distance to 27 ft”
Policy Proposal – Senior Eligibility for Nationals
Seniors graduating in the winter semester (or first or second quarter for schools on quarters) are eligible to play at nationals.
Rationale: NCAA does it, nice for guys to get one more nationals, best competition at nationals
Side note: this will not be personally affecting me
Public Service Announcement
There are 75 days until Nationals. More importantly, there are 68 days until the week before Nationals. Many of you (not all) know the week before Nationals as the only time throughout the year you actively care about the rule book. The week before Nationals has a long and storied history as the week people freak out and suggest a bunch of new rules. It would be great if rule proposals could be brought up and discussed before this infamous week. So if you have an idea for a new rule or rule change, please begin to bring it up and we can discuss it prior to the week before Nationals. That is all.
~(The following has been included per the request of Zigmas Maloni)~
Deadline for Rulebook and Policy Proposals: 2017-04-01
Submission: Post in Facecool Captains’ Club or Email to the League (ncdadodgeball@gmail.com)
Criteria: Rulebook stuff is a rule proposal. Policy stuff is everything else. The Exec Board will sort it out. Additionally, there are no limits to the amount of proposals that can be submitted per team.