Stupid question...

[snowman4951]

Sorry everyone. I was wondering if this is a legal offensive Shotgun formation.

TE T G C G T TE


RB RB QB RB
I agreed to emergency coach my sons football game tomorrow.

One of the kids said this is legal. Oh the QB would be behind center. I just wanted to make sure...Thanks!

[Kirby]

I will answer your question as it relates to NFHS rules, which all high schools use except 2 states in the USA (Texas and Massachusetts).

To have a legal offensive formation, you must have 7 players lined up on your line of scrimmage. The two players on the end of the line are eligible receivers assuming they are wearing an eligible number. 5 of the 7 players on the line of scrimmage must have a number between 50 and 79 inclusive. These players are ineligible by number, position, or both.

The formation you posted would be legal. All "RB" and "TE" would be eligible to catch a forward pass assuming they are wearing an eligible number (1-49 and 80-99).

Good luck.

[snowman4951]

Thank you so much! We really do not have any blocking. I figured take my three best blockers and run them. 2 would lead block the third. I don't expect much but, we are 0-4 and haven't had a first down yet. We tried this at practice and actually it made our O-line have more confidence knowing they will have help. And, it makes me feel better knowing it's legal.They are only 10 years old playing Pop Warner. I just want to see the kids smile.Thanks again!!

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by snowman4951

Sorry everyone. I was wondering if this is a legal offensive Shotgun formation.

TE T G C G T TE


RB RB QB RB
I agreed to emergency coach my sons football game tomorrow.

One of the kids said this is legal. Oh the QB would be behind center. I just wanted to make sure...Thanks!

CANADIAN RULING:

The lineup is valid. T, G, C, G, and T are ineligible.

• They must be numbered 40-69 (note the difference compared to the numbering for US ineligible receivers). If they're not 40-69, they must report to the R.
• Both TEs must be numbered other than 40-69 to be eligible. If they are 40-69, they must report to the R.
• The RBs only have to report to the R is they intent to catch a pass and are numbered 40-69.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by snowman4951

Thank you so much! We really do not have any blocking. I figured take my three best blockers and run them. 2 would lead block the third. I don't expect much but, we are 0-4 and haven't had a first down yet. We tried this at practice and actually it made our O-line have more confidence knowing they will have help. And, it makes me feel better knowing it's legal.They are only 10 years old playing Pop Warner. I just want to see the kids smile.

In that case, I'd like to invite you to participate in Delphi's single wing forum, where they can advise you on that sort of football offense. What you've reinvented is very much in the vein of a formation called The Beast.

Robert
coaching a team of Jr. Pee-Wees (AYF) who also "do not have any blocking"

[txrefcshou]

Originally Posted by snowman4951

Thank you so much! We really do not have any blocking. I figured take my three best blockers and run them. 2 would lead block the third. I don't expect much but, we are 0-4 and haven't had a first down yet. We tried this at practice and actually it made our O-line have more confidence knowing they will have help. And, it makes me feel better knowing it's legal.They are only 10 years old playing Pop Warner. I just want to see the kids smile.Thanks again!!

If some fool calls you for an formation pen. with 10 year olds they need their head checked.

[dumbref]

Originally Posted by txrefcshou

If some fool calls you for an formation pen. with 10 year olds they need their head checked.

I think you have missed the point completely. He may not know football, but he knows about life and loves kids - football is only a tool for him.

[snowman4951]

You are so right. I want the kids to have fun and love being outside doing something good for themselves. I would also like to learn as much about the game as possible. It's weird I 've watched it all my life but, instructing it and doing it well is extremely challenging. I 'd love to join that group! Just point me in the right direction! Thanks so so much !

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by snowman4951

You are so right. I want the kids to have fun and love being outside doing something good for themselves. I would also like to learn as much about the game as possible. It's weird I 've watched it all my life but, instructing it and doing it well is extremely challenging. I 'd love to join that group! Just point me in the right direction! Thanks so so much !

http://forums.delphiforums.com/SingleWing

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by txrefcshou

If some fool calls you for an formation pen. with 10 year olds they need their head checked.

Do you not call ANY formation penalties in 10 year old football?

[klo376]

I have in instances where they put 3 RB"s in the backfield then pull the TE and put him in motion. I warned the coach first that he needed 7 on the line at the time of the snap. Three plays later he does it again then I threw it. He says the officials last week told him it was ok. But I tried to be more preventative first. My rule of thumb for that age group is warn first then if it's obvious it's drawn illegal and not simply a matter of the WR not checking if their on the line then throw it. Problem is when they do start to see it in MS then they don't understand because it hadn't been called in 4 years.

If some fool calls you for an formation pen. with 10 year olds they need their head checked.

Are you saying that if a coach played with this formation you'd let it go?

-----------TE-T-G-C-G-T----------
-------------------QB-------------

----------------RB-RB-RB----------
-------------------RB--------------

[txrefcshou]

Originally Posted by klo376

I have in instances where they put 3 RB"s in the backfield then pull the TE and put him in motion. I warned the coach first that he needed 7 on the line at the time of the snap. Three plays later he does it again then I threw it. He says the officials last week told him it was ok. But I tried to be more preventative first. My rule of thumb for that age group is warn first then if it's obvious it's drawn illegal and not simply a matter of the WR not checking if their on the line then throw it. Problem is when they do start to see it in MS then they don't understand because it hadn't been called in 4 years.



Are you saying that if a coach played with this formation you'd let it go?

-----------TE-T-G-C-G-T----------
-------------------QB-------------

----------------RB-RB-RB----------
-------------------RB--------------

I sure would not call it without talking to the coach and making sure he knew why it was wrong. So I guess the answer is yes we would have run at least one flagless play from that formation with 10 year olds.

[klo376]

I had one coach of this age group who had 3 RB's then set his TE in motion where the C snappped the ball right before he got to the QB. I told the coach by putting that TE in motion he was leaving his line short. I do give them a lot of leeway but I call really obvious stuff such as this. He told me that in their league they onley need 6 on the line. I asked for it to be shown to me before they ran it again, then I waved that one off. But yes I did give them a freebie. If they come out like this

-----------------TE-T-G-C-G-T---------------
----WR-----------------QB------------WR----

--------------------RB------RB---------------

or

-----------------T-G-C-G-T-TE---------------
---WR---------------QB----------------------
---------WR----------------------------------
-----------------RB------RB------------------

I let them go. The 2nd one I'll even let go in MS a few times then tell then to ask if they're on the line (if we have coverage on that side). I'm more likely to call it at MS if the both WR's are on the same level.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by txrefcshou

I sure would not call it without talking to the coach and making sure he knew why it was wrong. So I guess the answer is yes we would have run at least one flagless play from that formation with 10 year olds.

Don't you think that team could've gotten even an inadvertent advantage from snapping from a formation with a greater than allowed ratio of backs to linemen? Since they commonly don't apply eligible receiver numbering at that age, how about the extra potential pass receiver gained thereby? Or the easier job of lead blocking one would have starting in the backfield compared to pulling from the line?

Robert

[txrefcshou]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Don't you think that team could've gotten even an inadvertent advantage from snapping from a formation with a greater than allowed ratio of backs to linemen? Since they commonly don't apply eligible receiver numbering at that age, how about the extra potential pass receiver gained thereby? Or the easier job of lead blocking one would have starting in the backfield compared to pulling from the line?

Robert

Very respectfully, in my opinion, no.