A-11 Offense ??

[Bob M.]

Originally Posted by goldenwings68

...To me, their initial position, was not on their LOS, but behind the LOS--thus, breaking the exception rule---

Comments, observations, agreements, disagreements???????!!!!!??

REPLY: I don't agree. If a player is not on the line between the ends, he's not operating under the exception. Nothing wrong with that. However, if he subsequently moves to a position on the line between the ends--now he's operating under the exception. I think the wording could use some tweaking, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with an eligible number somewhere in the backfield shifting to a position on the line between the ends and becoming an exception. It's only when he gets to this position that he is "a player in the game under the exception." Think about it...if the rule was intended as you suggest, the player could never be in the huddle.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by TXMike

Yes, BUT>>>>> that deception is limited to a maximum of 5 potential receivers. Your concept makes 10 potential receivers. This is patently unfair.

Difficult to administer, sure. Patently unfair, absurd.

Over the years there have been times certain things about football have declared inviolate, saying not just that the rules are (at a given time) such-and-such, but that they must always remain so because to do otherwise would be unfair, against the spirit of the game, etc. And then they changed them.

During the time I've followed football, such has been the case with use of the hands & arms in blocking. At some point in the 19th Century, after interference had become an accepted part of the game, it was decided, well, that's OK, as long as they don't hold. And then in fairly short order it was decided that using the hands & arms to push was as bad as holding, and that's the way it stayed for generations. Statements were put into the rule book by Parke Davis and others saying not only that the rule was the rule, but that use of the hands might make for an interesting game, but not one to be called "football". In other words, the rule for that time on use of the hands & arms was taken to be a defining characteristic of football.

Anyway, for various considerations regarding safety, ease of administration, and desired balance between offense & defense (which of course is a matter of momentary taste), that all changed. From requiring the hands & arms to be kept close to the body and the palms facing away from the opponent, it's now been changed to legalize pushing. Still not holding or pulling, but pushing. What about all the old statements about that not being football any longer? Gee, I guess if we're playing football now, that must not have been football then!

And so on. The forward pass was "unfair" and "not football". Similarly free substitution. Similarly helmets. Similarly blocking. They even took the goals off the goal lines; the pros did so twice! (Yeah, yeah, juggler, we know.)

Where this A-11 is going, who knows. If I had to, I'd guess Fed will do away with it by bringing back the pullover numbers. But don't pretend there's something inherent about football that requires its removal.

Robert

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by goldenwings68

Rule 7, section 2, Art 5b--states "...A player in the game under the exception MUST assume an INITIAL POSITION on his LOS between the ends and remain an ineligible forward-pass receiver during the down unless the pass is touched by B.

To me, an initial position would be after breaking the huddle, the players in under the exception, would immediately go take a position on the line of scrimmage---but according to the way this system works, after breaking the huddle, one player goes over the ball (the center, and the rest spread out and set behind the LOS and then shift into whatever play or formation they will use for the concerned play-----

To me, their initial position, was not on their LOS, but behind the LOS--thus, breaking the exception rule---

Comments, observations, agreements, disagreements???????!!!!!??

I think it's pretty simple: that after the ball is RFP, any player who assumes a set position legally on the line is in an "initial" position on the line, and remains so until s/he shifts or becomes legally a back in motion or until the ball becomes live or no longer RFP. The player may or may not remain a lineman while or after moving to a position other than the "initial" one. When the ball is put in play the position each player came from may or may not have been hir "initial" one.

So let's say they don't huddle. When the ref whistles RFP, some of them are milling around, and some of them are set. We don't know who of A is legally on their line (meaning that none of them are) until the snapper assumes a position with the ball. They don't all have to be positioned at the same time, so any time one sets "on the line", they get a mental tag. One of the things to note is whether they're on either end of the line, regardless of whether there are 7 yet on the line. The snapper might be for a time the only player on the line, and the snapper is then on the end of the line. Which end? Both! Obviously you need to have at least 3 simultaneously on the line for any of them to be "between the ends".

Robert

[goldenwings68]

Bob--I do not count the initial position to be the huddle----once breaking the huddle or coming in after the huddle, the rule states that anyone in under the exception must assume a position on his LOS between the ends---

This formation does not have any players from 50-79 in on the field and they are there for every play--so where is the exception?

I do not know if they use a huddle, but the fact remains they all line up, except a center, in the backfield off the LOS and then X-number of them move.shift onto the LOS between two ends.

To me, the exception rule was not created for this purpose and everyone here knows that, plain and simple----the exception rule was brought into play to give the punting team a chance to put in some faster, more agile players into the game to go down under a punt, not create an offense where there are only players wearing eligible numbers none of them are really there to assume a position under the exception.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by goldenwings68

Bob--I do not count the initial position to be the huddle----once breaking the huddle or coming in after the huddle, the rule states that anyone in under the exception must assume a position on his LOS between the ends---

You don't have to count the huddle, because the rule only takes effect for a player once that player assumes a position on the line. That's "an initial position on his line". The player could hop all over the place before that, setting here & there, but only if and when that player sets on the line does he get that mental tag.

Robert

[goldenwings68]

The exception rule states that when a player comes in the game as a replacement for a teammate who wears 50-79, under the rule, he then becomes a replacement for that player and his position and therefore, he is an interior linesman and cannot be hopping all over the field waiting to decide where he will light---as this A-11 offense does.

They have 11 players with eligible numbers in on every play----where is the exception? And which player is in for which player?

Naw--the offense is in my humble opinion, illegal--------

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by goldenwings68

The exception rule states that when a player comes in the game as a replacement for a teammate who wears 50-79, under the rule, he then becomes a replacement for that player and his position and therefore, he is an interior linesman and cannot be hopping all over the field waiting to decide where he will light---as this A-11 offense does.

Sorry GW68 but your interpretation is wrong. Never heard of anyone with such an interp.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Kurt, if you really were just in this to make your team better 99% of us would have no idea who you or your offense were and it certainly wouldn't have a name or a website. It's quite obvious that your real goal is to turn a profit. The sad thing for your team is that by bringing all this attention you very well could cause the NFHS to close the loophole. If you had kept your mouth shut, most likely no one would have noticed your little school running your little offense. Since you are trying to exploit something that is clearly an exception to the rules, you are making the rules committee look bad and will no doubt force them to make a change, thereby eliminating your little business venture. Please stop hiding behind your "innovation" and stop bringing your info-mercial to this web site.

A truly outstanding post!!

[goldenwings68]

My interpt??????

Rule 7, Section 2, Art 5b.....Exception: When A sets or shiefts into a scrimmage-kick formation any A player numbered 1-49 or 80-99 MAY TAKE THE POSITION of any A player numbered 50 to 79. A player IN THE GAME under this EXCEPTION----MUST assume an initial position on his line of scrimmage between the ends and he REMAINS an ineligible forward-pass receiver during that down unless the pass is touched by B.

So, in my opinion, if 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 come in for 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, they then have to be on the line between the ends----but according to this formation, those five players join the other six, say numbered, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as the offensive team for that play and the next play, and the next, etc, and each play, a different set of numbers go on the line and others remain the eligible players---thus, who are the players in as the exception players?

How many plays can you do back to back under the exception before it is no longer an exception, but the rule?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by goldenwings68

My interpt??????

Rule 7, Section 2, Art 5b.....Exception: When A sets or shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation any A player numbered 1-49 or 80-99 MAY TAKE THE POSITION of any A player numbered 50 to 79. A player IN THE GAME under this EXCEPTION----MUST assume an initial position on his line of scrimmage between the ends and he REMAINS an ineligible forward-pass receiver during that down unless the pass is touched by B.

You'd better read that rule again, particularly the part that says "ANY A player numbered" and "MAY take the position."

When 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 come into the game, they are NOT REQUIRED to take the positions of 50, 51, 52, 53, and 53. They MAY take those positions or any of the 11 players in the game at that point MAY take those positions.

Further, the POSITION only applies to their final position on the LOS.

Sorry partner. Your interp of the rule doesn't hold water.

[goldenwings68]

NO---The rule is stating that the coach MAY replace any player numbered 50-79 with any player numbered 1-49 or 80-99 and if the coach does do this in a SKF, he is using the Exception part of Rule 7, Section 2, Art 5--the rule then states that a player in under that exception, let me quote the rule here---"A player in the game under this exception MUST assume an initial position on his LOS between the ends...."

There are normally 5 players in the game wearing 50-79, the interior line, all inelgible receivers---this offense, takes those five guys out of the game, replaces them with five guys wearing 1-49 or 80-99, all eligible, thus making 11 eligible receivers in the game---Now, as the rule states, those in the game under the exception, you know, those that replaced those five offensive linemen, are supposed to assume a position on their LOS between the ends---now, on one play, they might, but on another only a couple do and a couple more of the other eligibles assumne those positions, and on the next, another group of them do---now, no one has left the field during this series and on each play, a different set of guys became lineman--The original rule, the exception was designed for the coach to replace a few interior linemen with more agile type players on a scrimmage kick situation to go down under the punt----

This is not happening here in this offense--the exception is no longer the exception and has become the rule due to bending of the rule and officials not following the spirit nor intent of the rule. In other words, there is no longer a replacement of players wearing 50-79 by players wearing 1-49 or 80-99 because no one ever came into the game wearing 50-79 to be replaced by a player wearing 1-49 or 80-99 and they are not punting on those plays---

Again, you can say I am messed up here, but you know and I know, this is a giant bending of the rule and becoming a gross miscarriage of fair play/sportsmanship.

[BktBallRef]

Let me ask you something. 6 eligible numbers and 5 ineligible numbers are on the field. After the down is over, all 5 ineligible players leave the field ALONG with 3 of the eligible numbers. 8 eligible numbers now enter the field. All 11 leave the field and 11 eligible numbers enter the field. How do you know who replaced who? YOU DON'T.

"...ANY A player numbered 1-49 or 80-99 MAY take the position of any A player numbered 50 to 79."

That's crystal clear. ANY A player MAY take those 5 positions. It does NOT have to be the 5 players who just came into the game.

You're wrong. That's why no one else is agreeing with you.

[goldenwings68]

I really could care less whether anyone agrees with me or not--the fact remains--read the ruleWhch states--"A player in the game under the exception must assume an initial position on his line of scrimmage..."

Now you are telling me we could have 11 players in the game under the exception????? There are only five players that fit the original intent of the exception rule--those that normally wear numbers between 50 and 79-According to you, the coach could send in eleven players in under the exception and any of those eleven can become the five on any play without ever leaving the field---Thus no player wearing the number 50-79 to be replaced by a player wearing a number 1-49 or 80-99. Now, tell me again where I am mistaken?

You're telling me that from the very start of a game, this offence can take the field never having a player out on the field with a number 50-79 and be in a scrimmage kick formation the entire game using players numbering 1-49 or 80-99? Can you tell me where the exception to the rule applies here? Is this the intent of the exception?

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by goldenwings68

You're telling me that from the very start of a game, this offence can take the field never having a player out on the field with a number 50-79 and be in a scrimmage kick formation the entire game using players numbering 1-49 or 80-99? Can you tell me where the exception to the rule applies here? Is this the intent of the exception?

That is the crux of the argument on the A-11 isn't it? That Team A can "cutesy" it's way around the numbering requirement by being in the NFHS loosely defined " scrimmage kick formation" ?

[goldenwings68]

Rule 7 section 2, Art 5b reads----"At the snap at least five players on the line of scrimmage MUST be numbered 50-79..."

Exception: When A sets or shifts into a SCRIMMAGE KICK FORMATION any A player numbered 1-49 or 80-99 may take the position of any A player numbered 50 to 79 (meaning five players can be sent in to meet this exception)

This offense is allowing the coach to start the game or any set of downs with 11 players on the field wearing numbers 1-49 or 80-99 without ever having five players on the field numbering 50-79 and operating in the SKR the entire game and never using the exception because he never had any players meeting the requirements of wearing the numbers 50-79---Thus in my opinion, breaking the rule from the start.