![]() |
|
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
In NCAA rules, forward passes were first allowed in 1906. At the same time, the rulemakers recognized the need for limiting eligibility and that change which authorized one forward pass said there had to be 7 players on the line of scrimmage and only the 2 on the ends would be eligible to receive that now legal forward pass. At that time, nobody was numbered. The requirement to even have numbers came in the game did not come until 1937. By 1966 teams were taking advantage of the rules and running tackle eligible passes. So to address this inequity, the rulemakers first required there be 5 players numbered 50-79 on the line of scrimmage and all 5 would be ineligible. This was not loosened until 1981 when the specific exception was put in for scrimmage kick situations. And even then, those who were coming into the game as exceptions had to report to the U so he could advise the defense.
The point is that the rules have been clear, since the advent of the forward pass, that only certain players should be eligible so as to keep the game balanced for offense and defense. The A11 offense is a clear attempt to circumvent this history of balance keeping. (The high school federation left the NCAA in 1930 so I can't speak to what they did from 1930 on. ) |
|
|||
|
Quote:
Unless you're NOT in a scrimmage kick formation, you must have 5 linemen, numbered 50-79 on the LOS at the snap.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott "You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith Last edited by BktBallRef; Thu Dec 20, 2007 at 10:50am. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
That's part of what I was looking for. So you can't have less than 5 inelible numbered men on the line. And can only have more if you report change of elegibility. Now, the other part of what I wanted to ask is. Can I have a Tight End report he's turning into an ineligible man and then have only 4 numbered from 50-79 plus the TE on the line as an offensive line? Or there is no such change of elegibility? |
|
|||
|
NF and NCAA rules do not have anything in the books regarding "reporting" of eligibility status.
Get that out of your head unless you are worried about the NFL. A player is eligible because of the position he has lined up as and by the number he is wearing. The defense and officials have to know who is and who isn't eligible on every snap. This A-11 formation complicates this. All that can change when in so call "scrimmage kick formation" where you can have all eligible by "number" players taking the positions of what would normally have been an "ineligible" player by his position on the line. Make sense? |
|
|||
|
Sharing of Ideas about A-11 Offense
Dear Officials:
Please let me say how much I appreciate your candor regarding our new offensive system - the A-11 Offense. Not only is your perspective appreciated but also enlightening, whether it be negatvie or positive. * What is critical to remember during these discussions, is that we took the time (more than a year) to research, submit, discuss, explain and diligently review everything we had developed in writing with the NFHS and CIF. Not only were those powers-that-be great and very keen, but they also knew this might be a potentially groundbreaking new system. Whether or not that is the case regarding the A-11 offense is not the point, respectfully, the due diligence has already been completed, the first season of use was fun and successful, and the players, fans, coaches and officials liked and/or had no problem with it - especially the Officials who worked our games, etc. Game notes: we had very few problems with illegal formations all year long, just the opposite - very, very few infractions indeed in that area because everybody is so spread out it is easy for Officials to see the grouping and/or who is on or off the L.O.S., etc. We change the snap count often and do get illegal procedure calls, and normal amount of holding calls, but very, very rare for illegal man downfield at all. Hope this helps and we are thrilled with the response nationwide and again, the game is for the KIDS, and this new system makes it more fun for them, allows smaller teams a better chance to compete, and as with any system, there are plusses and minuses. Happy Holidays. Kurt Bryan Head Football Coach Piedmont H.S. www.PiedmontFootball.com www.A11Offense.com 510-410-4717 [email protected] Last edited by KurtBryan; Thu Dec 20, 2007 at 01:59pm. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
NFL As I understand it NFL rules, on normal downs you must have at least 5 men 50-79 on the LOS. If for some trick play, another 50-79 numbered player comes in and reports himself eligible to the Referees, then he can catch a forward pass. On a scrimmage kick formation, you dont need to have those 5 men numbered 50-79. Often the long snapper has a different number, also the team might choose players who normally play defense (as they want people who can tackle the punt returner). NCAA In NCAA (which I understand Brazil plans to use in the future), on normal downs you must have at least 5 men 50-79 on the LOS. You can have more if you want, but even if they are in a position that might make them eligible, they are NOT ELIGIBLE because of their number. There is nothing in the NCAA Rules about reporting to the Refs, so nothing they do can make them eligible. If a team want to use this type of formation, they can if they wish - perhaps having extra linemen helps with running plays, but it means they will not have as many players eligible to catch a forward pass. On a scrimmage kick formation, you don't need to have those 5 men numbered 50-79. Often the long snapper has a different number, also the team might choose players who normally play defense (as they want people who can tackle the punt returner). However the NCAA definition of scrimmage kick formation includes the wording "and it is obvious that a kick will be attempted" which generally for most of a game we would interpret as meaning 4th down (you could think of other specific situations). This whole message thread comes about because in Federation High School rules, there is not the same definition of scrimmage kick formation, hence a loophole that this particular school and coach have exploited. This could not happen under NFL or NCAA Rules.
__________________
Sorry Death, you lose.... It was Professor Plum! |
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
One impetus to the change was the adoption of platoon substitution. With the liberaliz'n of substitution rules by NCAA (Fed had already been easier) in the 1960s, It was anticipated that it would be easier to get into the game on offense someone at an ostensible interior line position who was a good receiver and could line up at end at any time. I don't recall when Fed introduced eligible receiver numbering, but in general since the 1940s Fed has been more liberal regarding the forward pass than has been NCAA, partly in recognition of the fact that the necessary talent is harder to come by in high school. Fed legalized passing from in or behind the NZ when NCAA still required it to be from 5 yards behind, and Fed was the only major code to allow more than one forward pass per down. Fed gave consideration to awarding a TD for ordinary DPI in the end zone, but did not adopt it. Robert |
|
|||
|
Excellent info
Dear Officials:
Thank you for the high level discussion, much appreciated. The post prior to this reply stated that the people in the NFHS realized talent is harder to come by in high school than it is in college, etc. That is exactly the reason the A-11 Offense gives public schools like tiny Piedmont a fighting chance vs. much larger and/or private schools. Sincerely, Kurt Bryan HFC, Piedmont H.S. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: https://forum.officiating.com/football/40451-a11-offense-11-potentially-eligible-receivers.html
|
||||
| Posted By | For | Type | Date | |
| 1st Batch of A-11 Video (Thanks to Coach Huey)! | This thread | Refback | Wed Nov 21, 2012 01:48pm | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| A-11 Offense ?? | TXMike | Football | 203 | Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:43pm |
| Illegal sub or partic. on the Receivers | BoBo | Football | 15 | Mon Oct 24, 2005 09:35am |
| Such a potentially great resource | bossref | Basketball | 36 | Thu Oct 06, 2005 06:09pm |
| Eligible/Ineligible? | WyMike | Football | 19 | Fri Oct 22, 2004 03:43pm |
| Elgible Receivers | Snappenhaggle | Football | 8 | Tue Aug 17, 2004 12:16am |