a11 Offense - 11 potentially eligible receivers

[dvasques]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I don't understand your question, so I'll simply explain the rule.

Unless you're NOT in a scrimmage kick formation, you must have 5 linemen, numbered 50-79 on the LOS at the snap.

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?

[Theisey]

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?

[KurtBryan]

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]

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

Dear Officials:

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.

www.PiedmontFootball.com
www.A11Offense.com
510-410-4717
[email protected]

Gee, I wonder why?

[KurtBryan]

Dear Officials:

I hope you had a great Christmas Holiday.

I have really enjoyed this forum and greatly respect every one of your opinions.

I spent a lot of time on the phone today with Coaches and Officials from various parts of the country who had contacted us about the A-11.

And even though a couple of guys were not fans of the A-11 offense, many more of them were totally in favor of it - because of the possibilities it brings to the game for the kids and the sport itself.

There has been such a strong and positive response over the last few months (with some negative ones too), and based on what several Coaches and Officials have said to me lately about the direction that the game of football is headed - it seems very likely that the A-11 offense is here to stay, and in only one season of use it has quickly done tremendous good for a small team like Piedmont. In future years there might be teams that would like to try something like the A-11 if they so desire.

Thank you very much for all of your replies and feedback and I wish you all a Happy New Year.

Sincerely,

Kurt Bryan
510-410-4717

[BktBallRef]

While I realize that you would like nothing more than for the A-11 to stick around, tht doesn't mean it will.

I know that I've written to my state asscoiation concerning it and know others that have as well.

Only time will tell.

[KurtBryan]

Dear Officials:

I am going to try and relay something as gently as possible...

Unfortunately for a few of the the "neysayers" on this board, it appears you have tried to champion a cause to eliminate Piedmont's A-11 offense because you are not in favor of it for your own personal beliefs.

Instead, after yours truly has been asked by your peers and coaches to help review the details about the A-11 on this board and others -you have not taken into account some critical points:

If some people clamor for a rule change to outlaw the A-11 - but after its first season of use the A-11 has been "mostly" viewed as a good thing by the various factions listed in earlier posts (coaches/officials) - then the NFHS will have to be Honest and Diligent in its post-season review, of course as will the CIF.

Just like they did in their Pre-season ruling...that not only is the A-11 OK to use, but it does Not violate the spirit of the rules and it does Not make a travesty of the game.

Subsequently it has proved to be fun and exciting.

In short, the NFHS and CIF are not going to be negligent in their post-season review. Instead - and it has been pointed out to me multiple times over the last several months, IF the powers-that-be feel the need, they are going to discuss things with the actual people who had first-hand experience with the A-11, and not simply take the word of people who might not like it but have zero application with it.

Why?

Because the overwhelming amount of coaches and officials involved in Piedmont's games did not have problems with the A-11 and many of them liked it very much for their own personal reasons, and that has been well documented.

Instead, on here, there seems to be some people "banging some pots" because they do not like it, even though they have never coached against it nor officiated an A-11 game.

Do you get my point?

I am not trying to convince the negative people who view the A-11 as not good - because I understand you hold your own personal views.

But there is a real "disconnect" between some peoples' negative perceived view and the fun, positive REALITY of what this new offense has done for the kids and game.

* As promised to the NFHS and CIF before the season began....after the 2007 season using the A-11, we sent DVD copies of our games and a detailed accounting of how things turned out this year. Not only did we follow up by carefully again reviewing the Mission statements for those groups and why the A-11 was a great match on those points for the kids, but also what excellent feedback we had received.

I apologize for being long-winded and I hope these points are not ill-received.

Sincerley,

Kurt

[dvasques]

So, there can be on no scrimmage kick formation down, A63 lined up in the backfield and he will be eligible?

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by dvasques

So, there can be on no scrimmage kick formation down, A63 lined up in the backfield and he will be eligible?

NEVER. He is ineligble by NUMBER.

[mikesears]

Originally Posted by dvasques

So, there can be on no scrimmage kick formation down, A63 lined up in the backfield and he will be eligible?

Let me try to help because the NFL rules have more stringent numbering requirements than either high school or college.

For both high school and college, by rule, a team is required to have a minimum of five players numbered 50-79 on the line scrimmage (note that there isn't a maximum number). Any player wearing a number between 50-79 is ineligible to receive a forward pass regardless of where he lines up on the field. High School and College rules do not have a reporting system to allow ineligibles become eligible simply by reporting.

There is an exception in both rule codes to the five players required to be wearing 50-79. If a team goes into scrimmage kick formation, any number of linemen wearing 50-79 may be replaced by player(s) wearing an eligible number. But if these players wearing eligible numbers initially take an interior lineman's position, they are ineligible for the down. High school and college rules differ on what a scrimmage kick formation is. High School rules state a team is in scrimmage kick formation when a player is lined up 7 or more yards behind the center with no player in position to take a hand-to-hand snap. College rules add that is MUST BE OBVIOUS that a kick may be attempted (based upon the formation).

Hope this helps and hope I got everything correct

[JugglingReferee]

The Canadian game is so much less complicated!

What did you guys do to your flavour of football?!

[Bob M.]

REPLY: Coach Bryan...I don't believe anyone here doubts that you did the proper research on this new formation, and that the NF and your state association was thorough in its review of the legality of the A11. But one thing to remember is this: Many, many rules in Federation, NCAA, and even the NFL come about because well-meaning, innovative people learn the rules and "push the envelope." While what you're doing is perfectly legal, there is indeed the possibility that once it's observed and the Federation determines that it unduly disrupts the competitive balance between offense and defense, they may very well take steps to restrict it's use. For rulesmakers, maintaining that competitive ballance is the primary driver for rule changes.

[KurtBryan]

Dear Bob and Officials:

Part of Bob's Quote: "While what you're doing is perfectly legal, there is indeed the possibility that once it's observed and the Federation determines that it unduly disrupts the competitive balance between offense and defense, they may very well take steps to restrict it's use. For rulesmakers, maintaining that competitive balance is the primary driver for rule changes."

Coach Bryan's Reply.........

"Let us all hope the NFHS truly abides by its mission statement and intent to forever keep the game of high school football pure in its truest sense.

Being so...not only does the A-11 Offense HELP to ensure/maintain and foster a competitive balance between the entire spectrum of the much smaller vs. larger football teams forced to play each other, but in many regards it is the ONLY way to do it. If competitive balance is under review, then let us all hope the people at NFHS honestly reviewing the results of the A-11 Offense TRULY look at how great a decision it was to let it go forward.

By all Accounts this past season the A-11 was a huge success:

1. For the Kids
2. For the Fans
3. For the future of Football
4. For the Piedmont Community
5. For the Officials who worked our games
6. For the CIF and NCS as Piedmont made the playoffs but was then defeated by eventual NCS 2A East Bay Champion Las Lomas - most folks would call that VERY competitive, etc.

In terms of does the A-11, "unduly disrupt" the game of football. Nothing could be further from the truth. And as has been stated many times now, players, fans, coaches and Officials working the Piedmont games this year were not only OK with it, but we received Many compliments from top-notch Officials who worked our games.

* There are MUCH bigger problem fish to fry in High School Football and debating whether or not to abolish the A-11 Offense is not only foolish, but downright discriminatory to boot.

If the NFHS, State Federations and Associations governing High School Football want to Really tackle a Major Problem in High School football, let them please put STEROID USE on the top of the list.

STEROID USE by high school athletes is out of control and I would be happy to sit on a committee to help solve the problem.

I appreciate the forum...

Sincerely,

Kurt Bryan
HFC, Piedmont H.S.

[TXMike]

Coach Bryan - In case you did not see my sumamry of the applicable rule history here, please let me repeat:

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, and the defense should know who they are, 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. )

[With_Two_Flakes]

Originally Posted by dvasques

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?

dvasques - I can't speak with authority on NFL Rules which I know you are currently using in Brazil.

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.