Great, I have to deal with A-11

[Theisey]

What NFHS ruling?
As far the we know, they have been silent on this in 2008. Not even a peep saying no rule is being violated.

If you have something direct from the NF, please share it with us.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Theisey

What NFHS ruling?
As far the we know, they have been silent on this in 2008. Not even a peep saying no rule is being violated.

If you have something direct from the NF, please share it with us.

If no rule is violated, then why state that something is legal? I'm just relaying information that I received directly from my SI. According to him the NFHS has told the state interpreters that the A11 is not illegal. Where he got the NC thing about the coaching staff, I couldn't tell you, but that is what he told us. Bottom line is that I will soon see this thing in person. It should be interesting since this team already runs a no huddle spread.

[Theisey]

Originally Posted by daggo66

If no rule is violated, then why state that something is legal? I'm just relaying information that I received directly from my SI. According to him the NFHS has told the state interpreters that the A11 is not illegal. Where he got the NC thing about the coaching staff, I couldn't tell you, but that is what he told us. Bottom line is that I will soon see this thing in person. It should be interesting since this team already runs a no huddle spread.

First of all, a no huddle spread offense is not the A11 offense. NH/Spreads have been formations used for years. Nothing unusual with regards to officiating that formation.

Because a few states are saying the formation is illegal is all the more reason to the NF to step up to the plate and tell the rest of the "united" state associations that this A11 IS or ISNOT legal. That's why!

[GoodScout]

Back to daggo66's point, I notice that even the best teams that run the offense often are guilty of illegal formations, ineligibles downfield, etc.

Were I in your shoes (and thank you, GHSA, that I'm not!) I would work hard to make sure I flagged each and every time you have an ineligible downfield, 6 on the line, etc. If you and your crew even think you have such a foul, go ahead and drop the flag and talk out what each of you saw after the play's over. If you have to wave it off, no big deal. But if a team wins with an A-11, you want to make sure they won because of their ability, not because they gained an unfair advantage because your crew let them get away with fouls.

I still think they're exploiting a gap in the NHFS rules, and I feel comfortable NHFS will fix it next year (shame on them for not doing it this year). Any coach that tries this is just doing his program a disservice, because next year he'll have to teach them a totally new offense.

[daggo66]

I plan on approaching this scrimmage with the mindset of making sure they are at the letter of the law, thus making it easier on all concerned when the season opens. I do believe the NFHS will make a direct statement regarding this next year. In the case of the team in my area, it really isn't a matter or learning something new. I've made the case from day 1 that this is not a new offense. It is a new formation. The offense is the same west coast spread that has been around for years. The difference is the numbering and the shift to the line. This coach is a pro at the no huddle spread. All he is doing is adding new formations and shifts. He is not changing his offense and he will not change it next year if the rule changes, he just will have to wear legal numbers.

[Warrenkicker]

So we know that A-11 will not be allowed in at least three states. Let's hear from some of the people in those states. Is the A-11 offense illegal for all downs or is it illegal for scrimmage downs where it is obvious that a kick won't be attempted? Are you using the college rule?

If the individual states have not clarified this statement then they have basically stated that the numbering exception is not legal this year. I don't think they wanted to do that so what exactly was said.

[daggo66]

You need to clarify NFHS states. So far I only know of NC and the District of Columbia. Texas uses NCAA rules.

[BktBallRef]

Warren, the A-11 is illegal in NC. It makes no difference what the down is.

daggo66, you need to read more forums. The A-11 is illegal in NC, GA, LA, WV and the District of Columbia. There maybe others that we are not aware of.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Theisey

First of all, a no huddle spread offense is not the A11 offense. NH/Spreads have been formations used for years. Nothing unusual with regards to officiating that formation.

Because a few states are saying the formation is illegal is all the more reason to the NF to step up to the plate and tell the rest of the "united" state associations that this A11 IS or ISNOT legal. That's why!

Of course the spread offense is not the A-11. My whole point from day one is that the A-11 is not a new offense. It is a FORMATION. The spread is the offense.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Warrenkicker

I'll play devil's advocate then. Say a team comes up to the LOS on 4th down with 11 players wearing eligible numbers and gets into punt formation. These are all athletes so they are all wearing eligible numbers. What would be the indicator to an official that this formation becomes unsportsmanlike?

Warren, if you want to PM me, I'll be glad to discuss it with you. But I don't want to into a big discussion here, where I feel I have to justify what I post from posters who I know aren't going to agree. Drop me a PM on this board or the other.

Originally Posted by daggo66

Of course the spread offense is not the A-11. My whole point from day one is that the A-11 is not a new offense. It is a FORMATION. The spread is the offense.

Don't piss on my boot and try to convince me it's raining.

That simply is not true. You can try to make it sound that simple but Tom is right. It simply isn't. Had the Fed got off their a$$ and addressed this thing from the beginning, we wouldn't have states going in different directions.

[Warrenkicker]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Warren, if you want to PM me, I'll be glad to discuss it with you. But I don't want to into a big discussion here, where I feel I have to justify what I post from posters who I know aren't going to agree. Drop me a PM on this board or the other.

Well I am just not seeing how to PM from this board from this work computer. I would like to discuss it a bit so maybe I will try the other board. However I am just curious about the theory North Carolina is using to determine legality. I don't feel you have to justify anything to me at least. You have to do what you are told.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Warrenkicker

Well I am just not seeing how to PM from this board from this work computer. I would like to discuss it a bit so maybe I will try the other board. However I am just curious about the theory North Carolina is using to determine legality. I don't feel you have to justify anything to me at least. You have to do what you are told.

Oh, I know that. I'm glad to discuss it with you. My PM was turned off on this site for some reason. It's back on now.