Doesn't the fact that you are putting this out sort of signify that it isn't within the realm of the rest of the football world. If the A-11 has to have it's own top ten plays, instead of making the list with the rest of the world, it says it isn't real football. Just like in order for it to exist it has to have a special exception, it now has to have a special top 10...hmmmmmmm

We had one school a few years ago that tried exploiting the "roughing the snapper" rule on a crucial play by lining the QB 7 yards deep at the snap. No flag.

I told him he'd better protect himself because it appeared to me the QB was only 6.5 yards deep.

feedback
 

Dear Officials:

It is OK if we are putting out a highlight show featuring various teams using the offense...no big deal, it is fun, and the kids love it.

It is also OK if some of you guys do not like the offense, many more do, respectfully.

We had a very solid officiating crew work our game when we went to Southern California to play Laguna Beach. They officiated the game well, made some good calls and things went smoothly.

Prior to the game in my pre-game chat on the field with all of the officials, the sincere gentleman wearing the White Hat that night made it clear that football like the A-11 IS the game's future. Those are his words, not yours truly. Again, just another experienced Official who sees and understands where football is headed, and has made it clear to us in words or writing.

There is plenty of room in America for traditional football and also new brands of football, and I love them all, and respect them all.

Have a great day.

KB

Dear Coach,

This is not a fan site. We do not care what plays are in the top 10 or 100. This is a site for officials. We have discussed your offense extensively and the fact you keep pushing it has brought many states to outlaw it and the NF will likely do the same. This is not about tradition verse new age. This is about rules that have loopholes and are almost always closed to either clarify or disallow certain actions. This is why rules committees change rules all the time in all sports. And if you look at the tone of the country and the NF committee, what one White Hat thinks is not going to change the reality. Almost half the country has outlawed the offense already and states that use NCAA rules will not be allow this offense either. I do not see the NCAA throwing out their rules (or the NFL) to make this offense acceptable. And I seriously doubt that many schools are going to run an offense that might make their kids non-recruitable to other levels because they have not worked a more conventional offense. Nice try, now it is time for you to go away. Honestly this is starting to sound like a bunch of spam than a solid discussion about a silly offense.

Peace

Thanks, Rut, and I have posted other questions on officiating topics and/or replied to many on this board and others, etc.

1. It is NOT true that nearly half of the 48 states have banned the offense. It is 8 states plus D.C., A-11 is Legal in 40 states.

2. Recruiting of Kids: It is Not true the A-11 hurts kids chances of playing collegiate football. The Coaches who talk to us, LIKE the fact they see kids playing in space (most college teams are spread out now), because it gives them a chance to gauge the kid's speed, quickness, agility, strength and reaction time, because most of the players are easy to see, etc.

3. This is an excellent forum about many officiating issues on several threads, and No this is Not spam. I am not the one who brought it up, but it is important to keep the truth out there, when other people deliberately spread mistruths.

4. Like was said, earlier...there is PLENTY of room in America for traditional wonderful football, and new cutting edge brands of football as well.

Have a great week, and thank you.

KB

I find it interesting that you put more stock in one white hat's view and not another. How transparent that only those that support your view have any credibility.

I echo Rut. Get lost.

Kurt, this has stopped being about the rules along time ago. No one cares about what some unnamed person feels about this offense. I put my name to an article that you and I both were referenced and I do not feel this is even close to the future of football. For one it was hard to run and the team that ran it lost their first 3 games. And the team in question did not even run this offense for his lower level teams. His lower level teams were running a version of their previous offense. The coach already ran the offense in a scrimmage kick formation and he already passed all the time. When he tried to run shifts and motion, his team was so confused they could not move the ball. And as I said before, a fast quick team is going to make it very difficult to play against. If a spread offense is difficult for a team to run, this offense is even more difficult to run because so many people have to do things they would not ordinarily do. And if you think a coach is going to evaluate players based on a offense that is a gimmick and not see how they can fit them into the skill sets they have to teach, then you will have to show me a person that is playing at the major college level that has been in this offense and had success. I can tell you the team I saw, I do not know if anyone on that offense is something special as a player. Running in space is one thing, creating the space is another all together. Sorry Kurt, this sounds like spam when all you are talking about is what people think. I am in sales too and nothing you have said is going to change what people think about this offense or what the NF Committee might do in the future. And you tried to make it seem that everyone on the NF was on board. It is clear by the Chicago Tribune article written about 3 weeks ago that the NF is not completely sold.

Peace

What about the other two? (If Texas is one because they play by NCAA rules, that's fine, but is there another state that does? Or are we leaving Alaska or somebody out?)

Am I the only one who is confused about the "banning" by various states of a particular offensive set that appears to be within the rules of the game? Are they saying, "We just don't want to deal with it, it looks too complicated, la la la la la I am not listening to you la la la la?" And just saying "BOOM. That's it. Case closed. We ban it. Even though it appears there's no real, actual rule strictly against it?"

I know there's nobody really to appeal to, no Supreme Court.

IMHO, if the Fed just closes the loophole on 7-2-5b exception and makes the scrimmage kick formation comply with the other rules on numbering in the interior line (or says it can only be in an obvious punting situation or somesuch), that puts the A11 out of business with a lot less muss and fuss and gives every state something to lean on.

Because as it stands, I can't understand an arbitrary ban by some states and not by others, if the national governing body hasn't (yet) ruled on its illegality.

Maybe it's just me.

BTW, I don't think this is the future of football. There've been tweaks and attempts to game the system since Amos Alonzo Stagg and Walter Camp. They're all just variations on a theme, no matter what some random white hat may think.

And yet not one fact to support YOUR statements. Where are the other 992 teams that are supposedly using this?

And the only question I care about hearing YOU answer..... what is the purpose of the player numbering rule?

If you do not care to answer that then go try to kick someone else's shins

It is simple; the NF has no power to tell a state what to do and how to do things. And if the only risk is to lose voting seat, that obviously is not hurting Texas in any way. Why is that hard to understand?

Peace

What was the roughing the snapper rule adopted for? It's for the snapper, isn't it? Then why do you care whether the player getting the snap was a kicker or passer? The effect on the snapper is the same.

Robert

Because, per rule there cannot be roughing the snapper unless the offense is in a scrimmage kick formation. And you can't be in a scrimmage kick formation unless someone is in position to receive a snap who is at least 7 yds behind the LOS.
But, if the rule is ignored because they are attempting to pass out of the formation rather than kick, I agree we have a problem.

It's an end run around a rule just as the A-11 is an end run around the numbering exception. The protection is only for a scrimmage kick formation. Running every play out of that formation to avoid having a defender able to shoot up the middle is ludicrous.

If the guy is clearly 7+ yards deep (quick glance, obvious), I'll enforce it, but if it's borderline, I'm not going to penalize it.

Don't get snippy with me.

It makes no sense to me that a state that operates under the auspices of a governing body can tell that governing body to go fark itself.

This isn't a constitutional "states rights" issue unless there's some codicil to the NFHS charter that specifically delegates certain things to the states like our Constitution does.

That's what I don't understand because it seems dichotomous to me.