Thoughts of officals on the A11 offense.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

There are probably several other rules that could be exploited like this. I always thought it might be interesting for a coach to try two forward passes behind the LOS when that rule was still in effect. That was probably too risky but I bet most DBs would let up once they saw the first forward pass.

My school's varsity did it. Or maybe it was the other team, I forgot. (~40 yrs. ago.)

But that was different. Unlike A-11, it wasn't an unintended byproduct. According to their proceedings, shortly after Fed started making their own football rules instead of using NCAA's, they started looking at things to change. Allowing more than one forward pass per down was argued for and adopted within a few yrs.

The proceedings of those years were interesting for what was proposed & rejected as well as adopted changes. Only a few of the terminology changes were adopted. A proposal to award a TD for DPI in the end zone (or "score zone" if that terminology change had been adopted) never made it.

Robert

[hawk65]

I've had the opportunity to officiate as a flank official for both a varsity and a JV game for Piedmont HS, the originator of this A-11 offense. For what it's worth, I'm sharing some thoughts.

The varsity coach gave us a laminated card before the game illustrating all the various positions they might get into during the game. That was useless because we would never pull it out and look at it during the game nor would we try to mentally equate what we saw with one of the formations on his card.

Only the center was on the line when A first approaches the LOS. The QB is in scrimmage-kick-formation depth usually with another back near him, all the other players are spread out the width of the field and at least 2 yards off the LOS. Upon command, at least 6 others stepped up to the LOS in varying positions across the width of the field. There may also be a shift at this time, or they may shift a second time after this initial step up to the line. They might also send a back in motion after either the first or second shift.

As a flank official, it took a moment to adjust to this new look. Soon, it became routine to simply look to make sure there were no more than 4 in the backfield (easier to count than 7 on the line), identify eligible backs on your side and eligible end man on the line (irregardless of number), then watch for a moment after the snap to make sure only those eligibles went downfield. THIS WAS NOT DIFFICULT TO DO - no more so than conventional formations with shifts and motions.

As crews (both JV and varsity), we enjoyed officiating the games. In some ways, it is MUCH EASIER than some "conventional" offenses: holding stands out like a sore thumb in so much open space; it was easy to keep track of the ball so there should be less likelihood of inadvertent whistles; forward progress was easy to mark in the open field; it was a more entertaining game!

I've done a game where the offense was in a bunch formation for much of the game: line had no splits; QB, FB and Tailback stacked in less than 5 yards depth, HB toe-to-toe next to the FB and lined up behind a guard. They ran the ball into the middle of the line 90% of the time and simply tried a "rugby scrum," push-the-pile-forward, ball control game. It was much more difficult to officiate because it was hard to see who had the ball and to judge forward progress in the mass of bodies -- and, it was BORING!

As for "deception" and "trickery," this was a piece of cake compared to some other offenses I've officiated that use the double-wing belly series, or the "fly" back in motion across the backfield, etc. I'd rather officiate one of these games any day compared to the challenges of some other offenses I've officiated when they are executed by well-coached teams with skilled players!

Defenses will adjust to this very quickly. They'll use zone coverages with some adjustments on the number of rushers, they'll scout and figure out who the real threats on the offense are and man up on those threats if they have the personnel, they'll use man-up on better offensive personnel and zone the field otherwise, they'll rush/blitz the QB and try to overwhelm him before they can be beat on their man-to-man coverages, and they'll do any number of adjustments from their standard defensive schemes, just as they make adjustments for the various offenses they face during the year. In spite of the claims of the coach, it is not a big deal and it does not create a big offensive advantage. It will be interesting to consider the wins/losses and scores Piedmont has had since implementing this offense.

Piedmont won but only barely and they didn't score a lot of points. They won because they made some good plays down the stretch - plays that stood out because of they were good athletic plays, not because they "tricked" or "deceived" the defense with an unconventional offense.

Before passing judgment on whether the NFHS should tweak their rules to prevent this type of innovation, I hope you'll wait for the opportunity to officiate one of these games yourself. And I hope they'll listen to feedback from those officials who have actually officiated one of their games. The consensus from both crews I worked on was it was not difficult and it made for an entertaining game. If you get a chance, I think you'll enjoy it!!

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by hawk65

Before passing judgment on whether the NFHS should tweak their rules to prevent this type of innovation, I hope you'll wait for the opportunity to officiate one of these games yourself. And I hope they'll listen to feedback from those officials who have actually officiated one of their games. The consensus from both crews I worked on was it was not difficult and it made for an entertaining game. If you get a chance, I think you'll enjoy it!!

The reason many are against it is because it takes advantage of the numbering exception in an unintended way. How exciting the games are or how difficult it is to officiate has nothing to do with it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hawk65

Before passing judgment on whether the NFHS should tweak their rules to prevent this type of innovation, I hope you'll wait for the opportunity to officiate one of these games yourself. And I hope they'll listen to feedback from those officials who have actually officiated one of their games. The consensus from both crews I worked on was it was not difficult and it made for an entertaining game. If you get a chance, I think you'll enjoy it!!

I have officiated a team that ran that offense and I was not impressed. It was interesting, but it did not make the game more exciting. Actually the team that ran the offense lost big time. The reason is because they figured out the basics of the offense and stopped it. And because of the lack of success of the offense, the defensive side of the team was on the field a long time. The team that ran a conventional offense scored 69 points. Part of the reason is that they kept the defense on the field and the offense (that ran the A-11) only has success in the first half. Granted it might have been exciting, but it was not affective. And it was not really difficult to officiate. But I still see the NF changing the rule because at its core, this offense is taking advantage of a rule that was not intended to be used for this purpose. Who cares how entertaining it is, there are other offenses that are exciting without the A-11.

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have officiated a team that ran that offense and I was not impressed. It was interesting, but it did not make the game more exciting. Actually the team that ran the offense lost big time. The reason is because they figured out the basics of the offense and stopped it. And because of the lack of success of the offense, the defensive side of the team was on the field a long time. The team that ran a conventional offense scored 69 points. Part of the reason is that they kept the defense on the field and the offense (that ran the A-11) only has success in the first half. Granted it might have been exciting, but it was not affective. And it was not really difficult to officiate. But I still see the NF changing the rule because at its core, this offense is taking advantage of a rule that was not intended to be used for this purpose. Who cares how entertaining it is, there are other offenses that are exciting without the A-11.

Peace

JRut,

You mention that the winning team scored 69 points and that the losing team lost big time. You did not mention how many points they scored.

I think that the real reason that this team lost was not becaase the A-11 is a poor offense; I think its's because the winning team is vastly a superior team.

We all know that offense wins games; defense wins championships. It seems that the defensive players on the winning team properly adapted to the A-11. They're probably better coached, too.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

JRut,

You mention that the winning team scored 69 points and that the losing team lost big time. You did not mention how many points they scored.

A whopping 21 points. Whoopie!!!!

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I think that the real reason that this team lost was not becaase the A-11 is a poor offense; I think its's because the winning team is vastly a superior team.

We all know that offense wins games; defense wins championships. It seems that the defensive players on the winning team properly adapted to the A-11. They're probably better coached, too.

That might be true, but you cannot advertise and offense as the next coming and have similar results as before. If the claim is that the game is more wide open, I think you should be able to score more than 21 points in a high school football game. That is just my opinion of course.

Peace

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by hawk65

THIS WAS NOT DIFFICULT TO DO

MUCH EASIER

BORING!

Why all the RANDOM use of CAPITALIZATION and BOLD type?

[KurtBryan]

Hello Officials:

It has been interesting to see the various teams using the A-11, and there are others out there using various packages of it that we have not seen video of, etc.

Just a sampling of teams to note below using the offense:

Horizon Christian, OR
Riverside Brookfield, IL
Saddleback Valley, CA
Toullahoma, TN
LA Jordan, CA
Trimble County, KY
Saguaro High, AZ...I am friends with their OC and he is installing packages of it to use over the next several weeks.

* What is more important than what teams are using it, is the simple fact that some teams are having success with it, Saddleback is undefeated for example, while other teams are struggling trying to learn the system. It's football and those things happen with every system, and of course the level of talent that particular season makes a big difference too.

It is true the A-11 does Not give the offense an unfair advantage, and it is true that the A-11 is able to be officiated properly. Both of those facts have been well documented by teams losing games and also the testimonies of Officials now over several parts of the USA making it very clear the games involving teams using the A-11 are very workable indeed.

This past week, NPR did its second feature on the A-11, and the fact that it gives the smaller to mid-size schools a tad bit better of a fighting chance, etc. It was interesting to note however...respectfully, the counter argument put forth by the North Carolina State Rules Interpreter, and Appalachian State Alum used the example of Appalachian State defeating Michigan last year using the spread offense. And he thought it was a better example of how teams should compete on offense, and that it can lead to upsets.

OK...that is fine but there are some Major Holes in that type of reasoning put forth by the NC guy:

a. Appalachian State is a University, and they can Legally Recruit kids from all over the USA to fit their system.

b. However, the thousands of schools like Piedmont High School nationwide are Coed, PUBLIC schools and they Cannot recruit kids from anywhere.

Comparing college vs. high school is totally missing the point of helping to keep the game of high school football somewhat equitable and competitve, giving all teams, small, medium and big a fighting chance.

Not only is the A-11 Not hurting anybody, it offers teams who might need it a tad bit more of a fighting chance.

Sincerely,

KB

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

It is true the A-11 does Not give the offense an unfair advantage

I think it is pretty much an accepted fact that the A-11 gives the offense an unfair advantage by not having 5 players numbed 50-79. I know you try to ignore that as you never answer the question asked of you multiple times of what is the purpose of the numbering exception.

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

Comparing college vs. high school is totally missing the point of helping to keep the game of high school football somewhat equitable and competitve, giving all teams, small, medium and big a fighting chance.

Small teams do not get a fighting chance against big teams. If your school is to small to hang with the big schools then stop playing them.

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

Not only is the A-11 Not hurting anybody, it offers teams who might need it a tad bit more of a fighting chance.

How about getting stronger and faster or better executing your strategies instead of resorting to trickery and exploiting loopholes in the rules to get more of a fighting chance?

[mbyron]

What exactly is a "fighting chance," and where in the rules does it say that each team shall have one?

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

.....................
Just a sampling of teams to note below using the offense:

Horizon Christian, OR
Riverside Brookfield, IL
Saddleback Valley, CA
Toullahoma, TN
LA Jordan, CA
Trimble County, KY
Saguaro High, AZ
..................
It is true the A-11 does Not give the offense an unfair advantage, and it is true that the A-11 is able to be officiated properly.

....................................
This past week, NPR did its second feature on the A-11, and the fact that it gives the smaller to mid-size schools a tad bit better of a fighting chance, etc.
..................................
Not only is the A-11 Not hurting anybody, it offers teams who might need it a tad bit more of a fighting chance.

Sincerely,

KB

What is the purpose of the player numbering rule which is so fundamental that it is included in the HS, college, and NFL rulebooks??

You must really think we are ignorant. Do you honestly (assuming you know what that means) believe that any of us for a second thinks that is a "sample" instead of the entire list??? If you had more schools suckered in you would have listed them.

You can say it is a "fact" that the A-11 does not give an unfair advantage but that does not make it a fact. It goes back to the fundamental question which you continue to ignore because to address it you would have to concede your "fact" is bogus.

NPR...now there is a source for good, reliable, info on football. Most of the weenies there hate organized sports because organized sports have winners and losers.

Have you given any thought to what you will be doing next year at this time when you are a piece of forgotten history?

[KurtBryan]

TX Mike:

Appreciate the nasty words and immature and repetitive statements and mistruths you make without skipping a beat.

Lots of fun and interesting teams putting their own spin on the A-11 offense, some winning games and others losing games. It happens.

We are stockpiling various videos and DVD's from coaches who have sent us their videos and clips, and we are getting ready to launch our first version of Top Ten A-11 Plays of the Week nationwide next week...but again, keep up the good work on your end.

KB

[Rich]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

TX Mike:

Appreciate the nasty words and immature and repetitive statements and mistruths you make without skipping a beat.

Lots of fun and interesting teams putting their own spin on the A-11 offense, some winning games and others losing games. It happens.

We are stockpiling various videos and DVD's from coaches who have sent us their videos and clips, and we are getting ready to launch our first version of Top Ten A-11 Plays of the Week nationwide next week...but again, keep up the good work on your end.

KB

Enjoy your year exploiting a loophole in the rules. It will be closed. Haven't seen it yet on the field, but I've told my crew to be super-sticklers on formation/shift/motion rules if we ever do. In other words, if you wish to exploit this loophole, you better do it PERFECTLY.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

TX Mike:

Appreciate the nasty words and immature and repetitive statements and mistruths you make without skipping a beat.

Lots of fun and interesting teams putting their own spin on the A-11 offense, some winning games and others losing games. It happens.

We are stockpiling various videos and DVD's from coaches who have sent us their videos and clips, and we are getting ready to launch our first version of Top Ten A-11 Plays of the Week nationwide next week...but again, keep up the good work on your end.

KB

Please go pitch your little silly offense somewhere else. Honestly no one here cares what you think the offense is going to do in the future. Actually, it is likely not to have much future. For one I have not seen much success with teams that have used it. The team I had earlier this year got killed when they played good non-conference teams. They might only make the playoffs because they are members of a conference that plays everyone twice. They probably are in the worst conference in their division in the state. I would not be surprised if they get rid of the offense next year not only as a team, but the rules committee. But Kurt it is time to go away. Your stay is becoming less and less welcome if all you are going to do is pitch a silly loophole in the rules.

Peace

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

TX Mike:

....we are getting ready to launch our first version of Top Ten A-11 Plays of the Week nationwide next week...
KB

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