Thoughts of officals on the A11 offense.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

However, right now, I believe there is plenty of room in America within NFHS for various brands of football, so everybody remains happy ---MOST IMPORTANTLY the KIDS!

And I have read some interesting rule modification draft proposals emailed to me from people in favor of keeping A-11, while at the same time preserving traditional football too.

But it is very interesting to see how clearly ALL of us are at a very critical juncture in the history of football.

Will you stop with the sales pitch. This is not a critical time in the game more than any other. Rules change all the time and your offense has not revolutionized the game. The Run and Shoot was supposed to revolutionize the game and it is basically gone in the game today. And I do not see teams running out and using your offense. If anything it has not been successful enough to change the game for many. We get it already; you want everyone to like the offense. The problem is that is not the case.

Peace

[KurtBryan]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I certainly do understand this.

However, I also have seen teams trying to get a cheap automatic first down by exploiting this rule. QB backs up a bit deeper than usual (about 7 yds instead of the usual shotgun 5) and then want the auto first down when the center is blocked. It's not about safety for them -- those coaches WANT the center to get drilled so they can go from 3rd and long to 1st and 10. And I'm not playing that game. In my judgment in those situations, it's just short of seven, coach, sorry.

I've only seen it 3-4 times since Roughing the Snapper was put into the rules, but each time the emphasis wasn't on safety, it was an attempted "gotcha" moment.

Rich, interesting take too. We have now played 14 games in the A-11, and have not received one roughing the snapper call vs. the other team's defense. Going into the games, we HOPE our Center does not get cheap shotted or accidentally hurt due to roughing.

The opposing coaches know the rules, and I have not seen anybody get penalized for it, which is a good thing.

KB

[Mike L]

I gotta wonder why any "big business" types would be interested in this at all. NCAA, this offense is dead. NFL, this offense is dead. Attempts to compete with the NFL, fail every time. What business opportunities are there in HS ball outside of maybe Texas?
Let's face the facts, this is nothing more than taking advantage of a rule exception that maybe allows a school with a small student base to compete against a bigger school. That's it, despite the attempts at all the crap hyping it as "more fun", "officials love/endorse it", "innovation", "future of the game".

[Murd]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I certainly do understand this.

However, I also have seen teams trying to get a cheap automatic first down by exploiting this rule. QB backs up a bit deeper than usual (about 7 yds instead of the usual shotgun 5) and then want the auto first down when the center is blocked. It's not about safety for them -- those coaches WANT the center to get drilled so they can go from 3rd and long to 1st and 10. And I'm not playing that game. In my judgment in those situations, it's just short of seven, coach, sorry.

I've only seen it 3-4 times since Roughing the Snapper was put into the rules, but each time the emphasis wasn't on safety, it was an attempted "gotcha" moment.

So you interpet the rules the way you think they should be interpeted? Nice.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Murd

So you interpet the rules the way you think they should be interpeted? Nice.

Yup. Sue me.

Same as when I tell an end to back up a step and when I don't penalize every little flinch. It's called "judgment" or "understanding the spirit of the rule."

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

In fact, we have been contacted by a couple of big business entities that want to start a new "federation" for small to mid-size schools for football.
Again, we did not call them, THEY called us, etc.

Scammers do tend to seek out each other

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

But it is very interesting to see how clearly ALL of us are at a very critical juncture in the history of football.

Huh???? Who said we are at a CRITICAL JUNCTURE in the history of football? Is that just some more self-back slapping you are doing or is there really something going on in football that the rest of us are not aware of???? Do you really think your little scam is that important?

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

Regardless, it has become apparent the game is morphing into something so fast and athletic never before seen in the history of the game, respectfully to all of its great players, coaches and officials from years gone by.

And your deliberate attempt to circumvent the rules of the game does more to DISHONOR all those from years gone by than your pathetic little statement of "respect" does to honor them.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by KurtBryan

But it is very interesting to see how clearly ALL of us are at a very critical juncture in the history of football.

Can I nominate that as "most self-important statement of the season"?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I certainly do understand this.

However, I also have seen teams trying to get a cheap automatic first down by exploiting this rule. QB backs up a bit deeper than usual (about 7 yds instead of the usual shotgun 5) and then want the auto first down when the center is blocked. It's not about safety for them -- those coaches WANT the center to get drilled so they can go from 3rd and long to 1st and 10.

Then there should be some way for the officials to signal pre-snap to the other team that it's a scrimmage kick formation.

Of course I blame the rules makers at NCAA & Fed for this. I wrote about this a while ago at rec.sport.officiating, not sure about here. The rule should not reference the formation, but rather the position of the snapper's head.

BTW, there are some leagues for players below a certain age that require the snapper to snap with head up. I'm pretty sure they're the same ones that don't have normal live scrimmage kick plays.

Robert

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

It's analogous to the A11 exploitation of the formation/numbering exception rules. It's called "scrimmage kick formation" rather than "long snap formation" for a reason, after all.

The same reason NCAA & NFL rules now reference "normal tackle position" -- they needed a name to describe common practice. But they did it without any thought of requiring a team to snapping from "scrimmage kick formation" to kick.

Robert

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Attempts to compete with the NFL, fail every time.

Not every time. There was the AFL.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Then there should be some way for the officials to signal pre-snap to the other team that it's a scrimmage kick formation.

Of course I blame the rules makers at NCAA & Fed for this. I wrote about this a while ago at rec.sport.officiating, not sure about here. The rule should not reference the formation, but rather the position of the snapper's head.

BTW, there are some leagues for players below a certain age that require the snapper to snap with head up. I'm pretty sure they're the same ones that don't have normal live scrimmage kick plays.

Robert

Part of it is an officiating challenge. When it's 4th down and an obvious kicking situation, we are prepared for the numbering exception and the snapper protection. Our umpire calls out loudly to the players and the officials. (An aside: It's bad form to say "Stay off the snapper" on a field with adolescent boys (and officials).)

If a coach told me in the pregame they did this, I would make the other team aware so they could stay off. But no awareness. The last time this happened, they just dropped the QB back almost 7 yards somewhere between 6 and 8 yards) and then tried the whole "gotcha" thing afterwards.