The Snake Oil Salesman Is At It Again

[sloth]

I have yet to see the A-11 up close and personal. I suspect I will this next season as some of the local coaches in Indiana have started talking about it. As long as the coach lets us know ahead of time and we, as a crew, can talk about it before hand, I'm not too worried.

Is it in the spirit of the game...probably not. But you always have this issue when addressing unconventional plays. I think the challange is for us, as officials, to think of the best way to cover this type of offense should we see it in 2009. I think that is a far better course of action as opposed to complaining about it or lobbying NFHS or state associations to outlaw the formation.

[chymechowder]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

There was no rule against batting either team's backward pass in any direction as long as it didn't go out of bounds. So one coach had the ostensible holder for a place kick arise slightly and then toss the ball up for the ostensible kicker to volleyball serve forward, then his team scrambled for the ball and recovered it for a touchdown.

totally separate from the A-11 issue, i'm intrigued by this scenario. Mostly I'm having a difficult time seeing what the potential advantage to be gained by this loophole would be.

are you talking about a team lining up for a field goal or a point after?

how would volleyball serving the ball forward then scrambling for it be any more advantageous than simply throwing a forward pass? I can see that you'd have the "bonus" of the ball being live after it hits the ground. (as opposed to an incomplete forward pass, which is of course dead)...but is the offense any more likely to fall on that batted ball than the defense is?

when would it make sense to do this? If you're lined up to kick a point after, the odds of recovering the volleyball serve couldn't have been any greater than simply lining up to go for two, right?

if it was a short field goal try, would you sacrifice an "easy" three points for the risk/reward of recovering a loose ball in the endzone?

I freely admit that I could be missing something about this play that would give the offense an (unfair) advantage. assuming that it would behoove the offense to do that, how about this?

holder takes snap, kicker moves in directly behind holder. holder turns and fires a backwards pass off the kickers helmet. ball rebounds forward. as it would in the volleyball serve scenario--granted you couldn't control it as well as a volleyball serve, but you could probably get it forward.

rules wise, I don't think there'd be anything illegal here, at least according to the NCAA book. there is the rule against advancing a planned loose ball in the vicinity of the snapper (fumblerooski). but if you cleared the snapper with this ricochet backwards pass, I think you'd be ok on 7-1-7.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by newmdref

I on one level can appreciate the attempt to give his team an advantage or at least level the playing field within the rules of the game but personally I think its a joke and we have given way to much discussion time to this subject.

And yet you chime in to extend the discussion even further.

Suggestion to those of you who think this has dragged on too long, control your fingers and do not click on the thread. Unless someone has a gun to your head, nobody is forcing you to look or chime in.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by newmdref

Ladies please.

Let's see:

(1) Register for board.
(2) Start a post with an insult.
(3) Assume people read past the insult.

How to win friends and influence people....

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Let's see:

(1) Register for board.
(2) Start a post with an insult.
(3) Assume people read past the insult.

How to win friends and influence people....

Had the very same thoughts...

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Had the very same thoughts...

Conformist.

[newmdref]

Mike. I'm not trying to tell you or others what to do I'm just tired and so are many others of the "My Dad can beat up your Dad" conversation. If you want to talk about the offense as it relates football offciating great but think about a few points:

1. The more the A11 is discussed on public forums such as this one and the more controversy is stirred up from such conversation the more popular it will become thus giving momentum to those who have a vested interest in seeing it succeed. ie - you are contributing to the marketing of this offense of which you so despise

2. Some of the comments made about the individuals who have come up with this offense are slanderous in nature and if you think they are not monitoring this any many other websites like this one your sadly mistaken, especially since so much is at stake for them. The title of your thread in its self makes a slanderous inference




PS- sorry if I offended anyone, I forgot to put my smilely face after my "Ladies Please" comment

[daggo66]

Newmdref, I appreciate where you're coming from, but you're still thinking like a player. That will pass. Many of us, myself included, have a similare backround with the exception that I can add 20 years of officiating experience to that resume. You've come in rather late on this whole mess. Go back and read the many posts, including the ones from KB himself. Then go to his own web site and read the drivel there. There is nothing remotely slanderous in any of these posts. KB purposely walked up to a quiet hornet's nest and started poking it with a stick. I was the first to compare him to Billy Mayes. It is a well deserved comparison.

[newmdref]

Tom, point taken and I agree with your eval. of me with regard to player vs. official and I am here to try and learn that "Official" perspective of the game but its tough when the forum is consumed with in fighting about non-sense or why you can't say NFL as opposed to National Football League and the like. The statement you made about KB poking the nest is exactly what he wants thus my comment/point #1 in my last posting. I only bring up the slander issue because I had a family member who started and ran a national subscribed website, un-related to sports, and was shut down, sued and even subscribers were sued for comments similar in nature to the ones being made on here. Just letting people know to be careful about what you say about an individual on a public forum thats all.

Keeping mouth shut and sitting in the corner

[ajmc]

I'm afraid, newmdref, the sage advice of, "if you can't say anything nice, say nothing" has been completely forgotten by way too many of us, way too often. Part of that may be the fault of the annonimity of the keyboard and the instant nature of today's communication capabilities.

It's refreshing to see that a "new ref" still understands the benefits of simple manners and civil behavior, as well as the potential negative consequences of allowing emotions to guide behavior.

I've long maintained common sense may be the most critical attribute someone can bring to officiating, and that certainly includes how each of us decides to respond to challenge. You seem pointed in a good direction

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I'm afraid, newmdref, the sage advice of, "if you can't say anything nice, say nothing" has been completely forgotten by way too many of us, way too often. Part of that may be the fault of the annonimity of the keyboard and the instant nature of today's communication capabilities.

It's refreshing to see that a "new ref" still understands the benefits of simple manners and civil behavior, as well as the potential negative consequences of allowing emotions to guide behavior.

I've long maintained common sense may be the most critical attribute someone can bring to officiating, and that certainly includes how each of us decides to respond to challenge. You seem pointed in a good direction

That is crap. You obviously do not know the history of this person. You do not know how this person has basically lied about NF approval or the positions of the NF on this issue. Then when it has been suggested that the motives are more than "making the game better" he claims he is not trying to sell anything and his motives are simply pure. Well that is not the position of KB and this is why many here have pointed this out over and over again. And this is the reason many people have gone after him (he has actually posted here to defend his offense).

Also being a good official means you apply experience and know when to not look like you know everything, when you have achieved nothing.

Peace

[KurtBryan]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Typical – Kurt again reviews his submission and approval process, and even states that he had “questions regarding was the new offense an unfair act, was it a travesty of the game or deceptive, and was it within the spirit of the rules of the game.”

After reviewing the package they received their answer, “In February 2007 via the telephone, Stearns informed Coach Bryan that the A-11 Offense was indeed legal to use.”

No mention is made about the “spirit of the rules,” and I don’t believe anyone argued here that the A-11 is illegal under the current rules. I do believe we’ll be hearing differently very soon.

Kurt is a carnival huckster. He sees the writing on the wall and knows his sham will be over soon.

Dear Officials:

It was suggested we write a comprehensive position paper about the A-11 for the NFHS rules committee, which we did.

Regarding the erroneous, "spirit of the rules" comment above, please take the time to review the position paper again submitted for the NFHS rules committee.

One of the items reviewed (in addition to many other listed in the paper or not listed) was the item of whether or not the offense within the spirit of the rules - as is clearly stated in the paper. It was found, yes, it is within the "spirit of the rules", and it is NOT a travesty of the game, or an unsporting act, etc. See below in bold one item pulled from the paper.

In January 2007, the coaches submitted a comprehensive package detailing the A-11
Offense and the rule interpretations associated with it to Mr. Bob Colgate at the NFHS.
The package contained specific rule interpretations about the SKF, the application of the
numbering exception, a host of possible formations, various shifting ideas, and questions
regarding was the new offense an unfair act, was it a travesty of the game or deceptive,
and was it within the spirit of the rules of the game…among other items as well.

The reason we detailed the entire review process we underwent, is so that every single person on the NFHS rules committee knows the exact process we went through upon submitting everthing to the NFHS, and then a detailed review by the CIF state association before it was ruled legal.

And to those who think we did not undergo that process - please know we would not put forth any document that was not true to the NFHS committee -it would be crazy to do that.

We interviewed coaches, players, officials, and trainers for the paper, and we also drew upon testimonials from those professions about the A-11 for the paper, or items relative to it.

Lastly, I appreciate all of your professional opinions and thank you.

KB

Link to read A-11 position paper: http://kurtbryan.blogspot.com/

[asdf]

Why the need for a position paper when your offense has already been approved?

[KurtBryan]

Originally Posted by asdf

Why the need for a position paper when your offense has already been approved?

Since the A-11 was up for discussion and the items relative to it, it was suggested we develop the paper to put forth the correct story and facts behind its history and results, etc.

Gotta go for the day.

Thanks guys, KB

[asdf]

You said your offense was approved.....

Why aren't you peppering the message boards with your complaints that less than one year after approval, your offense may be considered illegal?

If I had a valid financial interest in this, I'd be all over the place highlighting the facts surrounding the approval, including but not limited to, the people involved, the comments and notes from the approval, etc...

I'd take this as an opportunity for a pre-emtive strike against those who may now possibly be changing their minds about their approval of my offense.


Then again............