Possible rules changes for 2009

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by stevegarbs

Limit the numbering exception to fourth down.

What if they want to kick on 2nd down or 3rd down? What if they kick is to win the game and the snapper has a legal eligible number?

The most accepted rules change in this issue is to go to the NCAA and/or NFL Language which limits a numbering exception to obvious kicking downs or plays. Doing that alone would eliminate what we know of the A-11 all together.

Peace

[stevegarbs]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What if they want to kick on 2nd down or 3rd down? What if they kick is to win the game and the snapper has a legal eligible number?

The most accepted rules change in this issue is to go to the NCAA and/or NFL Language which limits a numbering exception to obvious kicking downs or plays. Doing that alone would eliminate what we know of the A-11 all together.

Peace

Then add the holder-related exception on other downs.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by stevegarbs

Then add the holder-related exception on other downs.

OK, then what if the Left Tackle has been on the Field Goal Unit all season long and you need to kick a FG to win a playoff game, you want to require a player to be in that position that has not played there all year round?

I think the college rule would work perfectly. No reason to make more exceptions to a rule that only needs changing so you make it illegal to take advantage of a loophole found by a team or coach.

Peace

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I believe this satisfies both of my assertions.

Do you think it's just possible that Coach Bryan is so enamored with his idea that he wants to spread it, and extoll it, as fast as possible as far and wide as he can, and believes distributing tapes, disks and other visual aids is the best way to do that. Such a distribution clearly requires funding, which perhaps the good coach doesn't have access to, so he acquires what he needs to be able to distribute his idea from those who show an interest in his idea.

Then again he could simply be looking to make millions of dollars from the pure sale of his idea. That's just one, of an endless list of alternate possibilities that might be accurate. I have no idea which is correct, but NEITHER DO YOU.

A difference being you have chosen to presume the worst possible ulterior motive, and based on nothing more than pure speculation, whim and conjecture, declare what amounts to nothing more substantial than just pure gossip based on what you have presumed and conjured up through your own imagination.

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do you think it's just possible that Coach Bryan is so enamored with his idea that he wants to spread it, and extoll it, as fast as possible as far and wide as he can, and believes distributing tapes, disks and other visual aids is the best way to do that. Such a distribution clearly requires funding, which perhaps the good coach doesn't have access to, so he acquires what he needs to be able to distribute his idea from those who show an interest in his idea.

And when pressed about it he lied about that fact and claimed he was only doing what he was doing for the good of the game. I have ideas, but I am not trying to sell them. And if I was asked if I was trying to profit on them, I would clearly state that reality if I expected people to not further question my motives. Also, I would not go places that are not receptive to my point of view and continually come back to those places if I know people are not "buying" what I am selling.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Then again he could simply be looking to make millions of dollars from the pure sale of his idea. That's just one, of an endless list of alternate possibilities that might be accurate. I have no idea which is correct, but NEITHER DO YOU.

And whether we know or not is never the issue. This is why this is called a discussion board and people discuss things. We tend to discuss the motives or coaches, players, committee members, fellow officials, fans or administrators all the time here. And we do so based on our experiences and circumstances that took place in a particular thread or story. If that is a problem for you, then you better be preaching all the time because this issue only scratches the surface as to how things are often discussed here or in our local association meetings.

Originally Posted by ajmc

A difference being you have chosen to presume the worst possible ulterior motive, and based on nothing more than pure speculation, whim and conjecture, declare what amounts to nothing more substantial than just pure gossip based on what you have presumed and conjured up through your own imagination.

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

Honestly, no one assumed anything. We asked a question and found the answer. And all you have to do is a Google search and you will find Kurt's name is associated with all kinds of things are about selling products or the self promotion of this offense. And you do not have to look at this website to find that information. There is nothing wrong with selling things or this offense, but it is not gossip when you find the information on a link. Just like if you were to do the same thing with my name, you would easily find specific information that shows things about me as it relates to officiating and you would be able to see things I am directly involved in. And if I were to claim I was associated with something I was not, it would be exposed easily. And there are many people here that know me personally or belong to the same associations I belong to. I am confronted all the time by people that I know that I post here or ask me am I the same person they see on this site. I am very cognizant that when I say things here, there are people that are watching. If I were to say something that was blatantly false, I would be called on it in so many ways.

Now I can accept that reality and relish in that reality (I have been on here for over 10 years BTW). Why is that something you cannot handle? And BTW, I have had many people over the years try to discredit things I have said, only to find out that I was telling the truth by searching the internet or talking to someone that knows me personally. If you do not want to have people question your integrity, do not come here with your real name and do not say where you live and who you know. It is that simple.

I am done now.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

The problem is that there's a conflict of interest that's so obvious it's silly.

I can deal with that, though. I deal with it everytime I shop for a used car. The difference is, the used car salesman is at least open about the fact that he will be making money off of my purchase.

Yes, I do think it's acceptable to question someone's motives when a glaring conflict of interest has been hidden and even denied.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do you think it's just possible that Coach Bryan is so enamored with his idea that he wants to spread it, and extoll it, as fast as possible as far and wide as he can, and believes distributing tapes, disks and other visual aids is the best way to do that. Such a distribution clearly requires funding, which perhaps the good coach doesn't have access to, so he acquires what he needs to be able to distribute his idea from those who show an interest in his idea.

Then again he could simply be looking to make millions of dollars from the pure sale of his idea. That's just one, of an endless list of alternate possibilities that might be accurate. I have no idea which is correct, but NEITHER DO YOU.

A difference being you have chosen to presume the worst possible ulterior motive, and based on nothing more than pure speculation, whim and conjecture, declare what amounts to nothing more substantial than just pure gossip based on what you have presumed and conjured up through your own imagination.

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

Kurt Bryan's behavior and yours are both unacceptable.

When will you and Kurt Bryan understand there are fundamentals to the game and a procedure for making changes to the game and that procedure does not include publicizing in the New York Times or ESPN or even writing position papers and degrading anyone who disagrees?

And, for starters try being civil on this forum without resorting to degrading anyone. Most threads on this forum are respectful even when people disagree. Personally, whatever you opine has no credibility because of the descriptive language you choose to bully everyone whose opinion is different. I've learned a lot from listening and being respectful, it is time for you to do the same.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yes, I do think it's acceptable to question someone's motives when a glaring conflict of interest has been hidden and even denied.

AMEN!!!!

Peace

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by ajmc

If any of you have some rational question, simple or not, you need answered, and can figure out how to ask it rationally and I'll be happy to answer it.

No thank you.
I've seen enough of your responses that if I had a question, I would ask someone else.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Kurt Bryan's behavior and yours are both unacceptable.

When will you and Kurt Bryan understand there are fundamentals to the game and a procedure for making changes to the game and that procedure does not include publicizing in the New York Times or ESPN or even writing position papers and degrading anyone who disagrees?

And, for starters try being civil on this forum without resorting to degrading anyone. Most threads on this forum are respectful even when people disagree. Personally, whatever you opine has no credibility because of the descriptive language you choose to bully everyone whose opinion is different. I've learned a lot from listening and being respectful, it is time for you to do the same.

Excuse me, is this a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what I've said that has been so "unacceptable"? Does ganging up on an individual because he had the audacity to suggest something a special few don't like or agree with, is that acceptable? Or when the argument being raised is not gaining sufficient support on it's merits, does shifting to personal attacks, innuendo, rumor, pure speculation and a series of really dopey accusations based on empty hot air, rise to meet your description of acceptable?

Perhaps repeating or cheering for outlandash accusations and repeatedly mocking someone and denigrating his intentions simply because you resent the fact that he sees the issue differently is acceptable to you. Despite the gallons of pure garbage that has been dumped on this subject, by members of this forum, I haven't noticed any disrespect, any insult, mocking or abject sarcasim coming from the opposite direction. I've seen futile attempts at answering a gaggle of obviously loaded questions, being, twisted with absurd, irrelevant nitpicking and shoved back with an arrogance that has been truly amazing, and embarrassing.

Someone else, with a better graphic appreciation for reality than me, characterized the responses, of the few, as the feeding frenzy of a pack of hyenas. For those of you too stupid to know better, that wasn't a compliment.

I have not criticized anything, anybody has said regarding any fundamentals of this approach as it applies to the game I have repeatedly indicated that I personally doubt the A-11 approach will survive because I think it lacks the staying power, under it's own weight, for practical reasons. That's not the question and the A-11 is no longer the issue. That will be handled in due course by those who are authorized to deal with it, as has been recognized for some time.

My original intent, regarding this issue was to simply alert some that their comments were getting off track and unnecessarily personal and excessively derogatory. Now, after you might fast forward a lot of smart a$$ remarks, ridiculous assertions, absurd presumptions and assorted accusations based on absolutely nothing that was said or intended, my tone may have adjusted, downward, to stay with the flow of traffic.

Spare me your suggesting that the wetness all over my leg, right where you and a few others have been standing with your zippers down, is due to rainfall. I'm not buying your righteous indignation and I recognize who, and more importantly, what I'm responding to. I tried suggesting that wallowing in mud wasn't the smart thing to do, I never hinted it was something I didn't know how to do. You want to live in a glass house, don't throw rocks and don't be surprised when rocks get thrown back.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think the college rule would work perfectly.

You wouldn't think that if A-11 had happened to emerge in a game played by NCAA rules. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

You wouldn't think that if A-11 had happened to emerge in a game played by NCAA rules. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

So, there could be life on Mars afterall. I knew it!

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

You wouldn't think that if A-11 had happened to emerge in a game played by NCAA rules.

Did you ever wonder why the A-11 has never been used in an NCAA game? Did you ever wornder why all of Kurt Bryan's post about the A-11 releate to NF rules? It is because the current rules of the NCAA do not allow it....even Kurt Bryan understand that,

Originally Posted by ajmc

That's not the question and the A-11 is no longer the issue. That will be handled in due course by those who are authorized to deal with it, as has been recognized for some time.

Then feel free to move along. Those of us who've been following the thread out of sheer morbid curiosity have seen it pointed out to you, on several occasions, that none of us are open to any of your interpersonal communication tutoring. Besides, you said it best in an earlier post. If we weren't fortunate enough to acquire the requisite communication skills from our parents, there's probably very little you can do now in the way of influence.

Originally Posted by ajmc

....my tone may have adjusted, downward, to stay with the flow of traffic.

Without a doubt, the funniest (and most revealing) thing you've said to date. What a bummer it must be. You started out "well above" all of the insults and unprofessional behavior. Now look at ya'. Your swimming in the sewer with the rest of us turds. In the future, be a little more careful with whom you choose to spend time with.

And the best part about it is, you attempted to justify your altered behavior by using a "flow of traffic" analogy. I've got to say, I absolutely laughed until I cried when I read that.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Spare me your suggesting that the wetness all over my leg, right where you and a few others have been standing with your zippers down, is due to rainfall.

I'm not even going to touch this one. But let me say this from a person who, until today, considered himself a disinterested third party to all this crap. Absolutely juvenile. I'm sorry, who's the professional? JR may jump in your face a little with some of his responses, but I've never seen him respond like a drunken frat boy.

You've blathered on about people who shout and insult in an attempt to force their opinions on others. Over the years, I've seen another tactic that people might use to force their opinions onto others. Using a truck load of ten dollar words in attempt to convince everyone around them that their opinion MUST be important because, holy cow, look at all the big words I've used!

Yes, I'm brand new here. And, yes, I'm a new official. Could give a rat's tail what you, or anyone else, thinks about the appropriateness of my post with so little time on.

And for the rest of us........every time we respond (yes, I'm just as guilty right now...I absolutely couldn't help myself) we throw fodder on the fire. Let him go.....be free ajmc, and tell KB we said hello and we wish him the best with his program (and I mean that).

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LDUB

Did you ever wonder why the A-11 has never been used in an NCAA game?

Considering hardly anybody's played A-11 at all, and that fewer games are played by NCAA rules than Fed rules, no.

Did you ever wornder why all of Kurt Bryan's post about the A-11 releate to NF rules? It is because the current rules of the NCAA do not allow it....even Kurt Bryan understand that,

No, it's because Kurt Bryan's opinion about the rules should not be taken as dispositive.

Robert