Possible rules changes for 2009

[Robert Goodman]

OK, you want to leave the judgement in this call? At least take it out of the officials' heads. Call it a scrimmage kick formation based on whether team B has someone deep to receive. Won't work for all scrimmage kick situations, of course, as when a short field goal is anticipated, but then you could say the numbering exception isn't needed when team A doesn't have much ground to cover afer the kick.

How about it? Leave it to team B instead of team A? You drop a deep receiver back, you allow the other team the numbering exception.

The rule would have to tolerate situations where team B shifted to draw an illegal formation foul on A, by giving team A a pass in such situations. You'd have to allow a late substitution by A when B showed their scrimmage kick formation, so they could get their eligible numbers in, and then they'd still be allowed if B shifted out of it before play began or was prevented. So there'd be a bit of a special substitution procedure.

Robert

[daggo66]

That wouldn't work. Sometimes B won't drop anyone back in an all out attempt to block the kick. Hey wait a minute, that would mean it's obvious that A is going to kick.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by daggo66

That wouldn't work. Sometimes B won't drop anyone back in an all out attempt to block the kick. Hey wait a minute, that would mean it's obvious that A is going to kick.

that's good stuff !!

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by asdf

that's good stuff !!

I'm here until Thursday, try the veal!

[Mike L]

Maybe all this worrying by some over officials ability to grasp a simple concept of "obvious" can be relieved if the rule is changed to read that the numbering exception is allowed in a SKC when a kick may be obvious "or a legal kick does occur". Then all this concern about SK's in those extremely rare situations that we might all see 2 or 3 times in our careers will not be penalized because a kick actually happened. I would think it would be obvious that no flag would be dropped if a kick was made no matter what, but apparently some have to have everything friggin spelled out to them.

[Niner]

I know that the Illinois rep to the NF rules comm.will request that the wording on the exception read that it applies only on 4th down.

I officiated two varsity games this year where the A-11 was attempted for most of the game. To me, it reminded me of when I played HS football and you were eligible only by position---numbering was not a part of the rules then. Then football was "modernize" to follow the college numbering rules on eligibility. When I played, the defense had to understand the positioning and had to adapt on every play and the offense had to be clearly in an eligible position not this tight positioning, close to the LOS by backs that we see now. But, football was modernize, eligible numbering was brought in and I assume the committee will feel there should be no going back by taking advantage of an exception that was really brought in to eliminate the need to change jerseys or put on aprons with ineligible numbers. Remember when players used to slip on aprons over their regular jerseys so they could go in in place of a big heavy for punt coverage? That is why the exception was put in.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by daggo66

That wouldn't work. Sometimes B won't drop anyone back in an all out attempt to block the kick. Hey wait a minute, that would mean it's obvious that A is going to kick.

If they're not dropping anyone back, then team A doesn't need the speedy guys in coverage, hence no numbering exception. What's wrong with that?

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If they're not dropping anyone back, then team A doesn't need the speedy guys in coverage, hence no numbering exception. What's wrong with that?

2 things. Who is long snapping and A is going to want to be the first on the ball to down it as deeply down the field as possible.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by daggo66

2 things. Who is long snapping and A is going to want to be the first on the ball to down it as deeply down the field as possible.

If they line up at least one end numbered 50-79, the long snapper can have an eligible number even without the exception. So they sacrifice an eligible receiver; that doesn't seem to be a problem for you guys who just know that they're not going to pass.

And as far as kick coverage goes when the defense is rushing everybody, even the slow players will beat the defense peeling back if they don't block the kick. As soon as you lose your block, you release. They're still running one way while you're running the other.

Robert

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If they're not dropping anyone back, then team A doesn't need the speedy guys in coverage, hence no numbering exception. What's wrong with that?

2 reasons have already been given, but how can what B does determine if A is fouling or not?

A sends substitutes on 4th down to punt. B doesn't "drop anyone back" to cause A to foul.

B thinks that A may fake the punt so they stay in their normal defense and doesn't "drop anyone back". Is that a foul?

What constitutes "dropping back"?

You have to realize that when it is everyone against you (and that everyone includes the NCAA) that maybe you are wrong. This is easy to officiate. Teams never punt on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down. If a team is going to kick a field goal then a holder will be kneeling on the ground. No one ever drop kicks. Everyone knows when it is a kicking situation. Don't pretend that you can't determine if the team is going to attempt a kick or not.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LDUB

2 reasons have already been given, but how can what B does determine if A is fouling or not?

A sends substitutes on 4th down to punt. B doesn't "drop anyone back" to cause A to foul.

B thinks that A may fake the punt so they stay in their normal defense and doesn't "drop anyone back". Is that a foul?

Then team A would not have followed the special substitutionprocedure provided for these cases, and would not have subbed in players 1-49 & 80-99, so no foul.

What constitutes "dropping back"?

It would be an arbitrary distance. I suggest 25 yards because there's a defense that plays a 20 yard deep safety.

You have to realize that when it is everyone against you (and that everyone includes the NCAA) that maybe you are wrong. This is easy to officiate. Teams never punt on 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down.

That just means I've seen a lot more football than you.

BTW, I saw one HS game on TV in the NYC area where one team ran a good deal of its offense from a long punt formation, either shifting into it or coming out in it straight from the huddle. Sometimes they even punted from it, and not always on 4th down.

If a team is going to kick a field goal then a holder will be kneeling on the ground.

So, you want to allow the numbering exception as long as one player is kneeling in position to take the snap? I'm sure A-11 would still work just fine. They have 2 players 7+ yards deep in position to take the snap.

No one ever drop kicks.

I don't see how it would affect any of this if they did.

Robert

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Then team A would not have followed the special substitutionprocedure provided for these cases, and would not have subbed in players 1-49 & 80-99, so no foul.

So A can't use the exception unless B sends someone deep. Do you want A to just yell out and ask B if they are sending someone deep? First off B isn't going to line up in a punt return formation until A lines up in a punt return formation (or has the punt team coming on the field). How would it be possible for A to substitute after B is set?

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

It would be an arbitrary distance. I suggest 25 yards because there's a defense that plays a 20 yard deep safety.

So it's 4th & 15. A sees that B is sending someone deep so they remove the 5 players 50-79. Then before the snap the deep B player moves up to 24 yards deep. How can what B does dictate if A fouls?

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

BTW, I saw one HS game on TV in the NYC area where one team ran a good deal of its offense from a long punt formation, either shifting into it or coming out in it straight from the huddle. Sometimes they even punted from it, and not always on 4th down.

So of all the hundreds of thousands of football games everyone on this board has seen we have 1 example of a team that uses a SKF for their normal offense. I don't see how that is relevant.

Also if a team want to line up in a punt formation all the time it is fine, but the numbering exception will not be in effect.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

So, you want to allow the numbering exception as long as one player is kneeling in position to take the snap? I'm sure A-11 would still work just fine. They have 2 players 7+ yards deep in position to take the snap.

I didn't say that. The A-11 has the players spread across the field. No team is dumb enough to attempt a place kick field goal from that formation, blockers are needed to prevent B from blocking the kick. It is obvious when a team is setting up for a field goal.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

That just means I've seen a lot more football than you.

As far as I know teams who punt not on 4th down like it to be a surprise and therefore line up in a normal offensive formation therefore the numbering exception has nothing to do with this.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I don't see how it would affect any of this if they did.

Yes, drop kicks matter. A isn't going to punt on 1st down on B's 10 yard line. They could say that the QB was going to drop kick and therefore they were not in a field goal formation.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If they line up at least one end numbered 50-79, the long snapper can have an eligible number even without the exception.

Do you understand the reason there is a numbering exception? It is so that teams do not have to do stuff like that.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

So they sacrifice an eligible receiver; that doesn't seem to be a problem for you guys who just know that they're not going to pass.

This has nothing to do with a knowing a team won't pass. You saying that just proves you really don't understand this at all. The numbering exception is used for kicking situations. It has nothing to do with saying a team must kick.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

And as far as kick coverage goes when the defense is rushing everybody, even the slow players will beat the defense peeling back if they don't block the kick. As soon as you lose your block, you release. They're still running one way while you're running the other.

That just means I've seen a lot more football than you.

Many times a team will kick the ball and try to get it to stop near B's goal line. Having fast players on the field means they are better able to run down there and stop the ball before it bounces into the end zone.

To sum this up:

1. The current NCAA wording works perfectly. You should be smart enough to know it is a kicking situation.

2. You're idea about allowing the numbering exception only if B sends a guy deep is extremely stupid due to the many flaws in it.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by LDUB

So A can't use the exception unless B sends someone deep. Do you want A to just yell out and ask B if they are sending someone deep? First off B isn't going to line up in a punt return formation until A lines up in a punt return formation (or has the punt team coming on the field). How would it be possible for A to substitute after B is set?

You didn't read what I wrote in the thread above (or maybe it was fully described in the other thread)? A would look to see if B had someone deep, and if so the officials would allow time for A to sub in numbers outside of 50-79. Team A would be allowed to use the numbering exception until the ball was put in play or play was prevented, even if B shifted out of their scrimmage kick formation.

So it's 4th & 15. A sees that B is sending someone deep so they remove the 5 players 50-79. Then before the snap the deep B player moves up to 24 yards deep. How can what B does dictate if A fouls?

As above, as long as B showed scrimmage kick formation, those players would be allowed to remain in and use the numbering exception.

So of all the hundreds of thousands of football games everyone on this board has seen we have 1 example of a team that uses a SKF for their normal offense. I don't see how that is relevant.

Surely from my sampling there'd be other examples in a world this size. How many teams use A-11? You insist on writing the rules to take account of this minuscule number of teams, yet you blithely would sweep aside other minorities of systems that may be out there now or in the future.

Also if a team want to line up in a punt formation all the time it is fine, but the numbering exception will not be in effect.

Well, then, why not write a rule that draws such a line that doesn't rely on officials' judgement of the play situation? Why not write it like the pass interference rules, or roughing the passer, which don't require you to assess whether you think it's a passing situation?

I didn't say that. The A-11 has the players spread across the field. No team is dumb enough to attempt a place kick field goal from that formation, blockers are needed to prevent B from blocking the kick. It is obvious when a team is setting up for a field goal.

And so you would make that part of the official's judgement too? Would it surprise you to learn that I've seen an unusual place kicking formation too? Or that some teams are using the place kick for filed position instead of punting? Go figure, but there are some coaches that advocate it, even though I think they're nuts. But the rules should accommodate the plans even of those coaches I think are nuts.

As far as I know teams who punt not on 4th down like it to be a surprise and therefore line up in a normal offensive formation therefore the numbering exception has nothing to do with this.

Then I guess I know more about football than you do. Teams will punt from regular punt formation short of 4th down when they have poor field position (especially combined with poor ball control conditions) or little hope of making the line to gain. It's done because the threat of a run or pass in such a situation is greater than on last down, so there's less pressure on the kicker and coverage is easier. One game I saw the L.A. Rams (yes, they used to be in Los Angeles) line up in punt formation 4 times on 3rd down, and they punted on 3 of those 4 occasions and ran on the other.

Yes, drop kicks matter. A isn't going to punt on 1st down on B's 10 yard line. They could say that the QB was going to drop kick and therefore they were not in a field goal formation.

So explain how that makes it easier for you to tell it's a scrimmage kick situation.

Do you understand the reason there is a numbering exception? It is so that teams do not have to do stuff like that.

This has nothing to do with a knowing a team won't pass. You saying that just proves you really don't understand this at all. The numbering exception is used for kicking situations. It has nothing to do with saying a team must kick.

You're so solicitous of team A's being able to throw to any receiver even from scrimmage kick formation that you wouldn't want them to sacrifice even one eligible receiver to get a special snapper in at center, yet you deny them the use of the numbering exception to hide eligible receivers unless you deem it by pure judgement a kicking situation? Why is it so important to preserve up to 6 eligible receivers if you think a kick is likely anyway?

Robert