A-11 is no longer legal.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

Originally Posted by jaybird
Just the kind of mind we want coaching our young people!

Well, the list of authors who wrote successful novels about unsavory characters is pretty long and impressive. Fortunately they are judged by their writing and story telling abilities, not their choice of plots.

I just don't get the vitriol against the A-11.

If it was born as an unintended consequence from a poorly written rule then, by all means, close the loophole. But why rail against the innovation it represents? This type of reaction can lead to the A-11 obtaining cult status.

Better to let the A-11 try to stand on its own against the defensive minds who always find ways to dismantle the most innovative offenses.

i think the A-11 represents critical thinking on the part of its authors and practitioners and should be countered by the same. More than likely it will not survive.

I like to compare Coach Bryan and his "critical thinking" to the Wall Street bankers and their "critical thinking" that has gotten the country by selling mortgages to people who possibly could not pay them back. They got paid, the mortgagees got screwed.

My simile of "critical thinking" is called cheating. Thank goodness we have the Rules Committee calling a stop to this nonsense.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

I like to compare Coach Bryan and his "critical thinking" to the Wall Street bankers and their "critical thinking" that has gotten the country by selling mortgages to people who possibly could not pay them back. They got paid, the mortgagees got screwed.

Those "bankers" packaged home loans into new debt instruments and bet the housing bubble would never burst. As for selling mortgages to people who could not afford them, that was done earlier, spurred on by the politicians who insisted that loan qualifications be overlooked so more people could enjoy home ownership.

There is plenty of blame to pass around, and a declining number of active taxpayers left to pay for it all.

But I digress.

The Federation acted wisely in changing the rules that led to the current version of the A-11. And I won't argue with the opinions of you and the others on the motivation of Bryan.

I am just wary of making him the focus instead of the A-11.
But I digress.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

I am just wary of making him the focus instead of the A-11.
But I digress.

He made himself the focus.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland
I like to compare Coach Bryan and his "critical thinking" to the Wall Street bankers and their "critical thinking" that has gotten the country by selling mortgages to people who possibly could not pay them back. They got paid, the mortgagees got screwed.

Originally Posted by jimpiano

Those "bankers" packaged home loans into new debt instruments and bet the housing bubble would never burst. As for selling mortgages to people who could not afford them, that was done earlier, spurred on by the politicians who insisted that loan qualifications be overlooked so more people could enjoy home ownership.

There is plenty of blame to pass around, and a declining number of active taxpayers left to pay for it all.

But I digress.

The Federation acted wisely in changing the rules that led to the current version of the A-11. And I won't argue with the opinions of you and the others on the motivation of Bryan.

I am just wary of making him the focus instead of the A-11.
But I digress.

My point being "critical thinking" can have consequences and they may not be good.

Kurt Bryan and the A-11 have become synonomous. His "critical thinking" or innovation or whatever you choose to call it was never the intent of the rules.

Think about it, numbering, which predates many of us, was for easy identification of interior linemen. The exception was intended for punt formations and NOT regular scrimmage downs and survived over 20 years without a serious challenge.

Then comes Kurt Byran with his "critical thinking" and I am going to advance that there was probably coaches doing an A-11 deviant but it never got reported on ESPN, the New York Times, etc. as a great new innovation to the game.

If Bryan had simply run the A-11 at Piedmont and stayed low key it would have never been a problem.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

If Bryan had simply run the A-11 at Piedmont and stayed low key it would have never been a problem.

This is the key to the entire saga. I can't think of any reason why he simply wouldn't have gone to his local official's association to ask if the formation was legal. They would have said that while not in the spirit of the rule, there was nothing against it. His poor little school could then compete with the Goliaths they played. Evidently there was another motive.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by daggo66

This is the key to the entire saga. I can't think of any reason why he simply wouldn't have gone to his local official's association to ask if the formation was legal. They would have said that while not in the spirit of the rule, there was nothing against it. His poor little school could then compete with the Goliaths they played. Evidently there was another motive.

Yeah, but then who'd be hailing him as the genius creator of this innovative, exciting, safer offense?

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by daggo66

Evidently there was another motive.

"Ahhhh, it's a profit deal!" - Navin R. Johnson

[bossman72]

Na-Na-Naaa-Na
Na-Na-Naaa-Na
HEY HEY HEY
GOOD BYE!