NCAA Rule change on linemen

[FBullock]

The numbering exceptions are set once the center buts his hands on or near the ball. Once a numbering exception, always a numbering exception. So I would be a foul.

[TXMike]

Not saying that is not true. Just saying that if Team A "chooses" to play with 10 or less, then what real advantage are they gaining by loosening up the numbering exception?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Jayb: you're right. I misread the "no more than." However, 5 on the line and 4 in the backfield (or even 1 in the backfield) is now a legal formation and it never has been. Or at least, hasn't been in a long, long time. I don't understand the impetus for the change when it wasn't necessary.

I think it's long overdue. I don't know why the rule was ever written the way it has been instead of this new way to begin with. In Canadian football the requirement was also written as a minimum number on the line, but with an additional statement that if team A is short players that minimum is adjusted downward commensurately.

Robert

[Theisey]

While we (my study group) were discussing this formation it just was not clear in the rule wording whether A-24 is the exception or not because if he is the exception, he can't be on the end of the line. Some of us are not convinced one way or the other, and that's not good. The start of the season is not that far away, I want to know the ruling before it happens in a game.

[TXMike]

The exceptions are those who are in between the ends when the snapper gets on the ball, regardless of whether there are 5 of them or none of them.

[Texas Aggie]

I disagree with you guys about it being a needed or welcome change. I agree 10 vs. 11 isn't an advantage, however I'm afraid this might open up an opportunity for a late player addition and shift that WOULD create an advantage. We will have to be diligent of the substitution rules in addition to this. I think it might have been better to write in an exception to the 7 man on the line rule if there were fewer than 11 players on the field on the play and no more than 4 in the backfield.

[TXMike]

If Team A subs late you are hoilding them up and letting Team B sub to match up so what is the advantage? And like I said, if the snapper is over the ball and there is a shift involving a numbering exception player, he still has to be in an ineligible position at the snap. Give us a play scenario where Team A gets an advantage as a result of this rule change.

[actmiller]

During a SK formation Rule 1-4-2b2 states that given the condition that "at the snap any and all such numbering-exception players must be on the line and may not be on the end of the line. Otherwise, Team A commits a foul for an illegal formation." Does this not indicate that you must have 7 men on the LOS at the snap if they are using the numbering exception. If 24 is lined up at a tackle position and he is on the end of the line it would be an illegal formation and also an ineligible receiver?

[JasonTX]

Originally Posted by actmiller

During a SK formation Rule 1-4-2b2 states that given the condition that "at the snap any and all such numbering-exception players must be on the line and may not be on the end of the line. Otherwise, Team A commits a foul for an illegal formation." Does this not indicate that you must have 7 men on the LOS at the snap if they are using the numbering exception. If 24 is lined up at a tackle position and he is on the end of the line it would be an illegal formation and also an ineligible receiver?

No because #24 would not be an exception since he is legally on the end of the line. The exceptions are those players between the ends.

[actmiller]

Applying the answer you have given, then provide me with an example when Rule 1-4-2b2 would be a foul?

[TXMike]

If team lines up, snapper gets on ball and there are any exceptions between the ends, they must be between the ends at the snap. That prevents them from shifting around once the exceptions (regardless of how many or few there are).