🏈 Some states deeming new offense illegal.....

[bamafan4ever]

Have any of you heard about this? This sounds like something Mike Leach created!

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=911196

:shock: :shock:

 

[ghice]

I want to say chop posted something like this back last year sometime. But this isn't the first time I've heard of it, that's for sure.

 

[alagator]

I am somewhat indifferent on the A-11 formation, but the following quote from the link is pure comedy (and 1950s thinking)...

"The rule was written for a scrimmage kick exception, the number requirement, to aid in terms of long snappers and blocking situations," said Mark Dreibelbis, the supervisor of officials for the North Carolina High School Athletic Association. "They are taking a rule book exception for a scrimmage kick and putting it [in] place every down of the game and that is not the intent of the rule and it is outside the spirit of the rule code and it is an attempt to deceive and attempts to deceive are unsporting acts." (emphasis added)

Lining up in punt formation but snapping the ball to an upback who runs around right end is an effort to deceive. You are sending in your punt team knowing that your opponent will expect a kick but you deceive him by doing something non-normal with the personnel you have on the field. Is that an 'unsporting act?'

You line up to kick the ball off to start the game and instead of kicking it deep you execute an onside kick. This is deceiving. Is that an 'unsporting act?'

You line your offense up on fourth down and use a hard count to attempt to draw your opponent offside. This is done in an effort to deceive the defense into jumping offside to gain a first down. Is that an 'unsporting act?'

Just say you do not like the style of play and think it makes a mockery of the game you learned to play as a little boy and you will stop the change. Everyone will understand where you stand, they may not like it and reject your views, but everything will be above board.

 

[IllinoisTideFan]

Mighty confusing to me. :shock:

 

[imported_porkchop]

There have been a few posts regarding this A-11 offense here on the site over the last few months. It doesn't surprise me in the least that some people are taking issue with this. I've been waiting on it to happen actually.

I'm on the fence about it quite frankly. I'm more of a traditionalist and prefer to play the game lined up some traditional formation. Having said that, the coach that came up with this is very innovative and I have to give him props.

I don't consider this cheating or anything like that, and can't really justify outlawing it, BUT.. I also wouldn't ever want to face this either. It's such a new trend that most people still don't know about it. You come into a game against a team running the A-11 and you don't know about, you'll get 100 dropped on you. If you have some time to practice against it you'll get 50 dropped on you.

As I said, I don't consider it cheating and I can't justify outlawing it, but as a youth football coach myself, I can certainly see the uproar. A team facing this would be at such a disadvantage that it would cause people to question the whole notion of fair-play and sportsmanship.

Who knows? This might be the next big thing? The A-11 could be the next spread.

 

[imported_porkchop]

I am somewhat indifferent on the A-11 formation, but the following quote from the link is pure comedy (and 1950s thinking)...

"The rule was written for a scrimmage kick exception, the number requirement, to aid in terms of long snappers and blocking situations," said Mark Dreibelbis, the supervisor of officials for the North Carolina High School Athletic Association. "They are taking a rule book exception for a scrimmage kick and putting it [in] place every down of the game and that is not the intent of the rule and it is outside the spirit of the rule code and it is an attempt to deceive and attempts to deceive are unsporting acts." (emphasis added)

Lining up in punt formation but snapping the ball to an upback who runs around right end is an effort to deceive. You are sending in your punt team knowing that your opponent will expect a kick but you deceive him by doing something non-normal with the personnel you have on the field. Is that an 'unsporting act?'

You line up to kick the ball off to start the game and instead of kicking it deep you execute an onside kick. This is deceiving. Is that an 'unsporting act?'

You line your offense up on fourth down and use a hard count to attempt to draw your opponent offside. This is done in an effort to deceive the defense into jumping offside to gain a first down. Is that an 'unsporting act?'

Just say you do not like the style of play and think it makes a mockery of the game you learned to play as a little boy and you will stop the change. Everyone will understand where you stand, they may not like it and reject your views, but everything will be above board.

Hey, one thing though, alagator. Regarding the A-11 (you may already know this) but what makes the A-11 so effective and appealing to these coaches out here in California is that everyone is eligible in this offense and that's what makes it so hard to stop. Heck, I would hope the team that ran this against me would run a sweep or an option (like the above diagram). That's probably the most basic play in the offense and the easiest one to stop. Just imagine what a passing attack out of this thing would look like. Or worse, just imagine how to defend it. :lol:

The A-11 turns every traditional or accepted principle of defensive football on its head, making it hard for defenses to adjust. I imagine seeing this would be like system shock for your kids.

 

[pimpsahoy]

It isn't legal in the NCAA or the NFL. I could see why people would want to ban something that is only legal because of a loophole.

 

[FlaBama]

Bear Bryant ran some similar goofy set once. There was a center with a guard on either side, the quarterback, a running back, and three split wide to either side in a double triangle formation. The center snapped the ball, the QB fumbled the snap (but recovered it) and the formation was never seen again. I've always wondered what he had in mind.

 

[alagator]

Bear Bryant ran some similar goofy set once. There was a center with a guard on either side, the quarterback, a running back, and three split wide to either side in a double triangle formation. The center snapped the ball, the QB fumbled the snap (but recovered it) and the formation was never seen again. I've always wondered what he had in mind.

Find a tape of the 14-7 Sugar Bowl game versus Penn State, the 'Goal Line Stand Game.'

We ran that exact formation several times during a spurt when PSU was stuffing our offense.

 

[Rolling Tide]

I dont see a problem with it myself. This is the way I look at it. Both teams have 11 players. It is up to the defense to figure out away to shut it down.

 

[Guest]

To run formations is one thing, to run it as your offense is something else...I do not like it.

I saw this in HS, it is nothing new....but the team was known to run the formation every now and then. Not just lining up in the formation the entire game.

Just does not seem like traditional football(which I like), more backyard football and plays you draw up in the dirt.

 

[UAgrad93]

Quite honestly, it reminds me of the "old swinging gate" formation used on extra points. In it, you are allowed several options depending on what the defense does. Honestly, it makes the defense have to prepare for one more thing. Also, it looks similar to what we called the "lonesome polecat". You spread your linemen out on the LOS across the entire field and put eligble receivers on the end with backs behind them. Again something to make a D coordinator to pull his hair.

 

[Guest]

I dont see a problem with it myself. This is the way I look at it. Both teams have 11 players. It is up to the defense to figure out away to shut it down.

I agree with this. If the offense is scoring points, they're doing their job...no matter how close to bending the rules or how radical or how different it is. If a defense can't stop it...then that's thier problem.

Also, speaking of SEC teams using it, here's a recent play by Florida:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3MmVF9xao8&feature=PlayList&p=CFDC08EB67F6023B&playnext=1&index=14[/youtube]

 

[Guest]

This is the other side of the coin from what Coach Bryant did in the sixties with the tackle eligible play. He used it spectacularly with Jerry Duncan, who was actually a tackle, though he had been a running back in high school. By suitably positioning his wide receivers Bryant produced a formation where Duncan was indeed on the end of the seven guys on the LOS and thus eligible under the rules of the day. There was quite an element of surprise and the play/formation was very successful for a time. Complaints by other coaches, most notably Bob DeVaney, resulted in a rule change. 50-79 could still be eligible receivers, but they had to report to the referee before the play that they would be lined up as an eligible receiver, thus negating the surprise.

I'm all for innovations in formations (Spurrier has been clever about this over the years)
but the A-11 seems to make it a different game than football. The high school body should change its rule to mirror the college and NFL rules. (perhaps they could just allow only the long snapper to have the discrepant number.)

 

[imported_porkchop]

I say we just start over and make HS teams go back to running the wedge. :lol:

 

[alagator]

...Also, it looks similar to what we called the "lonesome polecat". You spread your linemen out on the LOS across the entire field and put eligble receivers on the end with backs behind them. Again something to make a D coordinator to pull his hair.

Gosh, I had forgotten about the old 'lonesome polecat.' Did you ever read the book from the guy who created that scheme? I think it might have been Mouse Davis, the guy who invented the run-and-shoot when he was a high school coach. If it was not Davis, Davis took the LP concepts and tweaked them to his more wide open system.

You are mostly correct in that the A-11 shares some of the principles. But the A-11 goes further by using the numbering loophole designed for kicking situations to make all eleven players a potential eligible receiver.

Refer to the clip of the busted play by UF offered by BamaCore. Imagine if every player had an eligible number and only one or two seconds before the ball was snapped everyone shifted to change who was covered and who was uncovered. Defenses would either have to have 11 DBs or LBs on the field or have to scatter like cockroaches when a light is turned on to adjust.

A totally radical concept from traditional football, but frankly I kind of like the idea. Isn't one of the great things about college football is not every team runs from the same playbook (like the NFL does) and one week your opponent will run a Power I offense, the next opponent might run a Spread Option, and the next opponent might run a Pro Set. This would just be another variable.

Of course, the easiest way to eliminate this offense is to require an offensive unit field at least five players with ineligible numbers (50-through 79) - which would then cause problems on special teams (no more LBers with a 40s number lining up at LT on punts), the reason the exception was made in the first place.

 

[Guest]

I would imagine that this is an officiating nightmare as well, keeping track of who is eligible and can be downfield, and who is not.

 

[UAgrad93]

Psycho you are correct. A good friend of mine was a head coach and he had put in the Lonesome Polecat in just to give an upcoming opponent some headaches. They played Mountain Brook and lined up in the formation and was immediately flagged for illegal formation. He called it again. Again he was flagged. The official explained it simply as " We ain't running that S%&@ up here."

 

[Guest]

Psycho you are correct. A good friend of mine was a head coach and he had put in the Lonesome Polecat in just to give an upcoming opponent some headaches. They played Mountain Brook and lined up in the formation and was immediately flagged for illegal formation. He called it again. Again he was flagged. The official explained it simply as " We ain't running that S%&@ up here."

:lol: :lol:

A team we played out of Montgomery used the LP on us in the a playoff game...ref let it go. Play failed, again we knew they would run it. Practiced to defend it.

Like Joe said, running that offense the entire game just does not seem like football....

The Nibblets even used it against us...they threw everything at us but the kitchen sink.

 

[tennbama]

polecat....

when I moved to tn I coached at a jr high for awhile
and the head coach used this "O" for extra points...he always went for "2"...they called it the Polecat