|
Post by redandwhite on Feb 16, 2009 7:53:40 GMT -6
Is #55 the snapper in the diagram? If he is, there are still only 4 ineligible numbers on the LOS, and therefore an illegal formation. According to my understanding of the change, on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down only the snapper can have an eligible number, thereby, as stx stated "then the A-11 is totally killed." The new wording of the rule allows for Swinging Gate type plays on any down. And, of course, any type of legally shifting into and out of balanced and unbalanced formations, as well as extreme formations like Spurrier used at Florida are still all legal.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Feb 16, 2009 8:58:56 GMT -6
I would love to comment but I am at a technology training today.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 16, 2009 9:25:52 GMT -6
89.....5..........62.55.56.........63........87 ....85.......................................84 .......................6..................... ..........................9 (7+ yards) Can the center have 55 as his jersey number during a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd down scrimmage kick formation? Or, do the two hypothetical guards and two hypothetical tackles have to have the four ineligible numbers? In this setup I just showed, if the center can be one of the four players required to have an ineligible number, once 89 were to shift to a slot and 84 onto the LOS, #5 would be eligible...thus a part of the A11 still exists (in theory). If the center must have an eligible number, then obviously #5 would have to be an ineligible number unless #87 was an ineligible number... then the A11 is totally killed. I haven't seen the official wording, but my understanding is that in a scrimmage kick formation, the snapper may (but is not required to) wear an eligible number, and that at least 4 players on the line besides the snapper must wear ineligible numbers. Therefore the formation you diagrammed is illegal. What we have on downs 1 thru 3 is not A-11, but 7/11 -- 7 players potentially eligible out of 11, provided one is the snapper. Of course that'd require a 5-1 unbalanced line and scrimmage kick formation to take advantage. On 4th down it'd remain A-11. Actually if they keep the special scrimmage kick formation numbering and eligibility rules, they couldn't do it by shifting off of the line as in the example I gave, but could take advantage by shifting onto the line to come up to a total of 7 on the line as in A-11. That's what officials dislike about A-11; it's not like the way it was before eligible receiver numbering over 40 years ago, when the officials had only to note who were ends & backs at the snap. Rather, the scrimmage kick formation rules make for complicated mental bookkeeping because players once set in ineligible positions on the line remain ineligible at the snap even if shifts intervene. The officials' job would've been easier if they simply abolished eligible receiver numbering and thus needed no scrimmage kick formation exception. Robert in the Bronx
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Feb 16, 2009 9:36:43 GMT -6
I would love to comment but I am at a technology training today. When a mod starts taking shots at a guy, you know he deserves it.
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Feb 16, 2009 10:28:13 GMT -6
Someone has brought up the question earlier but I'm going to say it too....I really would love to find out what Piedmont's administration, parents, players, and fans thinks of all this. I wonder if they are buying into to all the BS about the offense getting "picked on" because it was an outside of the box idea.
|
|
|
Post by charger109 on Feb 16, 2009 10:42:14 GMT -6
Question, which I am sure has been talked about already.
Is the Lonesome Polecat legal? I mean can the center(if wearing an eligible number) go out for a pass?
I am just wondering, because one rule change can effect all the nice wrinkles that can be used in the game of football.
|
|
|
Post by coachhensley on Feb 16, 2009 10:52:26 GMT -6
Question, which I am sure has been talked about already. Is the Lonesome Polecat legal? I mean can the center(if wearing an eligible number) go out for a pass? I am just wondering, because one rule change can effect all the nice wrinkles that can be used in the game of football. Yes the Lonesome Polecat is still legal. Thankfully.
|
|
kakavian
Sophomore Member
Where's the ball, boy? Find the ball.
Posts: 175
|
Post by kakavian on Feb 16, 2009 11:11:59 GMT -6
Tog:<<i would love to comment more but I have to go watch some videos on blocking>>
Hahahahah...Even as a person ok with the A-11 I think that's funny... The biggest thing the Fortuna guys said in taking on Piedmont, was they had terrible Defense, and that their offense was pretty simplistic once you got the numbers thing down.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 16, 2009 11:20:56 GMT -6
Question, which I am sure has been talked about already. Is the Lonesome Polecat legal? I mean can the center(if wearing an eligible number) go out for a pass? I am just wondering, because one rule change can effect all the nice wrinkles that can be used in the game of football. Yes the Lonesome Polecat is still legal. Thankfully. No reason it shouldn't be. I'm an A11 hater but it's not because they throw the ball or because it's innovative. I hate the A11 because it depends on a loophole in the rules. I have no animosity toward Coach Bryan and Coach Humphries. The loophole was there and they found it. Fine. Dean Smith hated the four corners but he used it because it helped him win.
|
|
|
Post by knight9299 on Feb 16, 2009 13:35:39 GMT -6
My favorite quote from this article: highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=912477"It was unethical for them to use a loophole in the rules to run this offense," said Mike Webb, the supervisor of football officials for the West Virginia Secondary Schools Activities Commission who is on the NFHS football rules committee. "This takes away the deception."
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 16, 2009 15:46:13 GMT -6
THE GAME BREAKER By Kurt A. Bryan In the history of the NCAA, no world-class female athlete has ever received a scholarship to play football. Never that is, until college football coach Kenny Brown gives TJ Woods the opportunity of a lifetime. Unbeknownst to Kenny, however, his dream of making TJ a football heroine and marketing icon clash with the sinister plans of a charismatic billionaire Presidential Candidate - Ferguson Marshall. When Kenny discovers that Marshall intends to kill him, he realizes that TJ is also at risk. Can the devious Marshall be stopped before he becomes the next President of the United States? Can TJ's career -- and her life be saved? Can Kenny stay alive for the next 24 hours? A real edge-of-the-seat thriller with an innovative sports twist. That sound familar? I really wanted to stay away but this is too, too, too much From: www.kurtbryan.com/"NEWS: The Game Breaker is soon to be a Major Motion Picture! To learn more about the movie, please visit: www.GameBreakerMovie.com." From: www.gamebreakermovie.com/"Who is... ...THE GAME BREAKER? Currently In Pre-Production Buy Kurt Bryan's thrilling novel here: THE GAME BREAKER To join the movie mailing list, please send an e-mail to: list@gamebreakermovie.com " The internet movie databse (imdb.com) has no record of this title, despite supposedly to be a "major motion picture." This stuff is wild, man
|
|
|
Post by redandwhite on Feb 16, 2009 16:34:19 GMT -6
If it stalls in pre-production, as movies often do, perhaps we can form a sub-federation of Hollywood to preserve our right to have this movie made. More later, have a big, secret meeting with some Hollywood guys - this could be big news.
|
|
|
Post by knighter on Feb 16, 2009 16:36:33 GMT -6
A-11 is dead, dead, dead.
I would comment more but I have to go home and play with myself...lol
|
|
|
Post by dal9000 on Feb 16, 2009 17:01:01 GMT -6
So where exactly did the "I would love to comment, but..." thing come from? Y'all have got me curious now.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 16, 2009 17:05:52 GMT -6
dal9000
That was usually a standard reply by A-11 marketer Kurt Bryan when confronted with a direct question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2009 18:16:59 GMT -6
coachd5085 is right. For some reason, Bryan felt the need to tell us "speaking at a great clinic" or presenting somewhere every time he posted. If you go to the A11 website, his clinic schedule wasn't as busy as he led us to believe.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 16, 2009 19:16:22 GMT -6
KB just had a lot of weird quirks that turned people off. Maybe they were unintentional. He would frequently end posts (abruptly) by saying "gotta run, gotta go to a clinic" or conference or something else. He would start most posts by saying "Gentleman," then (a) would talk about all the incredibly support for the A-11 or whatever, and (b) then calling out what he called the "vocal minority" who disliked what he was doing.
The biggest thing that annoyed me was trying to get a direct answer, which was often where the "gotta run" thing came in. About the offense, about alternative rules changes. I once asked him what he would think about eliminating the entire number eligibility rule (something I would think he would be for) but also upping the time the offense must be set before the snap to 2, 3 or 4 seconds (to give the defense time to react) and I got the same nonanswer obfuscate thing. It was like my question didn't exist, or I stopped existing as long as I wanted to engage in a discussion.
Anyway, talking to KB was like talking to someone who had heard John Updike's famous dictum about Ted Williams -- that "Gods do not answer letters" -- and has decided that he is one of the elect.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 16, 2009 19:43:52 GMT -6
The biggest thing that annoyed me was trying to get a direct answer, which was often where the "gotta run" thing came in. About the offense, about alternative rules changes. I once asked him what he would think about eliminating the entire number eligibility rule (something I would think he would be for) but also upping the time the offense must be set before the snap to 2, 3 or 4 seconds (to give the defense time to react) and I got the same nonanswer obfuscate thing. It was like my question didn't exist, or I stopped existing as long as I wanted to engage in a discussion. . I think this was where the alarm bells REALLY started to go off. It became more obvious that it wasn't as much about his "little team" competing with bigger teams, as much as it was about doing so running the EXACT A-11 that they were marketing. All of the other suggestions would have addressed his goal, BUT he hadn't gotten there first..there was no "patent" on them so to speak, and therefore they were not acceptable. But exploiting the loophole, well, that was already packaged and marketed. That is what is sad now. It is apparent that the original objective has taken a back seat to Pushing and Marketing the A-11.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Feb 16, 2009 20:15:49 GMT -6
The biggest thing that annoyed me was trying to get a direct answer, which was often where the "gotta run" thing came in. About the offense, about alternative rules changes. I once asked him what he would think about eliminating the entire number eligibility rule (something I would think he would be for) but also upping the time the offense must be set before the snap to 2, 3 or 4 seconds (to give the defense time to react) and I got the same nonanswer obfuscate thing. It was like my question didn't exist, or I stopped existing as long as I wanted to engage in a discussion. . I think this was where the alarm bells REALLY started to go off. It became more obvious that it wasn't as much about his "little team" competing with bigger teams, as much as it was about doing so running the EXACT A-11 that they were marketing. All of the other suggestions would have addressed his goal, BUT he hadn't gotten there first..there was no "patent" on them so to speak, and therefore they were not acceptable. But exploiting the loophole, well, that was already packaged and marketed. That is what is sad now. It is apparent that the original objective has taken a back seat to Pushing and Marketing the A-11. at the detriment of the kids at piedmont
|
|
|
Post by knighter on Feb 16, 2009 20:56:11 GMT -6
I'd like to comment, nut I need to go and see if I can sell my A-11 stash on ebay.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Feb 16, 2009 21:21:19 GMT -6
They are hoping our players are blind now
Coaches,
Several teams/schools have let us know they are going to formally petition their own state association to allow A-11 because they are terribly disappointed by the NFHS bad decision. That is great news, and we will have other news too. If you support A-11, we hope you help the cause in your state too, and also follow our lead upcoming.
This is going to be a true battle for all of the smaller to mid-size schools and undermanned schools nationwide!
Also, please check this out.
Numerical Camouflage:
Some of the great ideas developed this weekend in Seattle at the Clinic were awesome, and One of them is called, "Numerical Camouflage" - and Using Game Breakers at the Anchor Spots.
Using regular numbered personnel (with the Anchors) wearing #50 - 79, it is possible to stress out the defense by having the Anchors jersey numbers "look similar" to those of the ELIGIBLE numbered players in the Red or Blue Pods.
This enables your team to implement A-11 Concepts and Strategies (not full blown A-11) but it does provide a lot of challenges for the Defense - because the Defenders have to figure out which offensive players are wearing Eligible vs. Ineligible numbers in a matter of a few seconds.
a. Since you do Not have to be in a SKF, then your QB can be under center - which enables your bubble screen and negative hitch plays behind the LOS to the Anchors to develop easier and quicker, or.......your QB can be staggered at 4 or 5 yards Depth too.
b. At the NCAA level, the blockers can cut block - which will help when the "11 islands" are developed across the field of play.
Below are some examples of Numerical Camouflage with No Huddle:
Base:
88......................68...............U...C...Y.............77........................17 ...........86................................2.....................................7............. ...................................................1................................................
Base Out:
88............68.........................U...C...Y......................77................17 .............................86......................2..............7............................. ...................................................1.................................................
Base Wide:
..........88..........68................U...C...Y...............77............17............ 86........................................2......................................................7.. ..................................................1....................................................
331:
88..............68............86.....U...C...Y...........................................77 ....................................................2..............7..............17............. .................................................1..................................................
|
|
|
Post by olinecoach61 on Feb 16, 2009 21:23:41 GMT -6
The world is now a better place.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Feb 16, 2009 21:29:46 GMT -6
ON the NFHS he started every post with
Dear Officials:
Like he was writing a formal letter.
What a Putz!
|
|
|
Post by tog on Feb 16, 2009 22:33:36 GMT -6
dear coach huey members/used car buyers
i would love to comment more
but i have to go run some numbers on my latest tax returns
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Feb 16, 2009 22:52:08 GMT -6
I wish Kurt would come post but I think we scared him away
|
|
|
Post by coachjoe3 on Feb 16, 2009 23:01:54 GMT -6
KB just had a lot of weird quirks that turned people off. Resisting . . . Resisting . . . Aw, heck with it. Here we go. I totally agree with you, Coach. I felt bad for KB after all the crap he got - I still do to some degree - despite that he kinda sounds like a salesman. Guess I'm just a big pushover. But other coaches on this board make their living helping others too, but respectfully do not do a lot of salesmanship regarding their products here. Then recently all the talk about plans or proposals or whatever to unnamed groups . . . I don't know . . . It just not a style coaches want to deal with, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 17, 2009 6:27:31 GMT -6
They are hoping our players are blind now Coaches, Several teams/schools have let us know they are going to formally petition their own state association to allow A-11 because they are terribly disappointed by the NFHS bad decision. That is great news, and we will have other news too. If you support A-11, we hope you help the cause in your state too, and also follow our lead upcoming. This is going to be a true battle for all of the smaller to mid-size schools and undermanned schools nationwide! Also, please check this out. Numerical Camouflage: Some of the great ideas developed this weekend in Seattle at the Clinic were awesome, and One of them is called, "Numerical Camouflage" - and Using Game Breakers at the Anchor Spots. Using regular numbered personnel (with the Anchors) wearing #50 - 79, it is possible to stress out the defense by having the Anchors jersey numbers "look similar" to those of the ELIGIBLE numbered players in the Red or Blue Pods. This enables your team to implement A-11 Concepts and Strategies (not full blown A-11) but it does provide a lot of challenges for the Defense - because the Defenders have to figure out which offensive players are wearing Eligible vs. Ineligible numbers in a matter of a few seconds. a. Since you do Not have to be in a SKF, then your QB can be under center - which enables your bubble screen and negative hitch plays behind the LOS to the Anchors to develop easier and quicker, or.......your QB can be staggered at 4 or 5 yards Depth too. b. At the NCAA level, the blockers can cut block - which will help when the "11 islands" are developed across the field of play. Below are some examples of Numerical Camouflage with No Huddle: Base: 88......................68...............U...C...Y.............77........................17 ...........86................................2.....................................7............. ...................................................1................................................ Base Out: 88............68.........................U...C...Y......................77................17 .............................86......................2..............7............................. ...................................................1................................................. Base Wide: ..........88..........68................U...C...Y...............77............17............ 86........................................2......................................................7.. ..................................................1.................................................... 331: 88..............68............86.....U...C...Y...........................................77 ....................................................2..............7..............17............. .................................................1.................................................. Really? I mean REALLY? This is the alternative? Throw up your hands and say "we can't compete, so we just hope that we can trick you by wearing similar numbers" REALLY? If I were a Piedmont parent, I would be furious.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Feb 17, 2009 6:45:31 GMT -6
I have heard fo teams getting jersery because the color hides the ball better but this makes it sound like teams will look for jersey that make it hard to tell the difference between a 6 and an 8. They better teach low pad level on the WRs. Past the beginning of the game though how much are you going to get fooled?
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 17, 2009 6:50:35 GMT -6
They are hoping our players are blind now Coaches, Several teams/schools have let us know they are going to formally petition their own state association to allow A-11 because they are terribly disappointed by the NFHS bad decision. That is great news, and we will have other news too. If you support A-11, we hope you help the cause in your state too, and also follow our lead upcoming. This is going to be a true battle for all of the smaller to mid-size schools and undermanned schools nationwide! Also, please check this out. Numerical Camouflage: Some of the great ideas developed this weekend in Seattle at the Clinic were awesome, and One of them is called, "Numerical Camouflage" - and Using Game Breakers at the Anchor Spots. Using regular numbered personnel (with the Anchors) wearing #50 - 79, it is possible to stress out the defense by having the Anchors jersey numbers "look similar" to those of the ELIGIBLE numbered players in the Red or Blue Pods. This enables your team to implement A-11 Concepts and Strategies (not full blown A-11) but it does provide a lot of challenges for the Defense - because the Defenders have to figure out which offensive players are wearing Eligible vs. Ineligible numbers in a matter of a few seconds. a. Since you do Not have to be in a SKF, then your QB can be under center - which enables your bubble screen and negative hitch plays behind the LOS to the Anchors to develop easier and quicker, or.......your QB can be staggered at 4 or 5 yards Depth too. b. At the NCAA level, the blockers can cut block - which will help when the "11 islands" are developed across the field of play. Below are some examples of Numerical Camouflage with No Huddle: Base: 88......................68...............U...C...Y.............77........................17 ...........86................................2.....................................7............. ...................................................1................................................ Base Out: 88............68.........................U...C...Y......................77................17 .............................86......................2..............7............................. ...................................................1................................................. Base Wide: ..........88..........68................U...C...Y...............77............17............ 86........................................2......................................................7.. ..................................................1.................................................... 331: 88..............68............86.....U...C...Y...........................................77 ....................................................2..............7..............17............. .................................................1.................................................. Really? I mean REALLY? This is the alternative? Throw up your hands and say "we can't compete, so we just hope that we can trick you by wearing similar numbers" REALLY? If I were a Piedmont parent, I would be furious. "Numerical Camoflage" is such a catchy name though, isn't it? Honestly, if this represents the "future of football," I guess I'll be out in a few years!
|
|
|
Post by coachweigelt on Feb 17, 2009 6:51:11 GMT -6
I posted this in the wrong section (can be locked BTW!)I suppose you get as small as numbers on your jerseys as the federation allows and then have your players put their hands over them when they came up to the L.O.S.. My god, I think I've come up with something!!!! This is just the best idea ever, I think Piedmont can really get away with this, if they put their players like this they have an edge...
|
|