The Offense Of The Future?

[Clyde]

I love it. Hats off to innovators like these two guys. This has to be heck on a D coordinator who only sees this once a year.

[Clyde]

Looks to me like typical plays everyone runs, but out of the kick formation.

 

I don't see how you can say it looks like "typical plays" when we're talking about all 11 being eligible to tote the ball.

[Clyde]

Does the video in the linked page ever actually come up and play?

[gametime]

Does the video in the linked page ever actually come up and play?

Plays fine for me...

[Clyde]

I can't imagine the officials liking this offense. It seems like it would be difficult to keep up with who's on the line and who's off, etc.

[h-dothework-c]

Very cool, should be interesting.

[stick1]

Coach Sphire at Lexington Caholic did pretty much the same thing out of punt formation when Burke was there. There really isn't many inovative things in the game anymore. It all stems from somewhere. Burke punted but would spread the field and if you didn't cover up then he would burn you up throwing out of the spread formation. I also listened to a coach speak in Tenn about the spread punt formation. They numbered each guy and if you didn't cover them up then the shifted to get them eligable. That has been almost 10 years ago.

When Evangel Christian won the state championships down in LA they would drop their QB back around 7 yards. This kept people off the center and it wore people out trying to get a pass rush. That was when the Booty brothers were playing there. I have some film on them somewhere.

The guy has marketed the heck out of the A11 but the concpets have been around for awhile.

[born2reign]

Very gimmicky- I don't know if it can work at high levels versus defenses with speed. I'm pretty sure three down line man and standing up all of your other defenders would provide enough confusion that this offense would get thrown a monkeywrench. If you don't define linemen and only leave 3 guys around the QB, I would blitz you and zone behind it.

 

Good luck to Piedmont and the A-11. I know they hear from a bunch of coaches like me all of the time. Keep proving us wrong!

[kissinger]

In high school football you have to be eligible by position, and seven players have to be on the line of scrimmage, with only the last player on that side of the line being eligible. Without changing the rules of football, this can't be done. By definition only six players can be eligible on any given play: the last player on each side of the line (2), and all the players not on the line (4).

 

Sorry, but this statement isn't correct. By rule, this offense is totally legal to run. There are some illegal things they might do while running it (i.e. the covered up receivers going downfield, etc.), but by its nature, it isn't illegal. When run properly, on deep pass plays, only the two ends go across the line. But a lot of it is screens (Passes behind the line) and in that case, all of the ineligibles can be wherever they want.

[Ram]

Sorry, but this statement isn't correct. By rule, this offense is totally legal to run. There are some illegal things they might do while running it (i.e. the covered up receivers going downfield, etc.), but by its nature, it isn't illegal. When run properly, on deep pass plays, only the two ends go across the line. But a lot of it is screens (Passes behind the line) and in that case, all of the ineligibles can be wherever they want.

I miss read it, and you are right. I thought they were saying that all 11 players were eligible all at the same time. It has since been clarified. I was reading to fast.

[SpeedDemon]

The other thing is even if a guy is on the line and ineligible by alignment the QB can still throw a screen pass to any receiver, this matched with a QB who is a threat to run with the ball is deadly.

[offside]

I can't imagine the officials liking this offense. It seems like it would be difficult to keep up with who's on the line and who's off, etc.

 

Thankfully, we don't make the rules--coaches do. So, I would expect that after a few controversial calls (and the resulting uproar in the coaching community) the NFHS Rules Committee will clarify its numbering exception.

 

Additionally, the sidebar to the article contains a real eyebrow-raiser: the coach says that NCAA teams employed this offense last year. I think he's bending the truth a bit because the NCAA numbering exception is much more clear on when it can not be used.

 

For what it's worth, I think it's a novel idea. I only question the motivation for all the hype. Snake oil?

[nees1212]

Does the video in the linked page ever actually come up and play?

 

It plays, however, I have issues with it too. My laptop won't play it, but my desktop PC will.

[offside]

The other thing is even if a guy is on the line and ineligible by alignment the QB can still throw a screen pass to any receiver, this matched with a QB who is a threat to run with the ball is deadly.

 

False. Even if the numbering exception is in effect, a player must be eligible by number and position to bat, muff or catch a forward pass. However, there are no eligibility requirements to receive a backward pass.

[STRIKE3]

Certainly does force the defense, to spread and cover.