PDA

View Full Version : The "A-11" offense



jtk1519
07-24-2008, 08:53 PM
What developed from that brainstorming session was the "A-11 offense" - as in all 11 players potentially are eligible.

The base offense is one in which a center and two tight ends surround the football, three receivers are split right, three more split left and two quarterbacks stand behind in a shotgun, one of whom has to be at least 7 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=825031

http://www.humphinternet.com/a11/Images/Manual3Web.JPG
http://a11offense.com/

Video of the offense in at work...

http://www.americanfootballmonthly.com/video/editorials/player.php?id=A11GameFilm510x340.swf

Favpack
07-24-2008, 09:09 PM
Is this what LSU ran against tOSU in the bcs game last year? Flynn threw a TD pass to the TE who was wide open.

jtk1519
07-24-2008, 09:19 PM
Is this what LSU ran against tOSU in the bcs game last year? Flynn threw a TD pass to the TE who was wide open.

They didn't need to do anything like this. OSU was too slow to cover the TE.

dragonsdaddy
07-24-2008, 09:25 PM
They didn't need to do anything like this. OSU was too slow .

fify

jtk1519
07-24-2008, 10:00 PM
fify

Touche. :cool:

Favpack
07-24-2008, 10:33 PM
I missed the memo on this new-fangled offense. Let's start another thread on it for the coaches.

jtk1519
07-24-2008, 10:57 PM
I missed the memo on this new-fangled offense. Let's start another thread on it for the coaches.

You ruined my thread! :mad:

In all seriousness, I see a lot of the "swinging gate" in this formation.

Favpack
07-24-2008, 11:20 PM
You ruined my thread! :mad:

In all seriousness, I see a lot of the "swinging gate" in this formation.

I love the swinging gate. Lufkin has run it about 6 years straight on PAT's. Hard to defend.

TxJim
07-25-2008, 08:46 PM
You won't see it here in Texas or in college. We play NCAA rules in Texas and most of the A-11 plays are illegal under them.

Only on a scrimmage kick can you have a player numbering exception to the required 5 offensive men numbered 50-79 on the line of scrimmage. All other plays from scrimmage, the numbering scheme of A-11 is illegal.

So, you could see one A-11 alignment and guys can occupy those interior line positions on a punt, try, or FG attempt with other than 50-79. But, by rule, they are restricted and ineligble from catching a pass anywhere.

That said, I'm not sure how website can claim this is 'the future of football.' I'm not the least bit disappointed that big, strong, slow guys weighing 300+ pounds who have bricks for hands have a historical and sacred place in NCAA football, pounding on or making others maneuver around them at a punishing risk. A-11 looks a lot like flag football, and it's been around for decades.

mdfootball
07-30-2008, 01:06 PM
i believe that the idea with the a-11 is that every snap they are in a scrimmage kick formation, so the numbering is legal. Admittedly, the offense is somewhat odd, but i could imagine it being quite successful.

PeterGibbons
08-02-2008, 04:51 AM
Watching the video it looked a lot like 6-man football with 10 extra players on the field

The King
08-05-2008, 10:05 AM
My Flag football team in college ran this offense.

STJL41
08-05-2008, 12:50 PM
My Flag football team in college ran this offense.

You played 11 man flag football?

The King
08-11-2008, 12:09 PM
You played 11 man flag football?

No we only needed 7

CACoach
10-18-2008, 01:13 AM
if this is what football becomes ill hang up my whistle.

wizenbud
10-19-2008, 06:43 AM
I have seen this offense in person. Last year in California while I was visiting friends and family. What a joke.

IMO, if this brand of football came to this state, the "A-11" offense would be exposed for the farce it is.
When the coach was asked if this offense would catch on, he stated and I quote, "Not in states like Texas, Florida, or Ohio. Too much speed and talent within those States, for the A-11 to be successfull."

Texas style defenses would force A-11 teams to have, I don't know, 4 QB's.
With all the zone-blitzing and mutiple defenses around the state, no A-11 team would make it through an entire season without losing at least 3 QB's.
And I think we all know how tough it is to find a solid QB.

The size and speed of the defenses in Texas would render the A-11 as an offensive gimmick. Let's look at the number of blocked kicks throughout the state. Now tell me that an offense with no line is going to score.

The A-11 isn't the future, it's just another gimmick that will be exposed for what it is. An offense better suited for the backyard, not the grid-iron.

Maxthedog
02-11-2009, 05:14 PM
I have seen this offense in person. Last year in California while I was visiting friends and family. What a joke.

IMO, if this brand of football came to this state, the "A-11" offense would be exposed for the farce it is.
When the coach was asked if this offense would catch on, he stated and I quote, "Not in states like Texas, Florida, or Ohio. Too much speed and talent within those States, for the A-11 to be successfull."

Texas style defenses would force A-11 teams to have, I don't know, 4 QB's.
With all the zone-blitzing and mutiple defenses around the state, no A-11 team would make it through an entire season without losing at least 3 QB's.
And I think we all know how tough it is to find a solid QB.

The size and speed of the defenses in Texas would render the A-11 as an offensive gimmick. Let's look at the number of blocked kicks throughout the state. Now tell me that an offense with no line is going to score.

The A-11 isn't the future, it's just another gimmick that will be exposed for what it is. An offense better suited for the backyard, not the grid-iron.

Agreed! While it does place addition requirements on 1-1 coverage, tackling,,I didn't see anything that I have not seen with a potent Spead team. I did see where someone like Nikita could end the life of your QB running this offense. How many HS teams have 6 very good receivers?
Screw it,,,New rule-Wishbone only from now on:)

crunked9
02-12-2009, 09:48 AM
I like how they are saying "this formation is unsportsmen like and such, it tricks the D"

Doesn't every play try to trick the D???

wizenbud
02-13-2009, 01:38 AM
I like how they are saying "this formation is unsportsmen like and such, it tricks the D"

Doesn't every play try to trick the D???

Not quite, but nice try. ;)
The A-11 violates the spirit of the kick rules. By doing so, you are acting not in the best interest of sportsmanship, but of your own selfish means. The defense used for the A-11 isn't that it is legal. No, the people that promote this offense use the defense that their school(s) can't produce offensive linemen. Each one of the coaches using the system will tell you that they "bend" the rule book to the extreme. Sportsmanship depends on the spirit of fair play and a universally agreed upon set of written rules. If a coach decided to "trick" a defense within the spirit or context of the rules, have at it. Once a coach looks through a rule book, then tries to take one rule and have it trump all other rules for his or his teams benefit, that is the definition of being unsportman like. But worse yet, to take that one rule and twist it for your uses. Even though you know why the kick rules were written in the first place. To allow for the use of lower ineligible line numbers for the long-snapper position. Cali should have written their rule book a little bit better. Shouldn't have trusted coaches to be the better part of themselves. Just an opinion.

crunked9
02-13-2009, 08:40 AM
Not quite, but nice try. ;)
The A-11 violates the spirit of the kick rules. By doing so, you are acting not in the best interest of sportsmanship, but of your own selfish means. The defense used for the A-11 isn't that it is legal. No, the people that promote this offense use the defense that their school(s) can't produce offensive linemen. Each one of the coaches using the system will tell you that they "bend" the rule book to the extreme. Sportsmanship depends on the spirit of fair play and a universally agreed upon set of written rules. If a coach decided to "trick" a defense within the spirit or context of the rules, have at it. Once a coach looks through a rule book, then tries to take one rule and have it trump all other rules for his or his teams benefit, that is the definition of being unsportman like. But worse yet, to take that one rule and twist it for your uses. Even though you know why the kick rules were written in the first place. To allow for the use of lower ineligible line numbers for the long-snapper position. Cali should have written their rule book a little bit better. Shouldn't have trusted coaches to be the better part of themselves. Just an opinion.

Let me ask you this? When team kicks a PAT or field goal, does the holder have one knee down?

Answer: Yes

So by rule, that player is down with control of the ball, the play should be dead. But they don't call it. Why? b/c everyone agrees they shouldn't.

The point is people are going to ***** an whine everytime someone comes up with something else they think they can't stop.

If they were good enough coaches, they would find a way to stop it. Not complain about some "bending" of the rules

SLC
02-13-2009, 12:58 PM
Let me ask you this? When team kicks a PAT or field goal, does the holder have one knee down?

Answer: Yes

So by rule, that player is down with control of the ball, the play should be dead. But they don't call it. Why? b/c everyone agrees they shouldn't.

The point is people are going to ***** an whine everytime someone comes up with something else they think they can't stop.

If they were good enough coaches, they would find a way to stop it. Not complain about some "bending" of the rules



Same situation applies when the QB downs the ball...He is behind the line of scrimmage, between the tackles, no reciever in the area and the ball doesn't go beyond the line of scrimmage....That is by definition "intentional grounding".

crunked9
02-13-2009, 01:21 PM
Same situation applies when the QB downs the ball...He is behind the line of scrimmage, between the tackles, no reciever in the area and the ball doesn't go beyond the line of scrimmage....That is by definition "intentional grounding".

Yup!

Also, when teams motion a play and then the QB moves his leg for the snap. That is two players moving at the same time without resetting. Which should be a penalty.

TxJim
02-14-2009, 09:18 PM
Let me ask you this? When team kicks a PAT or field goal, does the holder have one knee down?

Answer: Yes

So by rule, that player is down with control of the ball, the play should be dead. But they don't call it. Why? b/c everyone agrees they shouldn't.

The point is people are going to ***** an whine everytime someone comes up with something else they think they can't stop.

If they were good enough coaches, they would find a way to stop it. Not complain about some "bending" of the rules

You are incorrect. The holder is not down by rule while there is a teammate in position to kick. This is specifically spelled out in NCAA rules, there is no bending of the rules for the situation you mention. During a scrimmage-kick play, he remains the holder until no player is in position to make the kick. And as long as there is a player in kicking postion, he may pass or hand off.

4-3-1 b Exception: The ball remains alive when an offensive player has simulated a kick or is in position to kick the ball held for a place kick by a teammate. The ball may be kicked, passed or advanced by rule)

TxJim
02-14-2009, 09:28 PM
Same situation applies when the QB downs the ball...He is behind the line of scrimmage, between the tackles, no reciever in the area and the ball doesn't go beyond the line of scrimmage....That is by definition "intentional grounding".

You were'nt clear....Was the QB under duress? If not, no IG. Was the QB ever outside the normal tackle box at any time during the play. If so, no IG.

Firebird
02-14-2009, 11:50 PM
The national federation of officals banned the A-11 offense. So RIP. It was very creative but you knew the fuddy duddys weren't goint to tolerate something like that very long.

SLC
02-15-2009, 02:38 AM
You were'nt clear....Was the QB under duress? If not, no IG. Was the QB ever outside the normal tackle box at any time during the play. If so, no IG.



I'm talking about a kill the clock, down the ball scenario....where the QB gets the ball and throws the ball down to the ground.

TxJim
03-07-2009, 06:19 PM
I'm talking about a kill the clock, down the ball scenario....where the QB gets the ball and throws the ball down to the ground.

In that situation, if to conserve time, it is not intentional grounding provided he threw the pass immediately after he first controlled the ball after the snap.

The King
03-09-2009, 01:08 PM
TXJim you have a Zebra in your avatar, does that mean you are a Zebra during football season?

t-long20
03-09-2009, 01:21 PM
R.I.P. football we hardly knew ya.

TxJim
03-21-2009, 10:26 PM
TXJim you have a Zebra in your avatar, does that mean you are a Zebra during football season?

Yes.

The King
03-24-2009, 12:22 PM
Yes.

thats a great avatar!