A-11 Offense Threatened By NFHS,
Potential Split By Member Schools A Possibility

UPDATE

The Contra Costa Times for February 26th provides the latest update on what has now become the ongoing saga of the fight for survival for the A-11 offense, recently ruled “illegal” by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS).

The Times reports that early this week Kurt Bryan and Steve Humphries of Piedmont High School (California) have submitted a two-part proposal to both the NFHS and California Interscholastic Federation (CIF), the first part which asks for a three-year experimental period allowing a waiver of a current rule instituted by the NFHS which requires a minimum of four players on an offensive unit to wear non-eligible receiver numbers (50-79). In its place, Bryan and Humphires request that both the state and NFHS allow that particular figure to be lowered from four to three and to allow for an official review of the effects of such an exception on the “safety, fairness, enjoyment of the game and problems it poses for game officials” after the three years has passed.

The second portion of the petition looks for the CIF to essentially ignore the NFHS ruling outlawing the A-11 offense, a move which the Times notes would ultimately force the former to given up its seat on the NFHS rule committee – something the CIF has already done due to its contentions over the usage of a shot clock in the state’s high school basketball games.

Marie Ishida, executive director of the CIF, tells the Times that she plans to meet with principal of Piedmont High, Randall Booker, sometime this week regarding the proposal and acknowledges that her organization will invite Bryan to present an extended presentation on the contents of the plan sometime in early fall. From there, an advisory committee for the CIF will make a decision on whether or not to formally apply for a hearing at the national level with the NFHS at which a request for reinstatement of the A-11 offense could be heard.

Continue to stay tuned to NATS for more information on this continuing story . . .

Those familiar with the A-11 offense run by head coach Kurt Bryan of Piedmont High School in California weren’t surprised to learn that the National Federation of State High School Associations could by the end of next week effectively bring a halt to the use of the controversial offensive playbook.

The A-11 offense – described by Rivals High as “a super-sized offense with eligible receivers popping up all over the field” – has already been banned by several high school state associations but now faces a ruling by the NHFS that would “effectively take the fledgling [scheme] off the chalkboard.”

Rivals High reports that the NFHS met January 24-26 in Indianapolis, where the Rules Football Committee discussed proposals seeking to bring an end to the A-11 offense. Brad Garrett, vice president of the committee, acknowledged that the subject was hotly debated, but added that those members present were bound not to discuss proposed rule changes or how individual attendees voted on the subject.

Bryan and Piedmont’s director of football operations, Steve Humphries’, voiced concerns about the meeting, however, particularly given that the NFHS board typically passes proposals forwarded to it by the Rules Committee. The board is currently slated to meet next week and leaves supporters of the A-11 in a state of flux as to the probability of the offense’s continued existence heading into the 2009 football season.

Rivals High comments that a wide-variety of proposals on the A-11 highlighted the docket of the Rules Committee meetings in Indianapolis, yet one of the most influential was a request to bring to an end an exception to rule 7-2-5b which allows players with jersey numbers 1-49 and 80-99 to be down linemen and eligible pass receivers in a scrimmage kick formation. That exception is key, notes an article published by Rivals High, due to the fact that all players participating in the A-11 offense wear numbers 1-49 or 80-99 – numbers reserved for receivers – and supporters of the offensive scheme have argued that if such a numbering system is allowed for scrimmage kicks, then that same exception must therefore apply to all offensive players. As such, any of the eleven players comprising the offense in the A-11 is technically eligible to catch a pass – a move intended to spread out opposing defenses and exploiting one-on-one matchups. Officials refereeing games featuring the A-11 offense, notes Bryan and Humphries, have allowed programs to run the scheme as is and have not thrown flags for ineligible receivers.

Bryan is vocal about his opposition to the NFHS attempting to overturn the usage of the A-11. The Piedmont head coach tells Rivals High, “There is a demonstrative benefit of using the A-11 offense, and there is room in America for more than one style of football. There is a loud, ugly minority out there that is against this offense.” Bryan adds that his opposition is based on “standing up for the little guy in football, the schools without the numbers of kids or the big linemen.” “There is a huge disconnect,” he states, “between the players on the ground, the kids that play in this offense and the National Federation.”

The North Carolina High School Athletic Association – one of just several officiating bodies that believe the A-11 offers an unfair advantage to programs that use it – disagrees, arguing that the use of this type of offense was an “unsporting act” and threatening to ban any of its member schools who attempted to take the field utilizing the scheme. Says Mark Dreibelbis, the supervisor of officials for the NCHSAA, teams using the A-11 “are taking a rule book exception for a scrimmage kick and putting it [in] place every down of the game . . . 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.” Dr. Ralph Swearngin, executive director of the Georgia High School Association, voices similar concerns, noting he saw to it that inserted in the GHSA rulebook this past football season is a rule noting players wearing jersey 1-49 to 80-99 “must still assume an initial position on his line of scrimmage between the end and he remains an ineligible forward-pass receiver during the down.”

With such polar-opposite viewpoints existing on the subject of the A-11, one thing seems certain at this point: regardless of the NFHS’ decision on the legitimacy of the offensive system, high school athletic associations across the nation are preparing for a showdown that quickly could cause irreconcilable differences amongst the programs comprising the NFHS. Bryan states, “Allowing teams the right to use A-11 football if they want is extremely viable. And there are plenty of people who will be ready to help set that up so everybody wins.” Does that imply that there could be a potential split of schools featuring the A-11 away from the NFHS? Both Bryan and Humphries see that as a real possibility. Bryan claims it is not his intent to “try and lead schools to break away from the National Federation”; yet, the creation of a proposed sub-federation of schools that want to play A-11 football would seem the next logical step. “What is ridiculous,” Bryan concludes, “is there already are A-11 teams playing non-A-11 teams without incident. We are playing within the rules.” Should the NFHS not be willing to acknowledge that, then it is up to those programs using the A-11 to construct a reality of their own, even if that means doing so outside the realm of the NFHS governing body.