If you don't like the HOA don't live in the neighborhood.

Should the swinging gate be illegal?

The passage of time does not negate the fact that new rules have been implemented or existing ones changed nor does it "traditionalize" the rule changes that have been made. To some it is an opportunity while to others it is infamy.

Frankly, it isn't that important to be so concerned about.

No. Why would it be? It satisfies all the rule requirements for an offensive formation.

By using a loophole.

And what loophole would that be?

No less a loophole than allowed the A11.

Honest question:

Are you in favor of lifting all formation rules on both sides of the ball in football? This would allow for the most innovation.


P.S. This thread is such a metaphor for government control that it should almost be moved to DC. Right down to what the football founders must have intended.LMAO

LOL. We race karts, and at our local track there are 2 shops that people race out of. The shop we race out of has the most die-hard racers that work on their stuff until they are fast. We routinely hand the other shop's racers their arses. The owner of the other shop is constantly whining about stupid things like bodywork being outside the rules, tires being prepped, etc., etc.

If these people would spend 1/2 the time working on their shit that they spend on whining, they might have a chance of winning.

DT

God not this argument again.

That's incorrect. A-11's formation is(I should say was) strictly intended for scrimmage kick formations. It does not satisfy the requirements for a legal offensive formation in two ways. The A-11 does not have 5 down offensive linemen, as required for a legal offensive formation. It also neglects the normal jersey numbering requirements for linemen in legal offensive formations.

The swinging gate on the other hand, does indeed have the required number of ineligible down offensive linemen, with the correct jersey numbering. They are simply in a different position, but they're still linemen on the line of scrimmage who are not eligible receivers. There is absolutely no loophole necessary to run it. It's simply a legal offensive formation with it's down linemen in a different position than normal. There are no extra eligible receivers as in the case of A-11.

This shouldn't be difficult.

Meh, whatever. It's over.

there are no "extra" eligible recievers in the A11. You just can't immediately tell who is eligible.
You also can't make hard and fast rules about what you can and can't do with "kicking formations" without doing away with fake punts and field goals.
So far, the only real argument I see against this is "tradition." if that's really the argument, them the argument must logically be against the swinging gate, as well. Hell, tradition says players used to have no such thing as eligible and ineligible nbers, so it's weak to begin with.

If leagues don't like it, fine. But let's not pretend there was anything illegal or non-traditional about it.

The fact that you can't immediately tell who's eligible out of all 11 players is part of the reason why it isn't legal. Anyone on the field can be an eligible receiver coming to the line of scrimmage because they're breaking the jersey numbering rule. That in itself gives a huge advantage over legal offensive formations. That's the point. Legal formations don't allow you to do that.

And fake punts and kicks are still perfectly safe due to the differences in jersey numbering and eligibility on obvious kicking/punting downs. That's how they closed the loophole. They revised the rules to provide distinction as to what downs would allow which formations.

Every level of football has said that it's illegal. That's the purpose of the ban. The National Federation of State High School Associations, the NCAA, and the NFL now all have rules prohibiting it.

That sounds ridiculous, to me. What if I want to punt on 1st down? (I know a local coach who makes the playoffs yearly who has done so)? What if it's late in the game and I want to try a FG not on 4th down?