Tackle Eligible

[shyndy]

Ok this has been bothering me and YES I know we still scored and I'm not trying to make some kind of officiating argument, but I would like a good explanation of why Alex Lewis is not an eligible receiver. I don't see anyone really saying much about this, everyone is focused on "was it a lateral? was it tipped?"

My memory tells me the end man on the LoS is always eligible, as well as anyone lined up in the "backfield." I'm having a little trouble finding a good replay of the play to watch but I'm pretty sure Lewis is not covered by a SE (definitely no TE on his side). In fact the only WR on his side motioned to the other side. If Lewis is the end man on the LoS he is eligible for reception of any kind of pass, the dude can run a fade if he wants and thus the argument of whether it was a lateral or not doesn't matter.

So I went to look it up, and I found a couple different things. Wikipedia (yeah i know) said that per ncaa rules anyone wearing numbers 50-79 is automatically ineligible with a few exceptions. One of these exceptions was if said person was the end man on the LoS! However, all I found in the rulebook was that these numbers are automatically ineligible, period.

SO I'm wanting to see if anyone knows, is this what it boils down to that he is ineligible solely because of what number he wears? Also, this is one of the dumbest rules the NCAA has. If I were a coach i wouldn't use these numbers (50-79) on offense- I don't think there is any kind of rule saying if you are over 260 pounds on offense you have to wear a number between 50-79, lol.

 

[zoogs]

I think they're required to use those numbers (50-79) for OL.

 

[ZRod]

The biggest reason for the numbers is likely so that coaches can match personal easier. How would you know when to go into dime if you have 11 guys with numbers from 50-79.

 

[JJ Husker]

I could way off here but wouldn't he have to report to the referee as being an eligible receiver before the play, unless it was a lateral pass? IDK, but that sounds familiar.

 

[Jason Sitoke]

Ok this has been bothering me and YES I know we still scored and I'm not trying to make some kind of officiating argument, but I would like a good explanation of why Alex Lewis is not an eligible receiver. I don't see anyone really saying much about this, everyone is focused on "was it a lateral? was it tipped?"

My memory tells me the end man on the LoS is always eligible, as well as anyone lined up in the "backfield." I'm having a little trouble finding a good replay of the play to watch but I'm pretty sure Lewis is not covered by a SE (definitely no TE on his side). In fact the only WR on his side motioned to the other side. If Lewis is the end man on the LoS he is eligible for reception of any kind of pass, the dude can run a fade if he wants and thus the argument of whether it was a lateral or not doesn't matter.

So I went to look it up, and I found a couple different things. Wikipedia (yeah i know) said that per ncaa rules anyone wearing numbers 50-79 is automatically ineligible with a few exceptions. One of these exceptions was if said person was the end man on the LoS! However, all I found in the rulebook was that these numbers are automatically ineligible, period.

SO I'm wanting to see if anyone knows, is this what it boils down to that he is ineligible solely because of what number he wears? Also, this is one of the dumbest rules the NCAA has. If I were a coach i wouldn't use these numbers (50-79) on offense- I don't think there is any kind of rule saying if you are over 260 pounds on offense you have to wear a number between 50-79, lol.

I think the issue is how you're reading the rule you're citing from. The entry says that a player is an eligible receiver if he is wearing an eligible number AND ( not OR ) his placement on the field is that of an eligible position.

From memory, I DO believe you're correct that Lewis was no covered up by anyone, however he does not have an eligible number. I know in the NFL you can report yourself as eligible if you're wearing an ineligible number (happens when JJ Watt lines up at TE, for instance), but I'm not sure about college.

The NCAA rulebook defines eligible receivers for college football in Rule 7, Section 3, Article 3.[1] The determining factors are the player's position on the field at the snap and their jersey number. Specifically, any players on offense wearing numbers between 50 and 79 are always ineligible. All defensive players are eligible receivers and offensive players who are not wearing an ineligible number are eligible receivers if they meet one of the following three criteria:

• Player is at either end of the group of players on the line of scrimmage (usually the split end and tight end)
• Player is lined up at least one yard behind the line of scrimmage (running backs, fullbacks, etc.)
• Player is positioned to receive a hand-to-hand snap from the center (almost always the quarterback)

Players may only wear eligible numbers at an ineligible position when it is obvious that a punt or field goal is to be attempted.

A receiver loses his eligibility by leaving the field of play unless he was forced out by a defensive player and immediately attempts to get back inbounds (Rule 7-3-4). All players on the field become eligible as soon as the ball is touched by a defensive player or an official during play (Rule 7-3-5).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eligible_receiver

 

[Throwin'Bones]

#s 50-79 are ineligible unless you declare them eligible before the play. Anyone can get the ball when passed backwards. It's like a fumble. I coach high school ball in GA and we have a couple of trick plays using this to our advantage.

 

[shyndy]

so does the rule say somewhere that you must have 5 people with those numbers and that they have to line up on the LOS? Bama used a tackle eligible play by splitting their actual OL wide and putting the TE at the "tackle" spot.

I mean, if the rulebook doesn't say something dumb like "must be five players on the offense with ineligible numbers" then I simply would not use those numbers on my offensive players.

 

[ZRod]

so does the rule say somewhere that you must have 5 people with those numbers and that they have to line up on the LOS? Bama used a tackle eligible play by splitting their actual OL wide and putting the TE at the "tackle" spot.

I mean, if the rulebook doesn't say something dumb like "must be five players on the offense with ineligible numbers" then I simply would not use those numbers on my offensive players.

But was he off the line?

 

[shyndy]

#s 50-79 are ineligible unless you declare them eligible before the play. Anyone can get the ball when passed backwards. It's like a fumble. I coach high school ball in GA and we have a couple of trick plays using this to our advantage.

I didn't see anything in the rulebook yet about being able to declare eligibility. I remember that in HS coaches said that you should declare eligibility to the official but that it wasn't required ( i think, that was a long time ago)

 

[shyndy]

so does the rule say somewhere that you must have 5 people with those numbers and that they have to line up on the LOS? Bama used a tackle eligible play by splitting their actual OL wide and putting the TE at the "tackle" spot.

I mean, if the rulebook doesn't say something dumb like "must be five players on the offense with ineligible numbers" then I simply would not use those numbers on my offensive players.

But was he off the line?

nah he is on the line and covered, the actual tackle isnt a receiver, the "tackle" that is played by their tight end is

 

[shyndy]

Ok this has been bothering me and YES I know we still scored and I'm not trying to make some kind of officiating argument, but I would like a good explanation of why Alex Lewis is not an eligible receiver. I don't see anyone really saying much about this, everyone is focused on "was it a lateral? was it tipped?"

My memory tells me the end man on the LoS is always eligible, as well as anyone lined up in the "backfield." I'm having a little trouble finding a good replay of the play to watch but I'm pretty sure Lewis is not covered by a SE (definitely no TE on his side). In fact the only WR on his side motioned to the other side. If Lewis is the end man on the LoS he is eligible for reception of any kind of pass, the dude can run a fade if he wants and thus the argument of whether it was a lateral or not doesn't matter.

So I went to look it up, and I found a couple different things. Wikipedia (yeah i know) said that per ncaa rules anyone wearing numbers 50-79 is automatically ineligible with a few exceptions. One of these exceptions was if said person was the end man on the LoS! However, all I found in the rulebook was that these numbers are automatically ineligible, period.

SO I'm wanting to see if anyone knows, is this what it boils down to that he is ineligible solely because of what number he wears? Also, this is one of the dumbest rules the NCAA has. If I were a coach i wouldn't use these numbers (50-79) on offense- I don't think there is any kind of rule saying if you are over 260 pounds on offense you have to wear a number between 50-79, lol.

I think the issue is how you're reading the rule you're citing from. The entry says that a player is an eligible receiver if he is wearing an eligible number AND ( not OR ) his placement on the field is that of an eligible position.

From memory, I DO believe you're correct that Lewis was no covered up by anyone, however he does not have an eligible number. I know in the NFL you can report yourself as eligible if you're wearing an ineligible number (happens when JJ Watt lines up at TE, for instance), but I'm not sure about college.

The NCAA rulebook defines eligible receivers for college football in Rule 7, Section 3, Article 3.[1] The determining factors are the player's position on the field at the snap and their jersey number. Specifically, any players on offense wearing numbers between 50 and 79 are always ineligible. All defensive players are eligible receivers and offensive players who are not wearing an ineligible number are eligible receivers if they meet one of the following three criteria:

• Player is at either end of the group of players on the line of scrimmage (usually the split end and tight end)
• Player is lined up at least one yard behind the line of scrimmage (running backs, fullbacks, etc.)
• Player is positioned to receive a hand-to-hand snap from the center (almost always the quarterback)

Players may only wear eligible numbers at an ineligible position when it is obvious that a punt or field goal is to be attempted.

A receiver loses his eligibility by leaving the field of play unless he was forced out by a defensive player and immediately attempts to get back inbounds (Rule 7-3-4). All players on the field become eligible as soon as the ball is touched by a defensive player or an official during play (Rule 7-3-5).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eligible_receiver

ok yeah i did read it as if they were wearing an ineligible number, rather than "not wearing an ineligible number" i read not wearing an eligible number

 

[Jason Sitoke]

#s 50-79 are ineligible unless you declare them eligible before the play. Anyone can get the ball when passed backwards. It's like a fumble. I coach high school ball in GA and we have a couple of trick plays using this to our advantage.

I didn't see anything in the rulebook yet about being able to declare eligibility. I remember that in HS coaches said that you should declare eligibility to the official but that it wasn't required ( i think, that was a long time ago)

Well...I think that Lewis could've reported as eligible, however it really was a trick play. It was meant to be a lateral and Armstrong or Lewis just didn't quite make it obvious enough. So regardless, it wasn't schematically supposed to be a pass anyways.

 

[Throwin'Bones]

#s 50-79 are ineligible unless you declare them eligible before the play. Anyone can get the ball when passed backwards. It's like a fumble. I coach high school ball in GA and we have a couple of trick plays using this to our advantage.

I didn't see anything in the rulebook yet about being able to declare eligibility. I remember that in HS coaches said that you should declare eligibility to the official but that it wasn't required ( i think, that was a long time ago)

Well...I think that Lewis could've reported as eligible, however it really was a trick play. It was meant to be a lateral and Armstrong or Lewis just didn't quite make it obvious enough. So regardless, it wasn't schematically supposed to be a pass anyways.

True. Either way, it wasn't run properly. Needed to be more obvious.

 

[Throwin'Bones]

Take it for what's it's worth. I got it from Wikipedia. Still doesn't mean the past was run properly. Also I don't know how to post this properly since I'm on my phone so I apologize.

Under almost all versions of gridiron football, offensive linemen cannot receive or touch forward passes, nor can they advance downfield in passing situations. To identify which receivers are eligible and which are not, football rules stipulate that ineligible receivers must wear a number between 50 and 79. This, however, can be circumvented in most leagues, most commonly by informing the referee of any player with a number in the ineligible range who lines up as an eligible receiver.

 

[ZRod]

so does the rule say somewhere that you must have 5 people with those numbers and that they have to line up on the LOS? Bama used a tackle eligible play by splitting their actual OL wide and putting the TE at the "tackle" spot.

I mean, if the rulebook doesn't say something dumb like "must be five players on the offense with ineligible numbers" then I simply would not use those numbers on my offensive players.

But was he off the line?

nah he is on the line and covered, the actual tackle isnt a receiver, the "tackle" that is played by their tight end is

But what I'm saying is I think he is actually lined up off the line of scrimmage, technically in the backfield, but in a three point stance. Otherwise I don't think he can be eligible.