ellitor 33,114 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 My guess is 2 with the outside receiver and TE being eligible and the slot not being eligible because he and the outside receiver are on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTiger 3,928 Posted September 11, 2012 Author Share Posted September 11, 2012 My guess is 2 with the outside receiver and TE being eligible and the slot not being eligible because he and the outside receiver are on the line. Remember only talking about the 7 players on the line of scrimmage in that photo. The correct answer is ONE. Only the WR at the top of the picture is eligible in that particular formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellitor 33,114 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 My guess is 2 with the outside receiver and TE being eligible and the slot not being eligible because he and the outside receiver are on the line. Remember only talking about the 7 players on the line of scrimmage in that photo. The correct answer is ONE. Only the WR at the top of the picture is eligible in that particular formation. Oh... The TE a yard back did not count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTiger 3,928 Posted September 11, 2012 Author Share Posted September 11, 2012 My guess is 2 with the outside receiver and TE being eligible and the slot not being eligible because he and the outside receiver are on the line. Remember only talking about the 7 players on the line of scrimmage in that photo. The correct answer is ONE. Only the WR at the top of the picture is eligible in that particular formation. Oh... The TE a yard back did not count? Not for the purpose of this discussion, no. The main point to get across was that the player 2nd from the top is ineligible AND the left tackle at the bottom of the picture is ineligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ValleyTiger 2,894 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 1, top of the picture silly me ETA - 4, WR @ top of picture, offset TE, and 2 RBs I'm surprised nobody else offered a comment on this one. You were right the first time. The question was how many on the LINE OF SCRIMMAGE are eligible pass receivers. I made no mention of the backfield. D'Oh! I blame it on the state of the Football Forum these days, conditioned to skimming posts. At least I covered all bases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTiger 3,928 Posted September 11, 2012 Author Share Posted September 11, 2012 1, top of the picture silly me ETA - 4, WR @ top of picture, offset TE, and 2 RBs I'm surprised nobody else offered a comment on this one. You were right the first time. The question was how many on the LINE OF SCRIMMAGE are eligible pass receivers. I made no mention of the backfield. D'Oh! I blame it on the state of the Football Forum these days, conditioned to skimming posts. At least I covered all bases. I can understand that. Here's another play that happened saturday that the folks at ESPN were talking about. It involved one of the rule changes this year. In this particular play a defensive player loses his helmet. The ball carrier just happened to take a path near to where this player was and this player without his helmet got up and tried to make the tackle. Ruling: Personal Foul penalty on the defensive player that lost his helmet. The new rules state that once a player loses his helmet he must stop participating in the play. Here's the rule reference for it: c. If the ball carrier’s helmet comes off as in paragraph a (above) the ball is dead (Rule 4-1-3-q). If the player is not the ball carrier the ball remains alive, but he must not continue to participate in the play beyond the immediate action in which he is engaged. Prolonged participation is a personal foul (Rule 9-1-17). By definition such a player is obviously out of the play (Rule 9-1-12-. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.