Importance of terminology and definitions

[ElvisLives]

The following example displays a flaw in the rule language that is somewhat technical, but important.

1/10, A-30, 6:00 (2), A=7, B=10. A11 is three-year starting "quarterback" for Team A. Team A initially aligns themselves in a traditional formation, with 5 "tight" interior linemen, a tight end, a split end, a slot back to the split end's side, a back spread wide to the opposite side, a running back (A45) about 5 yards behind the left tackle, and A11 in a shotgun formation, standing at about 5 yards directly behind the snapper. After several seconds of reading the defense, A45 takes one easy step forward, then turns to his right and, while running parallel to the NZ, catches the snapped ball in front of A11. As A45 continues to run to the right (behind the NZ), A11 moves to his left, as a potential pass receiver. A45 abruptly stops and throws a legal forward pass toward the split end at the 50. (At this time, A11 is at the numbers on the left side, with no opponent within 10 yards of him.) B23 intercepts the pass and begins to advance. B23 is at the A-40 when passer A45 is moving to pursue B23 when blocker B77, from directly in front of, an in full view of A45, blocks A45 by leading with his shoulder into the head of A45, with forcible contact.

Is this a 9-1-4 targeting? Is A45 a defenseless player? He was the passer, but that status disappeared long before he was blocked. Was he the "quarterback?" I don't know. What is a quarterback? At the turn of the century (Wow - I have to identify the 20th century), in the old "Wing T" formation, the 'quarterback' was called that because (in position to receive the hand-to-hand snap) he was positioned about 1/4 of the way into the backfield. Halfbacks were about one-half way into the back field. And fullbacks were - you guessed it - all the way into the back field. By that definition, he wasn't the quarterback.

But what does the word "quarterback" mean today? I believe every sports minded American considers the quarterback to be the player that is the exceptionally talented passer on the team, and is also (by default, if not by actual ability) the team leader. Why is this important? Well, we have a rule that says a "quarterback" is a defenseless player following any change of possession. But, we have no definition of what is a quarterback.

I understand that the schools (somewhat selfishly) want to protect their "star" player(s). And we all recognize that opponents will attempt to 'seek and destroy' the star players on their teams, if given the opportunity. If the rules committee wants a rule that offers enhanced protection for the star offensive player(s) on each team, they need to say so, and provide a definition in the rules. Unfortunately, I think that would mean that the team (HC) would need to identify, to the Referee, every player that they deem to be a "quarterback" when in the game. That opens a can of worms. Say team A identifies three players as QBs. Then two of them play during the same down, and one of them gets creamed, with a possible targeting action. Does he have this enhanced protection, even if he was just a 'decoy' prior to a change of possession, and is actively attempting to pursue the opposing ball carrier (after the COP)? Perhaps, in exchange for enhanced protection, such players may not block or tackle an opponent at ANY time. And they must wear some special identification, such as red arm bands or something.

Just rambling.

[Kalle]

Based on the only definition for a quarterback in the rules, ie. rule 1-4-1 for recommended numbering, in your play A11 is the quarterback and A45 is a halfback. Thus the extra protection from 2-27-14-i does not apply.

And yes, the current wording of 2-27-14-i is bad, unless the rules actually define what a quarterback is. I guess the rules makers want it to be something like: "A quarterback is a player at the snap positioned stationary behind the snapper and the apparent receiver of the snap." This would include a wildcat RB, though, which may or may not be the intent of the rule.

[Etref]

Let’s say they change the definition of quarterback to passer.

A11 lines up to in the position normally associated with QB but in this case A45 threw the pass.

On an interception return are we going to catch that A45 is now a defenseless player, especially given with a crew of less than 7 especially if the return is a long involved play with a lot f East/west movement

[ElvisLives]

Let’s say they change the definition of quarterback to passer.

A11 lines up to in the position normally associated with QB but in this case A45 threw the pass.

On an interception return are we going to catch that A45 is now a defenseless player, especially given with a crew of less than 7 especially if the return is a long involved play with a lot f East/west movement

Ah, you picked up on that, too. Yeah, that would be the problem with simply offering enhanced protection to the "passer," who, in some cases, may not be the 'star' player. If that is what the NCAA wants, fine - make it so. But, if they are looking to offer enhanced protection to the 'star' offensive players, then they need to have their HCs identify that/those players prior to the start of the game.

[Kalle]

Ah, you picked up on that, too. Yeah, that would be the problem with simply offering enhanced protection to the "passer," who, in some cases, may not be the 'star' player. If that is what the NCAA wants, fine - make it so. But, if they are looking to offer enhanced protection to the 'star' offensive players, then they need to have their HCs identify that/those players prior to the start of the game.

Why not just add a new mandatory numbering saying that team A may have at most one player numbered 1-9 on the field and that player is protected under 2-27-14-i.

[TxBJ]

Why not just add a new mandatory numbering saying that team A may have at most one player numbered 1-9 on the field and that player is protected under 2-27-14-i.

Supposedly the 0 was added due to the popularity of single digits among the players.

[ElvisLives]

Why not just add a new mandatory numbering saying that team A may have at most one player numbered 1-9 on the field and that player is protected under 2-27-14-i.

That would be a good solution for us, but some entitled whiney hiney wide receiver would want to keep his “1” and some equally whiney QB would want to keep his Tom Brady “12”, and they would get their coaches to have their rep on the rules committee vote against that. But, yeah, that would be a very good and easily officiated solution, if that is what the rules committee is wanting to accomplish.
But that is ‘sensible.’ Never work for NCAA football. 🙄

[ElvisLives]

Well, it helps to check ARs.  9-1-4-IV implies that a QB is the guy aligned in a position to receive the snap, either by backward pass, as described in this AR, or, certainly, hand-to-hand. This isn’t necessarily the Heisman candidate player that takes 99.99% of the snaps, who happens to be a decoy or receiver on this particular down.

But, it doesn’t address:
1) a direct backward pass snap to another back (not directly behind the snapper), with another back in position directly behind the snapper to, ostensibly, receive the backward pass snap);
2) a backward pass snap to a back in motion that catches the backward pass (with another back in position directly behind the snapper to, ostensibly, receive the Backward pass snap);
3) a recovery of a snap by someone other than the player aligned in a position to, apparently, receive the snap.

Perhaps they do mean “the receiver of the snap.” Then say so.
Who is the “QB” in these cases?