Some More Low Block Videos

[TxSkyBolt]

I remember many years ago when the backs being inside or outside the tackle box first became a rule, our (cant remember if it was local or state) procedure called for the R to point at any back who was outside the box.

[El Macman]

I remember many years ago when the backs being inside or outside the tackle box first became a rule, our (cant remember if it was local or state) procedure called for the R to point at any back who was outside the box.

I know one FBS conference for certain, and possibly a second, that will point to the back in questions, then give a quick wrist wave toward the outside to indicate just that. It will still be a challenge to know the limits of the tackle box.

[Hawkeye]

That is not how I read the memo.  I read it that if the formation is tight, THEN the TE can be considered in the tackle box, not if the formation is considered normal.  That being said, this is not the best video to determine splits.  Anytime a camera (video or still) is used that has a telephoto (zoom) lens, you get perspective distortion.  But if the splits are tight, then the RB is likely in the box.  If they are normal, he is not.

I read that memo as giving an example (tight splits) where a back may be inside the tackle box and not within the tackles.  Essentially, instructing us to think 5 yards from the snapper, not tackles for the tackle box.  Yes, this makes it a lot harder to visualize, but I've heard of one FBS conference that is instructing to always consider the distance from the snapper in determining whether a back is inside the tackle box and thus unrestricted for BBW.

But, as we've also been instructed, as you said, "when in doubt, he's out".  So if they make us guess, they may not like our guess.

[copedaddy]

Given what I got from my coach here at school, the average lineman's feet are 3 feet apart. Even with 3 foot splits it is possible for a wing back to be just outside the frame of the tackle but still in the tackle box. That means that the BJ will have to be able to estimate approximate distance. I really don't like doing that.
I made a crude diagram, it is not to scale but is what I am talking about.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[TXMike]

Ever since the "tackle box" became defined we have been told to "define" it as the normal tackle to the normal tackle and to accept that the distance was 5 yards snapper to tackle.  Someone last year said they obtained a 5 yard wide tarp and laid it done when a team was lined up in a normal formation and they discovered the tarp extended out past the outside of the tackle.  But there is no way we can accurately gauge 5 yards exactly so we have been taught that if the tackle is "normal" he is the outer limit of the tackle box.  That is easy to gauge and is how we should be officiating.

[Diablo]

But there is no way we can accurately gauge 5 yards exactly so we have been taught that if the tackle is "normal" he is the outer limit of the tackle box.  That is easy to gauge and is how we should be officiating.

Try this.  It doesn't use the position of the tackle; hence, not influenced by varying splits between the linemen.

When the ball is snapped on a hash mark, the top of the numbers is 11 yds away.  To be inside the tackle box, a back in the side zone can't be more than half way to the numbers.  Similarly, a back in the opposite direction can't be more than one third of the way to the other hash mark and be able to BBW in any direction.  If the snapper is midway between the hash marks, an unrestricted back can't be no closer than ~1.5 yds from a hash mark.

It's a bit more difficult when the snapper is not on a hash mark or halfway.  You have to use a mental yard stick.  Try it out during the pregame watch.

[TXMike]

Too complicated for this ole Texan, sorry.  I am going with this...I can tell if the team is in normal splits, significantly tight splits or significantly wide splits.  If normal, then back needs to be inside or behind the tackle.  If wide then he needs to be inside or behind the gap between guard and tackle.  If tight, then he can be inside or behind the tight end (or where tight end would be).

[Diablo]

Too complicated for this ole Texan,

That's a common excuse from a retiree.  Keep that attitude up and there'll be moss & mold growing on your back side.

How do you define normal splits?

[TXMike]

Sort of like porn...I probably can't describe what I would define as "normal" splits, but i know them when I see them.

I would say this is NOT a normal split.



These would be normal:

[TxSkyBolt]

In the last picture, it looks apparent that any back completely inside the TE would be unrestricted.

[ref6983]

In the last picture, it looks apparent that any back completely inside the TE would be unrestricted.

In the last picture any back directly behind the TE would also be unrestricted. Splits look right about two feet as noted in the memo.

[TxSkyBolt]

In the last picture any back directly behind the TE would also be unrestricted. Splits look right about two feet as noted in the memo.

That's what I meant.

[ref6983]

That's what I meant.

Ah yes...any back completely within the outside edge of the TE would be a good way to phrase this as well.

Basically, the phrase "tackle box" became a misnomer when the rule was change to make it 5 yards from the snapper and omitted any reference to the location of the tackle.

The concept of wide/normal/tight splits and formation is now being used as a guide for us to determine, consistently, what is and is not five yards.

Do I like the fact that a WB can now be completely outside the tackle, i.e., directly behind the normal TE position, and be unrestricted...no I don't. But it is the rule. What the "completely" part means is that if the WB tries to stretch this any further at all, then he becomes restricted.

[Atlanta Blue]

In the last picture, it looks apparent that any back completely inside the TE would be unrestricted.

I REALLY hope you are referring to the football linemen picture!

[TxSkyBolt]

I REALLY hope you are referring to the football linemen picture!

OMG!  AB does have a sense of humor   Nice one!